Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes. Although I remain open-minded to all and any suggestions about how we strengthen and improve the protection of our ancient woodlands and rise to emerging challenges, the system as it stands, including the environmental designation and the forestry and land management route, where operating correctly, ought to be sufficient. There is a whole series of protections but we are not complacent. The Government is trying to identify all the threats to those incredibly precious trees and woodlands and we are taking action across the board.

I am particularly pleased to see the development of national planning framework 4 and some of its provisions for protecting our woodlands. They are explicit planning laws that will determine what happens throughout Scotland. The draft, which is being consulted on, says:

“Development proposals should not be supported where they would result in any loss of ancient woodlands, ancient and veteran trees, or adverse impact on their ecological condition”

or if they would have

“adverse impacts on native woodlands, hedgerows and individual trees of high biodiversity value”.

When it comes to potential felling or removal, a suite of rules is in place that ought to protect our woodlands. When that does not occur, Scottish Forestry has enforcement powers, which were strengthened in 2018 so that, for example, we would not need a successful prosecution for Scottish Forestry to step in and undertake restocking.

When the rules operate, they ought to protect woodlands, but we are always looking for new ways to do that such as through NPF4 and our work on deer and invasive non-native species, which we can come on to.

David Torrance is absolutely right that one of the first points in anything is identifying location, conservation status and threats. Developing the register of ancient woodlands is in our programme for government, and we will be taking that forward through the summer. It will be a parallel exercise with the biodiversity strategy.

There is a number of existing registers or archives showing where ancient woodlands and native, natural and semi-natural woodlands are. However, for the reasons that David Torrance gave, it is important to bring those together so that local authorities and all those who have a responsibility for looking after them know exactly where they are.

However, it is also important that we know where ancient woodlands exist in relation to landowners. I would like to see that knowledge down to very small pockets, because everything requires to be conserved. We can use that knowledge to support, encourage and incentivise landowners even more than we already do. I hope to see that being developed in the summer.

That is an excellent question, and something that officials and I grapple with all the time. We are in a fortunate position in that woodland can deliver across many objectives, such as carbon sequestration, biodiversity growth and socioeconomic outcomes, including the creation of good jobs in rural areas.

The types of woodland that we create have to be balanced across that. For example, we need to plant fast-growing commercial species, because they provide the greatest opportunity for carbon sequestration, and allow us to prop up the successful timber industry, which supports many jobs in rural Scotland. Then there are the types of trees that support our biodiversity objectives: native broad-leaved trees that will help us to reverse the decline in biodiversity.

There are other objectives that we build into the picture. For example, there is a requirement that 10 per cent of new woodland should be open space. That serves the socioeconomic objective of supporting wellbeing, as it allows people to spend time in forests and to enjoy the health and wellbeing aspects that come with that. We must start from a position where woodland can deliver, and we have to judge how best to match the objectives with the types of trees that we grow and the types of forests that we develop. All that is underpinned by the United Kingdom forestry standard, which is about all those things and managing forests for their multiple values.

I am not going to make a commitment like that in this forum, because I am not a scientist or an ecologist who would be tasked with considering the characteristics of woodlands throughout Scotland and determining whether they ought to be protected under an SSSI or special area of conservation designation. As a Government minister, I am not going to pre-empt the views of scientists and ecologists in that regard. However, I can commit to being open minded to all suggestions about how we can strengthen the protection of ancient woodlands and rise to all the challenges that are bearing down on them just now.

I listed some of the challenges, but I would like to go into a little more detail. Deer pressure is accepted across the piece as one of the greatest threats to ancient woodlands. The issue has been described well to me. We have ancient trees but, because of activity on the ground over decades and centuries, as grazing has increased, the saplings that the trees have tried to produce have been consumed. The grandparent tree is left, but the rest of the family has not managed to become established, because of the overbrowsing by deer. Dealing with that issue is critical if we are to protect and grow trees.

Clearance of invasive non-native species—in which we are investing heavily—is also critical, as is combating wildfire, which is a threat to our woodlands. I will take through the Parliament a separate piece of legislation on grouse moor licensing, as part of which I will consider the licensing of muirburn. Given that we are due to have warmer summers, you can imagine the immediate threat that is posed by fire ripping through the countryside.

I will not commit to the SSSI point just now, Mr Sweeney. It would not be appropriate for me to do so. However, I commit to doing everything that I can to protect the precious trees and woodlands that we are talking about.

