Tree planting budgets cut by half

[Heym SR20]

Has anybody else seen that our great powers that be in Holyrood have halved the tree planting budgets. They have spent many £ms of shooting all the deer to make way fir the trees, lots of land has been prepared and now they have cut the grants.

‘We’ll have to burn millions of trees after cuts'

Foresters say a decision to halve tree-planting budgets will damage jobs and the climate.

www.bbc.co.uk

And

Forestry funding cuts could see investment in trees 'shift elsewhere' to peatland restoration, industry leaders say

The carbon focus could shift to other schemes such as peatland restoration in Scotland while the forestry sector grapples with a major confidence blow after funding cuts

www.scotsman.com

 

[JockStalk]

Can’t be true. They have such a great track record of delivery, how could this not be as good.

 

[David Barker]

The SNP and Greens are rapidly running out of cash in all areas. It will be cheaper to allow natural regen or protect raised bogs and peat rich areas than it will to cover our land with tree,s. I am sure this will lead to more cuts in the forestry sector very soon. Les new trees planted will mean a reduction in Contractors that would be sent in to protect them.

 

[HonestJohn]

No wonder Goldcrest can’t find a buyer for the 5.000 acre glen shira block for £30m.

This will hopefully have a lot of the big-Corp carbon credit land consumers thinking twice before they engage in more peatland habitat destruction - so likes of brewdog can expand more and feel up more staff backsides in after hours factory tours…, hundreds more miles of fencing that will lay in the ground for hundreds of years after its fallen over, and isolated fenced blocks stopping natural deer movements.
Contractors killing everything they see with no moral management compass purely for profit; all of which is highly impacting neighbouring estates abilities to employ stalkers and staff, driving tourism and income for many small businesses along the travel corridors.
Hopefully this will also put a slowing to some estates engaging in rewinding and modern day style ‘clearances’

Carbon capture is great if it’s for the environment, but if it’s just to allow major companies to increase non-domestic production and result in a net par or increase in emissions, what’s the point. Further, if it comes at the cost of rural employment, small business failures due to tourism decline, pollution via left over fencing, inability of deer to move freely to find feeding grounds and shelter - then the whole exercise is, quite frankly sickening - at least in my mind. And FFS, stop planting Sitka spruce, after a few years although it looks green, the floor is barren, void of life, and only the tips of the trees carry green, 90% is brown and unable to capture much carbon

Rant over

 

[Heym SR20]

Simplest, easiest, cheapest and most effective way of sinking vast amounts of carbon is to prohibit, close off, prevent, buy out the trawling of the the seabed on an industrial scale.

Very quickly the kelp forests will regrow. They grow incredibly fast and when it dies the vast majority ends up in the deep deep ocean floor. They are pretty good at locking up pollution.

They also provide a very good ecosystem for a vast array of sea life, including fish which can then harvested by methods other than sea bed trawling.

 

[Freeforester]

Simplest, easiest, cheapest and most effective way of sinking vast amounts of carbon is to prohibit, close off, prevent, buy out the trawling of the the seabed on an industrial scale.

Very quickly the kelp forests will regrow. They grow incredibly fast and when it dies the vast majority ends up in the deep deep ocean floor. They are pretty good at locking up pollution.

They also provide a very good ecosystem for a vast array of sea life, including fish which can then harvested by methods other than sea bed trawling.

You’ll get all the carbon you want by another 20 years, and their rewilding projects will be as Tunguska, but on steroids.

 

[finnbear270]

Has anybody else seen that our great powers that be in Holyrood have halved the tree planting budgets. They have spent many £ms of shooting all the deer to make way fir the trees, lots of land has been prepared and now they have cut the grants.

‘We’ll have to burn millions of trees after cuts'

Foresters say a decision to halve tree-planting budgets will damage jobs and the climate.

www.bbc.co.uk

And

Forestry funding cuts could see investment in trees 'shift elsewhere' to peatland restoration, industry leaders say

The carbon focus could shift to other schemes such as peatland restoration in Scotland while the forestry sector grapples with a major confidence blow after funding cuts

www.scotsman.com

Must be why they are pressing farmers to plant instead

 

[slider]

Has anybody else seen that our great powers that be in Holyrood have halved the tree planting budgets. They have spent many £ms of shooting all the deer to make way fir the trees, lots of land has been prepared and now they have cut the grants.

