At the crossroads

Since early 2011 English forestry has been the subject of intense high-level debate. The government's announcement that it intended putting the public forest estate in England up for sale created anger and dismay across the nation, the outpouring of which took politicians by surprise.

The then secretary of state Caroline Spelman's U-turn (which her successor Owen Paterson and new forestry minister David Heath have confirmed they will stand by) was greeted with relief but the forest estate was still in limbo pending the publication of a report by the Independent Panel on Forestry (IPF), set up in response to the predicament the government - and the forestry sector - found themselves in. The IPF's remit was "to advise the secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs on the future direction of forestry and woodland policy in England".

The IPF, chaired by the Bishop of Liverpool, comprised 12 individuals from different sectors and with, potentially, very different agendas. However, the report, which was published and handed over to Defra in July this year, showed remarkable consensus. Defra is now analysing the 31 recommendations made by the IPF and will announce its decision at the end of January 2013.

It's a pivotal moment for England's forests, as discussed at Confor's recent conference, "A landmark year for English forestry?". The event was held at the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors in Westminster - a venue chosen for its proximity to the Houses of Parliament. However, while Owen Paterson and David Heath were scheduled to speak at the conference, both were prevented from doing so by other parliamentary business.

It was another example of how hard it is to pin the ultimate decision makers down but the importance of the forestry sector to both ministers was clear from a video message from David Heath. "This is a really exciting time for forestry," he said. "With the publication of the Panel's report and our response to it we have the perfect opportunity to set forestry on the path to positive growth, which will contribute to wider economic growth. Watch this space." Defra director Sarah Hendry, who is overseeing the government's response to the IPF's recommendations, stood in for the ministers and reinforced Mr Heath's positive message. The launch of the IPF's report had been met with "a tangible sense of excitement and enthusiasm" she said. "That's something we've been determined to maintain in working on the government response."

That enthusiasm has been tempered somewhat by typical government and civil service caution.

Cost of implementation

"The Panel has set an ambitious and strongly aspirational agenda," Ms Hendry said. "Some of their recommendations are far-reaching; some involving the Forestry Commission and public forest estate would require primary legislation. And beyond those items that the Panel put a price ticket on, there are quite a lot of others that will cost large amounts of money. It begs the question how it would be paid for - so it's not something we can instantly respond to."

One potentially costly recommendation she cited was to increase forest cover from 10% to 15% by 2060.

"It sounds modest - some people have suggested it is insufficient," said Ms Hendry, "In reality it would require a huge and unprecedented step-change in woodland planting. To achieve this we would need to cover nearly two-thirds of a million more hectares of land with trees. That would be a 500% increase on the current planting rate, sustained over nearly 50 years.

"If we relied on the public purse to pay for it through the kind of grant mechanisms that have delivered recent planting rates it would cost around £6.5bn - albeit over time."

That shouldn't be interpreted as any lack of commitment, she added, but it did demonstrate the imagination and innovation that would be needed to rise to the challenge.

The IPF's recommendation that English woodlands be managed to better fulfil potential economic and environmental benefits had struck a chord, said Ms Hendry.

"The Panel's recommendation of a Wood Industry Action Plan aligns well with the government's commitment in the Natural Environment White Paper to 'increase the use of sustainably grown and harvested wood products'. We strongly support this objective and good progress has been made so far in laying the foundations for such a plan."

Core themes of the plan were likely to be increasing the volume of English-grown wood used, ensuring security of supply from the private sector and creating new jobs.

"I'm confident that we can produce a plan that will build confidence in the wood supply chain and, with the sector fully behind it, deliver real change," said Ms Hendry.

This real change would mean a new wood culture, said IPF member John Varley, of Clinton Devon Estates, but that raised fundamental questions. "Do we bring back a wood culture or facilitate a new one?" he said. "And is there one culture, or many? People love trees for all sorts of reasons and many of them are far removed from commercial ones."

While the different agendas of public access, biodiversity, the economics of the timber industry and social implications all had to be respected, despite the tensions they caused, the end game as he saw it was "to find the levers to create a woodland culture in which woodlands and woods as a material and fuel are highly valued and sought after".

Increasing active management in the private sector, raising the profile and importance of forestry careers and "telling the story of wood" all constituted new ways of valuing our woodlands, said Mr Varley.

