Money will grow on trees but is renting out our forests a good idea?

THEY cover ten per cent of the land in Scotland and are crucial for wildlife, recreation, tourism and jobs. So plans by the Scottish Government to lease a quarter of the forests it owns to private firms have sparked huge concern.

The proposals have prompted fears that international investment companies could use the Forestry Commission land for commercial forestry, with little concern for protecting wildlife, ensuring public access, or promoting the use of the woodlands for tourism.

There are also fears the plan could put hundreds of the thousands of jobs that depend on the forests at risk.

Under the proposals, more than 100,000 hectares of forest – an area the size of Fife – could be handed over to private companies under a 75-year lease in return for £200 million.

This has led to accusations that the SNP government, which has in the past opposed measures that hint at privatisation, would be essentially putting the land under private management and "selling off the family silver".

The proposals, outlined in a consultation paper, would be aimed at generating millions from the forests to spend on initiatives to tackle climate change.

The money would be pumped into planting 10,000 hectares of new woodland a year and invested in renewables projects such as wind farms and hydro schemes.

Yesterday, a meeting to address concerns was held between Michael Russell, the environment minister, and opposition MSPs, the tourism sector, unions, and industries that rely on the forests.

However, growing rumours that several international investment companies have already shown interest in the land did little to quell the anxieties. Opposition politicians and groups reacted by launching a campaign to put a halt to the measures.

Meanwhile, emails seen by The Scotsman show worried Forestry Commission staff are encouraging as many people as possible to write to the Scottish Government opposing the proposals.

Mr Russell told The Scotsman that leasing out areas of forest would result in no noticeable difference to the way they are managed, with any firm granted a lease subject to environmental protection and public access laws.

He said only woodlands already used for commercial forestry would be leased out, not those widely used by the public for recreation or tourism. "It's disingenuous to suggest that there will be some sort of rape of the forests," he said. "That's not what will happen. This is not an attempt at an Amazonian-style logging exercise."

However, Edward Shepherd, trade union secretary for the Forestry Commission, predicted the whole 25 per cent would be given out in "one whopping great lease" to an international investment company overseas.

This, he said, would mean control of the land would be lost to an organisation whose key aim would be to make a profit. "Although the minister is not attempting to privatise the land, he would be privatising its management and control," he said.

Jim Hume, Lib Dem environment spokesman, vowed yesterday to start an online campaign to stop the plans. "Scotland's forests are not just areas of natural beauty, but hubs for rural and tourist enterprise," he said.

"Plans to sell the family silver by offering 75-year lease options on our forests jeopardise this. Many people's livelihoods depend on the forest."

Labour's environment spokeswoman, Elaine Murray, called on Mr Russell to think again about the proposals.

Mr Russell said it was crucial to maximise the potential of forests in Scotland to help with climate change.

He said targets of planting 10,000 hectares of new woodland each year were not being met. Last year, just 4,000 were planted. He added that woodlands leased to companies would not be those currently used by the public, but those areas already managed for commercial use.

The consultation into the proposals closes on 27 January.

How would the plans to lease out the forest work?

Measures would be included in the Scottish Climate Change bill to give the Scottish Government powers to modify the functions of the Forestry Commission in Scotland.

Who would own the leased forest?

A not-for-profit trust that would use the funds to mitigate climate change.

What would the money raised by the lease be spent on?

Creation of 10,000 hectares of new native and commercial forest a year – which would help soak up carbon dioxide, and the development of renewable projects, such as wind farms, small scale hydro schemes and woodfuel projects.

How much of the forest land owned by the commission could be leased out?

25 per cent – or just over 100,000 hectares – about the size of Fife.

How much money could this bring in?

About £200 million, for a 75-year lease.

What types of organisation could the forest be leased to?

The Scottish Government said it would expect leases to be of interest to investment firms, or commercial forestry companies.

Is it likely to impact on environmental protection of the forests, or public access?

There are concerns that the priority of the company leasing the land would be to make a profit, meaning biodiversity could suffer, as well as public access and tourism. However, the Scottish Government said it has given a commitment that public access to leisure and recreation trails and sites will not be affected.

Could there be job losses as a result?

There are widespread fears that jobs could suffer both within the Forestry Commission and in industries that rely on forests. But environment minister Michael Russell has guaranteed there will be no compulsory redundancies.

Scottish bill to put us at forefront of world

THE measures to allow the Scottish Government to lease out 25 per cent of its forests will be included in a long-awaited Climate Change Bill.

The bill is due to be published today, although the details are unlikely to be made public until tomorrow.

It is expected the bill will include world-beating legislation, such as:

&149 A target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 80 per cent by 2050;

&149 All greenhouse gases, not just carbon dioxide, to be included in the targets;

• Emissions from international aviation and shipping to be included from the start – that would make it more ambitious than any other climate change legislation in the world, including the UK Climate Change Act.

The consultation for the Scottish Climate Change Bill attracted more than 20,000 responses.

Lobby groups have called for the Scottish Government to use the legislation to act as an example to other countries. Currently, the international community is involved in talks in Poznan, Poland, on how to set emissions targets that will prevent catastrophic climate change.

Meanwhile, the UK government's Climate Change Act has been welcomed by environmental groups,

but also criticised for not including emissions from aviation and shipping.