The proposed disposal of the Forestry Commission’s woodland in England may have met with widespread public opposition, but the reaction from the timber sector is more mixed.
The government has already committed to selling 15% of the English public forest estate, but has now put plans to dispose of the remaining 85% on long-term leases out for public consultation.
Despite assurances from environment minister Caroline Spelman that the sale would include safeguards on sustainable management, access and timber production, it has been widely condemned. Save our Forests, set up to stop the disposal, has been endorsed by leading environmentalists and celebrities, and its online petition has received 150,000 signatures.
The UK Forest Products Association (UKFPA) and Timber Packaging and Pallet Confederation (Timcon) have both voiced serious concerns over the sale.
“The UK pallet and packaging industry purchases an estimated 25% of UK sawn timber production, part of a highly efficient cascade model that sees most of a harvested tree used,” sad TIMCON president John Dye. “However, if renewable energy providers buy these forests, we could find ourselves in a situation where harvested logs are burnt instead of making their way into the manufacturing chain.”
If the ownership of English forests was going to change, he added, the process had to be “managed with great care”. “Harvesting policy and proposed use of harvested timber must be stipulated in the terms,” he said.
UKFPA executive director David Sulman described the proposed move as “an extremely worrying situation”.
“It not only affects England, but also has serious implications for wood-using businesses in Scotland and Wales, given the relatively small size of the overall GB wood basket,” he said. “Plans for 150-year leases will be of no comfort and simply add to uncertainties about wood supply in the future.”
However, ConFor chief executive Stuart Goodall took a different view. In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, he did not express opposition to the proposed disposal, but urged that sale terms should place a high priority on forestry’s commercial potential
“The status quo is not great for England’s forests and more than half are not sustainably managed because the costs and bureaucratic obstacles of caring for forests make it increasingly difficult,” he said. Current legislation dissuades owners from trying to care for their forests and undermines the confidence of wood-using businesses, he said.
He welcomed environmental and access safeguards outlined in the consultation document, but urged recognition in final legislation of the value of forestry and timber; industries which in England “provide 110,000 jobs and contribute £4bn to the economy”.
Andy Lodowski, managing director of hardwood merchant and sawmiller Associated Timber Services, did not believe the Forestry Commission sale would affect “felling, extraction or sales”.
“We source from a wide range of public and private forests, depending on what we require and availability,” he said. “Our split is about 50/50, but I could change that with one phone call. I don’t see any significant change if all the forest is in private hands – and I’ve urged the sort of long-term leases the consultation document is proposing.”
What he was concerned about, he added, was that forests were sold at their true worth.
“I’m worried it will just be seen as a land sale, without taking into account the worth of the timber and the rising value of biomass,” he said. “The danger is that it will be bought as cheaply as possible by the big [land and forest] management businesses.”
A spokesperson for BSW said the company would be engaging with forestry officials as part of the consultation.
“Our primary objective will be ensuring that the principles of sustainable forestry management and continuity of supply are upheld,” he said. “We support multi-purpose forestry and are happy to work with any organisation that supports this.”