I think that you are quite right. That is another aspect of the fact that we are dealing with an emergency. We can never stop, pat ourselves on the back and just say that what was good a year ago is still acceptable now. That will not be the case up to 2045, and it will not be the case beyond 2045. We need to keep reviewing what we are doing. A good example might be our targets for the percentage of our planting that must be native, which I talked about at the beginning of the evidence session. I mentioned that we had the 3,000-hectare minimum, which we were meeting and exceeding, so we raised that minimum. As part of our biodiversity strategy, we will now do an evidence-based assessment of that minimum to see whether it needs to be upped again.

We are always challenging ourselves to ensure that what we are doing is up to speed. If we are not sufficiently challenging ourselves, Parliament and the stakeholders we work with will challenge us. That is all the better, as we do not have time to mess about.

If you do not mind, I will use this opportunity to respond to Ms Baillie’s points, all of which I note and think helpful.

She asked about some specifics, and I will start with the community engagement point. I have been in post for approaching a year, which I can scarcely believe. In that time, I have tried to stress the community element of the portfolio. Officials and I have been working with the Scottish Land Commission to understand exactly how best we can embed community engagement, development, management and ownership within our ambitions for woodlands. Of course, I hope to take forward a land reform bill in this session. As well as continuing Scotland’s land reform journey, specifically, I will be trying to rise to the challenge of what are colloquially termed “green lairds”. We are all conscious of that issue, as the value of Scotland’s natural capital rises in the climate emergency.

Ms Baillie asked about what action is currently being taken on clearing the ancient woodlands that are potentially planted with other species. I am not sure whether I said this before, but I confirm that FLS, which manages land on behalf of Scottish ministers, is currently undertaking restoration of 60 per cent of plantation on ancient woodland sites—PAWS—and I expect that to increase when it is possible.

Ms Baillie made a point about the extent to which the forestry grant scheme is supporting those who could readily afford to undertake work in any case. I will correct this if I am wrong, but I think that, in recent years, 60 per cent of all the scheme’s grants have been for projects of fewer than 20 hectares. For example, we have a real focus on working with farmers, to help them stitch woodland into their farming business. Therefore, there is a focus on the smaller players as well, although, in the support that we offer, our mantra is “right tree, right place, for the right reason”.

Finally, I understand the point about the extent to which everything that we have discussed today—and what the Government is doing—feels at odds with what communities are experiencing, because, as I said, in my constituency capacity, I have experience of that occasionally being the case. However, in this role, I see the national picture and, when I look at the national picture, I am comfortable that the rules, as they are, are robust.

However, as with anything, there are circumstances in which people will not comply with the rules. Very frequently, when that happens, people get in touch with me and Forestry and Land Scotland. We try to get actively involved, often by visiting sites to see what is happening and what we can do to help.

Doug Howieson and I discussed this before coming to the meeting today. We would like to offer visits—with Doug, NatureScot officials or a local conservancy officer—to any sites where Jackie Baillie and her constituents would like us to see what has potentially gone wrong in that circumstance.

That is fine. Do you want me to talk about—

We are already accommodating it through our forestry grant scheme. Doug Howieson will have more information on that at his fingertips. That scheme already supports landowners with funding to undertake management of their woodlands for conservation and other purposes. There are opportunities coming down the track to look again at how well we are doing that. For example, there is the design of post-European Union exit agricultural policy, and I hope to introduce a land reform bill during this session of Parliament. In all those ways, we can assess both the incentives that are available to landowners and the requirements.

A big part of the land reform portfolio is the land rights and responsibilities statement, which makes clear that with rights come responsibilities. In an emergency, perhaps we could do more to make clear to landowners their rights and responsibilities and our expectations about how land is managed.

Those are two important, technical questions. I will try to answer them, but I would also like to go away and get you a fuller answer. I will ask my colleague Doug Howieson whether there is anything that he would like to add. We will come back to you with a response that is detailed enough to reflect the questions.

I will quickly pick up on the point about the contamination by different species of trees and the extent to which that is a threat to our ancient woodlands. For our part, Forestry and Land Scotland, which manages the public forests and estate on behalf of Scottish ministers, is undertaking restoration on 60 per cent of the sites that they manage where there has been historical planting on ancient woodland. That often means removing the non-native species that are planted in and around an ancient woodland site to prevent that cross-contamination and to allow the ancient woodlands to develop as they naturally would.

I will now hand over to Doug Howieson and we will both come back to you with further detail in response to your questions.

If the committee indicates its support for the draft SSI, we will be on track to fulfil the legislative requirements well in advance of the deadline of 23 March, which was to have the initial version of the balance sheet formally established in law. That is what we will do. As I said in my opening remarks, the process will include annual review and updating Parliament on the balance sheet, which will begin from next year.