Following my post on Forest and Land Scotland’s Larch Removal Plan in Strathyre, which would decimate the forest and its wildlife (see here), the local community has set up a campaign to stop the destruction. In the words of a local person:
“most of the villagers and local businesses had no idea this mass tree felling was happening. We had our BLS (Balquhidder, Lochearnhead and Strathyre Community Development Trust) annual meeting in the village hall , last week and that is where it was raised. FLS has not been transparent with us and we had no idea that there was a meeting on the 25th March to discuss the proposed felling. Of course no one attended and there were no objections from the village”.
That speaks volumes. The UK Forestry Standard 5th Edition (see here), which purports to set out the four home nation governments’ “approach to sustainable forestry”, includes a requirement for public involvement (Page 91) which states:
“Once submitted to the forestry authority (i.e Scottish Forestry) for approval, most felling, planting or management plan proposals are made available for public comment. Arrangements for this vary across the UK. Where an EIA is required, the consultation process is more extensive.
People with a recognisable interest in a forestry proposal or its outcomes should be given
the opportunity to be involved in its development.”
It appears that local people weren’t aware of Scottish Forestry’s formal 28 day consultation on the Strathyre Larch Removal Plan (now closed) either and they were given no meaningful “opportunity to be involved in its development”..
More and more people are now beginning to realise that consultation on forest plans across Scotland is a farce. Even the forest industry admitted consultation could be improved at the Scottish Parliament’s Rural Affairs Committee evidence session on forestry in January (which can be viewed on Scottish Parliament TV from c1.hr 35 mins see here). However, the forestry industry also tried to blame the public for getting angry about forestry proposals when most of that is due to people having their views and interests ignored.
The people in Strathyre would have every right to be angry about being ignored but their campaign is a model of reason asking FLS and Scottish Forestry to conduct a proper consultation:
Please consider suporting then and signing their petition here. Please also consider emailing or even better speaking to your MSP about the urgent need for meaningful consultations on forest plans instead of the current tick box approach.
Scottish Forestry’s website is hopeless for consultation purposes. Its very hard to find out what consultations are taking place and when you do little or no information is available and usually you have to ask for it. In terms of transparency, the planning system is bad enough but Scottish Forestry is way behind local authority planning portals – as Ian Wall from the Royal Society if Edinburgh pointed out at the Rural Affairs Committee on January. Major reforms are required to give local communities, like that in Strathyre, and the wider public a real say.
Every step in the consulation process run by FLS Scotland in cahoots with its wee brother Scottish Forestry, is designed to deter, frustrate, and obfuscate community voices. The only thing I can say they are actually good at is mendacity. The Forestry Minister should get out more and meet real people away from her minders….all of whom are in the pockets of industrial forestry.
One can only assume those local villagers and local businesses go around with their eyes shut.
Mature or diseased timber needs harvested.
Crack on
Not quite the case! Anonymous !! Villagers recognise that necessary management, thinning and block commercial felling is a regular occurrence in the area. The difference here is the sheer scale and impact this will have and its not just dead Larch they are planning to remove! As for plant health and prevention of Larch disease there has been no action by Either forestry body to promote and prevent the disease spread on national trails in the almost ten years they’ve known about it. Easy to put some signs on place and advice and even check points disinfectant…nothing!! As for felling I am attempt to contain spread it’s an excuse for cost cutting as with the rob Roy way well walked, the disease will be half way across Scotland just by foot!!
If the Scottish Ministers don’t ensure proper community consultation on land they own themselves, how can they expect private landowners to act any better? The public sector, through FLS, should be setting the standard for openness and accountability.
Unfortunately, Scottish Forestry continues to fall short as a regulator. The public register exists, but it’s poorly signposted and inaccessible to most. Key information about new woodland creation, felling, and forest plans is non-existent. That’s not transparency—it’s gatekeeping.
We need updated regulation and a cultural shift in approach. Expecting transparency is not anti-forestry. In fact, it’s the lack of it that fuels frustration and mistrust. The sector and public alike would benefit from a process that values early engagement and open communication.
strathyre is one of the most idyllic places in the area
from pedigree cattle/sheep to free range chickens
buzzards live in harmony with the other wildlife
as for blighted trees yes cut them
dont have the attitude they all must be downed
makes no sense at all ,it will lead to flooding erosion
take examples from stratheck and glen massan
if you need examples please ask as i know the answers
straight from the land owners own mouths
Honestly, I think people need to trust the foresters to do their jobs. Trees don’t last forever—they get old, sick, or damaged and sometimes need to be cut down. Better to use timber from our own forests than ship it in from halfway around the world. At least here we know it’s being replanted and managed properly.
Public consultations do happen—if someone missed them, that’s not really the forestry people’s fault. You can’t expect every decision to be made based on social media outrage. Foresters look at the bigger picture, not just what’s right in front of someone’s house.
There’s a place for nature conservation, and we have a lot of land already set aside for that. But we also need timber, and managed forests can support both nature and the economy if done right. It’s about balance, not stopping everything because a few people don’t like change.
Hi ‘S’… its easy to criticise villagers for not understanding ‘forestry’. But where does the fault lie? When I worked for the Forestry Commission in Strathyre in the late 1970s, there was a local FC Office there, with a Head Forester. There was also a crew of 10 full time FC staff employed out of Strathyre on planting, weeding and harvesting as well as general maintenance. Now there is no one. The FC abandoned Strathyre so it is not surprising that people have also lost their forest knowledge and understanding. Diseased trees may need harvesting to prevent the spread of diseases typically (imported into this country by industrial forestry), but mature larch do not. They are a windfirm species and mature larch make a significant contribution to local amenity value and biodiversity. If your attitude ‘S’ is typical of the neo-forestry generation, where people are seen as an encumbrance to forestry operations, then I fear for forestry’s future. A better alternative would be to start employing local people in forestry, engaging with the community, and give back some profit from local timber harvesting operations to improve village life.