| | TYPES OF RESPONDENT |
| 2.1 | Each respondent has been coded according to their organisation type, as outlined in the table below. Throughout the analysis of responses this classification has been used to help highlight similarities and differences of opinion between different sectors. |
| 2.2 | In coding the responses, only the official responses of authorities, public bodies, and institutions have been attributed to the relevant code (i.e. NDP, LA, PRO). Personal responses from individuals employed by these bodies have been classified according to the type of work that the respondent is involved in. Thus, for example, an employee of the Forestry Commission would be classified under FLM. |
| 2.3 | For the forestry industry, the two categories of contractors and hauliers (HAU) and processors (PRC) have been identified. Processors (PRC) include all responses made from the emerging biofuel industry. |
| 2.4 | Not surprisingly, the category of woodland owners, managers and associations (FLM) is large. Woodland and Forestry Consultants have been separated out from this group under the code FAD. Where an organisation is both owner/manager and processor of wood, it has been classified as FLM. |
| 2.5 | The 'individual' category (IDV) is also large and made up of personal responses from private individuals who have not identified if they manage woodland or own land or have any other specific interests. It also includes a batch of email responses from Powys (local authority) where there is no indication of the role of the respondent. A further breakdown of the respondents is provided in Appendix 3. Table of respondents by type
| Code | Organisation Type | No. of
responses | | NDP | Non-departmental public body | 3 | | LA | Local Authority | 18 | | PRO | Professional society/institute | 2 | | UNI | Academic institution | 0 | | HAU | Hauliers and contractors | 3 | | PRC | Timber and wood processing | 12 | | FLM | Forestry and woodland landowners/managers and associations | 48 | | FAD | Forest advisers and consultants | 14 | | ALM | Agricultural landowners/managers and associations | 10 | | AMN | Amenity, landscape, recreation and education | 9 | | TOU | Tourism | 2 | | NC | Nature conservation | 6 | | SPO | Field sports and game | 0 | | CCO | Community and town councils and community groups | 9 | | HE | Historical and archaeological | 1 | | IND | Individual | 53 | | OTH | Other | 4 |
Total = 194 (+3 records)
|
| | SUPPORT FOR A WOODLAND STRATEGY |
| 2.6 | Support for the consultation process: A large proportion (76%) of the respondents specifically welcomed the consultation process undertaken to date and many commented on the usefulness of the workshops that had been held in support of the consultation exercise. |
| 2.7 | The need for a woodland strategy for Wales: A large proportion (78%) of the total number of respondents made comment on the need for a new woodland strategy, with strong support for a strategy that is "clear in its aims,....inclusive in its approach and...adequately supported by Government in its implementation." (Institute of Chartered Foresters). |
| 2.8 | The potential content of the strategy is considered in more detail in Chapter 4 but the need to draw in a wide range of views and concerns is generally acknowledged. The Timber Growers Association, along with many others, points to the importance of considering the "wider productive woodland industry" in any strategy to ensure a well-balanced and sustainable approach. Equally there is a call for the strategy to reflect more local needs in terms of local Agenda 21 and Local Biodiversity Action Plan targets (132). But, as emphasised by the Welsh Development Agency (WDA), "any strategy is only as good as its implementation". |
| 2.9 | Links with other policy areas: A number of respondents lay stress on the importance of linking a woodland strategy to wider policy areas, recognising that it should not be isolated but part of a holistic rural strategy (8). The RSPB welcomes the commitment that a woodland strategy for Wales "should be a strategy for the Assembly rather than for the Forestry Commission alone" noting that there needs to be "clear integration with other Assembly policy areas, especially agriculture, rural development, water resources, energy and transport". Similarly, the National Trust stated that "a strategy for woodlands should be fully integrated within a broader rural policy framework for Wales". As noted by the Royal Forestry Society "it is essential at its outset that the woodland strategy be developed hand in hand with policies relating to agriculture and sustainable development". This theme is further stressed by the Farmers' Union of Wales, who note that the strategy provides "an ideal opportunity to ensure that forestry policy is tailored to the needs of the [agricultural] industry and that all avenues are explored to ensure that forestry becomes a far more realistic proposition for farmers". Many respondents identified the linkage with the National Assembly's Sustainable Development Scheme. In the area of economic development, it is noted that the strategy should link with the work of other agencies in supporting the Welsh timber industry, such as the WDA's recently established Welsh Timber Forum (164). |
| 2.10 | It is also argued that the strategy should reflect EU policies on energy, agriculture and transport and international inter-governmental fora on forests and World Trade negotiations (10). Similarly reference to forestry strategies in other European countries may be valuable "at least to put the Welsh situation in context, particularly as we seem to have become the consumers of a global forest" (126). A parallel point is made by the RSPB and others with regard to international commitments to conservation. |
| 2.11 | There is a word of warning, however, against an inclusive approach, with one respondent from the Forestry Advisory sector noting that while it "might be tempting to produce a strategy full of compromises…if this means an unrealistic or unachievable strategy it would be better to have a very limited strategy or none at all" (147). |
| 2.12 | Timescales for the strategy: A wide range of respondents make comment on the timescale of the strategy. It was noted that during the last 50 years there have been several changes in forestry policy, some of which have been short term (16). Yet forestry is a long term process which would benefit from a more consistent approach at the strategic level (95). In consequence, there is a consistent view across the different sectors that the strategy should be based on a long term vision - 50 years or more, providing flexibility within a firm framework. As examples of this concern, the Countryside Council for Wales felt that a strategy should "meet the needs of the people of Wales over the next 30 to 50 years" while for the wood processing sector it was noted that "forestry is an extremely long-term business/undertaking. Actions today are not felt until 20-30 years have passed so any [strategy] must look that far forward" (Ransfords Sawmillers). |