‘We’ll have to burn millions of trees after cuts'

Foresters say a decision to halve tree-planting budgets will damage jobs and the climate.

www.bbc.co.uk

And

Forestry funding cuts could see investment in trees 'shift elsewhere' to peatland restoration, industry leaders say

The carbon focus could shift to other schemes such as peatland restoration in Scotland while the forestry sector grapples with a major confidence blow after funding cuts

www.scotsman.com

Old news, this was in the pre-christmas financial statement.

41% cut but not sure it will make a massive difference to planting rates. I have spoken to foresters from 2 of the big woodland management business and they tell me that investors are still forging ahead. Remember the vast majority is planting is done by major investment houses.
In addition lower grants will also make it easier to fit into the additionality criteria of the woodland carbon code.

 

[Heym SR20]

Old news, this was in the pre-christmas financial statement.

41% cut but not sure it will make a massive difference to planting rates. I have spoken to foresters from 2 of the big woodland management business and they tell me that investors are still forging ahead. Remember the vast majority is planting is done by major investment houses.
In addition lower grants will also make it easier to fit into the additionality criteria of the woodland carbon code.

If that was the case why are many of those planting now cancelling or not ordering from the nurseries?

 

[slider]

If that was the case why are many of those planting now cancelling or not ordering from the nurseries?

Are they? Or the recent press a bit of political scare mongering from the nurseries.

 

[Mungo]

If that was the case why are many of those planting now cancelling or not ordering from the nurseries?

That seems to have more to do with them running into planning restrictions rather than budget cuts.

As has been said, the bulk of the purchase and planting has recently been driven by private equity investors, largely not reliant on grants, or at least with grants as a minor part of the business model.

Where they have gone wrong is in not anticipating the complexity of the surveys required, the restrictions on the extent of planting and the time it takes to get it all processed. There is also evidence of a shift in planning thresholds, such that Scottish Forestry are starting to ask for ‘cumulative’ impact assessments. Essentially, if two other estates in your glen have recently been given permission to plant, you may not receive it because there will then be nowhere left for the curlews in that glen.

Finally, there is also evidence that a number of the ‘conservation’ organisations that are fronts for the investors have suddenly realised that they’re going to need to get into the business of shooting large numbers of deer, and they aren’t comfortable with this. This seems to be both because of the expense (which again, they appear not to have built into business models in advance), and because the city boys making the decisions start feeling queasy about mass deer death in their names.

And, underlying it all, is a growing nervousness about the overall direction of travel with ScotGov thinking on land ownership in general. Why start planting trees in anticipation of a payoff in 40 years time if it’s all forced into quasi public ownership within 20.

 

[jimmy milnes]

Has anybody else seen that our great powers that be in Holyrood have halved the tree planting budgets. They have spent many £ms of shooting all the deer to make way fir the trees, lots of land has been prepared and now they have cut the grants.

‘We’ll have to burn millions of trees after cuts'

Foresters say a decision to halve tree-planting budgets will damage jobs and the climate.

www.bbc.co.uk

And

Forestry funding cuts could see investment in trees 'shift elsewhere' to peatland restoration, industry leaders say

The carbon focus could shift to other schemes such as peatland restoration in Scotland while the forestry sector grapples with a major confidence blow after funding cuts

www.scotsman.com

The ferry need a refit as its outdated..

 

[Heym SR20]

That seems to have more to do with them running into planning restrictions rather than budget cuts.

As has been said, the bulk of the purchase and planting has recently been driven by private equity investors, largely not reliant on grants, or at least with grants as a minor part of the business model.

Where they have gone wrong is in not anticipating the complexity of the surveys required, the restrictions on the extent of planting and the time it takes to get it all processed. There is also evidence of a shift in planning thresholds, such that Scottish Forestry are starting to ask for ‘cumulative’ impact assessments. Essentially, if two other estates in your glen have recently been given permission to plant, you may not receive it because there will then be nowhere left for the curlews in that glen.