Ideal culture

In the ideal 21st century woodland culture, he said that woodland owners would understand the benefits of managing their woodlands and be motivated to do so; people would understand and value the changing characteristics of productive woodlands; and wood would become the product of choice. The net result, he said, would be "more jobs, better skills and more timber to market".

"We urge society as a whole to value woodlands for the full range of benefits they bring," he continued. "We call on government to pioneer a new approach to valuing and rewarding the management, improvement and expansion of the woodland ecosystems for all the benefits they provide to people, nature and the green economy."

The primary motivation for IPF member Sue Holden, who is chief executive of The Woodland Trust, is the increase of forest cover and the protection of ancient woodlands and she is adamant that the Panel's report "is not a pick-and-mix" for Defra to cherry-pick.

"It's a web of interrelated recommendations and should be seen as a whole," she said.

"Ancient woodland is our richest habitat and is irreplaceable," she said. "If we have a 'development at any cost' policy we'll continue to destroy ancient woods. We need to review development rights and provide stronger guidelines for local authorities."

She added that the Trust's vision was "more trees in more places" and that it advocated planting in upland areas and on farms. "Trees on farms have proved beneficial, trapping pollution, reducing soil erosion, improving water quality and providing a source of wood fuel, so we are working with farmers to encourage them to grow trees to improve the resilience of their farms," she said.

Economic returns

The target of 15% forest cover by 2060 - an increase of 600,000ha - was entirely necessary and achievable, Ms Holden maintained. "In 1995 the National Forest had 6% woodland cover and by 2009 it had 17%," she said. "It can happen and it can lead to a good economic return."

Good economic returns would be the drivers of change for forestry, said Confor chief executive Stuart Goodall, who said the Panel recognised the demands on the public purse.

"The prime minister stated recently that 'every department is an economic' department," said Mr Goodall. "The challenge for the government is very clear - it is vital for the coalition to demonstrate that it is in control of the economy."

But, he said, woodlands were an untapped "golden resource". Less than 40% of the annual increment was harvested and 600,000ha of woodland wasn't achieving its potential. If these issues were addressed, said Mr Goodall, the forest products sector could provide government with the solution to some of their "really sticky problems". "The sector is in a position to deliver the benefits that everyone is looking for if the government changes the way it delivers its policies."

These benefits include more jobs - potentially 7,000-plus new jobs by 2020 (1,400 in sawmilling; 1,660 in woodland management; 250 in woodland establishment; and 4,000 in wood fuel) - greater biodiversity and a reduction of "millions of tonnes" of carbon.

"Money is the lubricant needed to deliver these aspirations - income drives activity," said Mr Goodall, adding that while increased government funding was unlikely and EU funding was reducing, the markets for wood were increasing. Home-grown timber now accounted for 40% of UK consumption, a fact that should encourage those private owners who haven't managed their woodlands because the financial returns have, thus far, been small.

"The financial solution will primarily come from sales of wood," said Mr Goodall. "Work with that."

All party political viewpoint

One of the most spirited sessions of the conference was when delegates heard - and challenged - some of the views of members of the All Party Parliamentary Group on forestry, Lord Clark of Windermere (Labour), Rory Stewart (Conservative) and Lord Redesdale (Liberal Democrat).

Lord Clark, a former chair of the Forestry Commission, said that there was now an opportunity to get a consensus across all political parties on the subject of forestry and that although this wouldn't be easy, it was both attainable and crucial. "Forestry is a long-term business and the more certainty you can get, the better," he said. "There's no reason why we can't have broad accord and I think the government should endorse most of the IPF's recommendations. This is a landmark year for [English] forestry, but next year is when we must put the nuts and bolts on and drive forward."

"We're in a good position," agreed Rory Stewart. "The IPF's report has forced us to look holistically and think about the relationship between commercial and non-commercial forestry and its relationship to the economy.

"The report has had a huge amount of admiration from all sectors and this is a generational opportunity for people to feed into this," he said, adding that he thought money would be "available to set up a really good settlement for the future".

Lord Redesdale, on the other hand, said he couldn't see the government dipping its hand in the public purse to invest in forestry, but that he thought it would endorse the IPF's report. And, he added, factors such as the biomass sector pushing roundwood prices up had already increased wood's value.

"The value of wood will continue to grow, so I think the whole forestry industry is looking at a golden age," he said.