| 2.13 | Targets within a woodland strategy: Some respondents highlighted the need to set quantified objectives and targets within the strategy against which the long term success of the strategy can be measured. This theme was particularly developed by the RSPB who noted that "there is considerable merit in the development of robust and justifiable targets for the medium term. These should set out and interpret the main directions for forestry in Wales over the time frame of a strategy. We believe it would be appropriate to bring together and consider existing targets in the preparation of a strategy, not least to provide an assessment of their likely cumulative contribution against strategic priorities. We do not support unjustified annual afforestation targets. As a minimum measure, we believe that a forestry strategy should include clear targets for the conservation of biodiversity and that these should be informed by…..UK Biodiversity Action Plans and EU conservation directives". |
| 2.14 | The role of regional and more local strategies: Although not frequently addressed through the responses, the need to recognise regional distinctiveness within a strategy was a theme picked up in a few cases. For example, Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council (LA) discussed the need for a regional approach to strategy development to ensure that priorities and aspirations are relevant to the economic, social and environmental needs of the area. "For example, the access and informal recreation opportunities for the public in the South Wales Valleys are totally different to those in mid Wales. Similarly the proximity of wood-using SMEs in the South Wales Valleys to large tracts of forestry/woodland are higher than in West Wales". |
| | THE ROLE OF ON-GOING CONSULTATION IN STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT. |
| 2.15 | There was general support for the continuation of the consultation exercise in the development of the strategy, although there was a view that consultation simply slowed the process and resulted in compromises that suited nobody. |
| | A National Woodland Forum |
| 2.16 | Through the responses 20% identified the potential for developing a national woodland forum and possible regional fora (to reflect regional differences), with the aim of driving forward national and more regional strategies. It is suggested that regional fora might be organised on a north, central and south basis (41). There was general concern that the national and more local fora must not just be talking shops but, in the words of the Farmers' Union of Wales, must have a "specific remit and terms of reference for action. It is vital that if interest in forestry and woodland is to be re-kindled outside the public sector, the Forum must be seen to deliver". |
| 2.17 | There were some in the forestry industry, however, who were concerned that fora would simply serve to confuse and dilute - "no substitute for vision and leadership from Government"(147). On the other hand, those outside the industry pointed to the value of an inclusive approach in providing a foundation for ongoing dialogue and partnership working (160). There was a general view that some form of fora could contribute towards co-ordinating the policies and objectives of all the countryside agencies that have influence over forestry and forest land. |
| 2.18 | Alternatives to a National Woodland Forum that were suggested by some included: - A Rural Forum with a membership of the Forestry Commission, industry interests, NGOs and academic foresters with a remit for best practice in rural development.
- A Department of Countryside (98) or a Countryside Agency for Wales (55) taking on the responsibilities of the Forestry Commission, Environment Agency, CCW, and agriculture (98).
|
| | Membership of National and Regional Fora |
| 2.19 | The form that a national forum should take was not generally the subject of detailed comment. However, a very wide range of organisations was suggested for inclusion in a woodland forum, or at least to be included in the on-going consultation process, covering: - Government Departments and Agencies: the Forestry Commission, CCW, WDA the Sports Council, CADW;
- Other funding groups: LEADER groups and Enterprise Councils;
- Representatives of the forestry industry: covering timber growers, contractors, wood processors, and their representatives including the Institute of Chartered Foresters, and Timber Growers Association.: It is widely recognised that the industry must be fully represented if the strategy is to be accepted and implemented. Fora such as the Welsh Timber Forum were identified as critical in ensuring the necessary communication between the large number of small businesses which provide the basis of the rural woodland economy (168).
- Representatives of farming and landowners: including FUW, CLA, RICS, land agents and the Agriculture and Rural Development Committee of the Assembly. A number of respondents highlighted that small farmers must be listened to as they will be a key group in implementing any strategy. This is borne out by the fact that some 52% of the woodland estate in Wales is in private ownership (Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales). Similarly the FUW, TGA and others, feel that there must be a pro-active relationship between farmers and the forestry industry to encourage a partnership approach.
- Local government and representatives of amenity, landscape, recreation and education: including the Woodland Trust, National Trust, Wales Tourist Board and Coed Cymru.
- The general public. Amongst a wide range of respondents there was a view that the general public should be drawn into the continuing consultation process. To this end it was suggested that it may be appropriate to raise the profile of the woodland strategy in order to bring it to the attention of a more representative cross-section of the Welsh population.
|
| | The Role of the National Assembly and the National Assembly Regional Committees |
| 2.20 | There was a wide ranging view that the National Assembly for Wales should have an active involvement with future strategy development, in particular in developing inter-departmental/cross agency approaches relevant to strategy implementation. In addition, it was noted that the Welsh Assembly should encourage appropriate university departments (especially at Bangor and Aberystwyth) to initiate research and develop courses that are more directly relevant to the requirements of Wales (2). |
| 2.21 | There is also general support across the different sectors for the involvement of the National Assembly Regional Committees in any future consultation and strategy development process. It is felt that their involvement provides "a useful sounding board" (Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales) and would help bring recognition of the regional distinctiveness within Wales (85). |
| | |
| | |
| | |