Finally, there is also evidence that a number of the ‘conservation’ organisations that are fronts for the investors have suddenly realised that they’re going to need to get into the business of shooting large numbers of deer, and they aren’t comfortable with this. This seems to be both because of the expense (which again, they appear not to have built into business models in advance), and because the city boys making the decisions start feeling queasy about mass deer death in their names.

And, underlying it all, is a growing nervousness about the overall direction of travel with ScotGov thinking on land ownership in general. Why start planting trees in anticipation of a payoff in 40 years time if it’s all forced into quasi public ownership within 20.

No its nothing to do with planning. There are planting programmes that are earmarked for now, with seedlings ready for planting, all based on grants that were approved in process. Planting grants are for this year, and now the money has been pulled.

So those owning the forests and woodlands, including the Scottish ministers are suddenly left a huge hole in their own budgets so they are unable to proceed with the tree planting or having to scale back.

Its all about cash flow. Particularly as a few days before the budget Scottish Government told the industry it was full steam ahead as usual.

But yes there is also huge nervousness at the whole of land ownership.

 

[LuckyEddie]

People should have a read of this.
I suppose I have mixed views about the site “parkswatchscotland” some of the articles are really good. Others I think go a little bit off track - but that’s my personal view.

Brewdog's Lost Forest at Kinrara - a long way from net zero - parkswatchscotland

I had said I would follow my post looking at the impact of BrewDog’s tree planting at Kinrara (see here) with one that looked at the impact of the new deer fences. However, having looked at further further information about BrewDog’s carbon emissions at Kinrara, it seems more important to cover...

parkswatchscotland.co.uk

 

[slider]

No its nothing to do with planning. There are planting programmes that are earmarked for now, with seedlings ready for planting, all based on grants that were approved in process. Planting grants are for this year, and now the money has been pulled.

So those owning the forests and woodlands, including the Scottish ministers are suddenly left a huge hole in their own budgets so they are unable to proceed with the tree planting or having to scale back.

Its all about cash flow. Particularly as a few days before the budget Scottish Government told the industry it was full steam ahead as usual.

But yes there is also huge nervousness at the whole of land ownership.

Planting grants already awarded have not been pulled where the grant contract has already been signed. The grant cut will only affect application in process and new applications. Has has already been said this will have little affect on the investment decisions of financial institutions.

Scottish Minister forests are unaffected by the cut in planting grants, simply because FLS and other managers of Scottish Minister land have never been eligible to claim grant aid.

 

[Heym SR20]

Planting grants already awarded have not been pulled where the grant contract has already been signed. The grant cut will only affect application in process and new applications. Has has already been said this will have little affect on the investment decisions of financial institutions.

Scottish Minister forests are unaffected by the cut in planting grants, simply because FLS and other managers of Scottish Minister land have never been eligible to claim grant aid.

It is tree planting budgets as well that have been cut, so FLS also affected.

 

[slider]

It is tree planting budgets as well that have been cut, so FLS also affected.

No, it's planting grants that have been cut. In the Financial Statement Scot Govt actually increased the FLS planting target for next year.

FLS planting is largely self fund (just proves it can be done). They get an annual subsidy in the region of £15m a year, which is largely to off set the additional costs they face in providing other public goods such as recreational facilities. That said they have been awarded an extra £4m next year to assist with the above mentioned increased planting target.

 

[Olaf]

Has anybody else seen that our great powers that be in Holyrood have halved the tree planting budgets. They have spent many £ms of shooting all the deer to make way fir the trees, lots of land has been prepared and now they have cut the grants.

‘We’ll have to burn millions of trees after cuts'

Foresters say a decision to halve tree-planting budgets will damage jobs and the climate.

www.bbc.co.uk

And

Forestry funding cuts could see investment in trees 'shift elsewhere' to peatland restoration, industry leaders say

The carbon focus could shift to other schemes such as peatland restoration in Scotland while the forestry sector grapples with a major confidence blow after funding cuts

www.scotsman.com

Sounds positive, at least there’s going to be a few tonnes less plastic tree tubing blowing about the countryside eh ?
Kindest regards, Olaf

 

[HallyButt]

Sounds positive, at least there’s going to be a few tonnes less plastic tree tubing blowing about the countryside eh ?
Kindest regards, Olaf

And no need for winter fuel payments or energy subsidy for a while either !