Storm Arwen: Reflecting on the clear-up of damaged woodlands

I currently have some friends from Colombia staying with me and, as is the norm for living in Northumberland, it’s obligatory to show people ‘the sights’.

We did all the usual: Bamburgh Castle and beach, Dunstanburgh Castle, Low Newton, Ad Gefrin distillery in Wooler (well worth a visit for those who haven’t been), the Cheviot Hills and, of course, the battlefield sight of Flodden Field. Over the next few days we took in a more westerly route towards the Tyne Valley and Hadrian’s Wall, Kielder Forest and reservoir. While they were fascinated by the scenery and my attempted historical commentary, they wanted to know why so many trees had been felled, asking: “Is this normal?”

I explained that a couple of years ago we had a terrible storm and that south-east Scotland and Northumberland were particularly badly hit. Millions of trees were destroyed and many sites are just now being cleared.

READ MORE: Storm Arwen: One year on, what's its legacy for forestry?

The businessman in our party was very interested, enquiring: “Who owns them?” That’s not an easy question to answer, I said. Some are part of large estates. Some are Forestry Commission and a lot are just wind belts or plantations on private farms. I explained ‘loosely’ about the structure and role of the FC and how the industry was generally very tightly regulated.

It’s nothing like that in Colombia, he replied. Much of the population is very poor and subsistence agriculture is still very prominent, particularly in remote rural locations.

Small individual mills pop up on a daily basis. The surrounding woodland is cleared for agriculture and the wood is either used for building or fuel, with any surplus sold as a cash crop. While there is little regulation, there is a growing awareness of the need to preserve these fast-disappearing forests, and ecologists and government officials are starting to try and impose some kind of control. The problem, he explained, was the vast majority of people in charge are either corrupt or in the pockets of other, more powerful individuals. Failure to comply with the wishes of these individuals is a bad move and terrible things can happen. There are few state handouts and how can anyone persuade a family who have no food that the trees they are cutting down in order for them to grow crops to feed themselves has serious ecological consequences?

Colombia is a vast country with amazing resources and some of the most diverse flora and fauna on the planet. In the Amazonas region there are most certainly trees that people have yet to identify. Unfortunately, many of these areas are controlled by drug cartels and there is ongoing conflict between the cartels and the government. Any form of forestry regulation is impossible and so individuals will continue to chop down trees in order to feed their families. In other, more urban areas of Colombia around major cities like Bogota, the land is virtually devoid of natural vegetation. Readers might be surprised to learn one of the most prevalent species of trees in populated areas, as with a great deal of South America, is eucalyptus, an invader from Australia.

Like most governments, the Colombian authorities promise much and deliver little and so there is a built-in scepticism of any officialdom. Yet despite this, my friend tried to reassure me that recently some attempts were made to change current thinking and practice. For instance, any road schemes now have to come with built-in ecological/environmental assurances and you can now only take your car into Bogota on certain days, depending on your registration, in an attempt to curb pollution. Whether this will ever begin to address the eucalyptus-clad hillsides is another issue but at least it’s a start.

It is undoubtedly going to be difficult to bring about change in Colombia, but it does have several advantages. There’s little need for central heating, for one. Colombians often come top of the ‘happiest people on the planet’ league table. Materially, many have very little, but the climate provides an abundance of riches. One family I stayed with grew coffee in the garden and after drying the beans they roasted them in an old oven run from a gas bottle. The beans didn’t turn out like something from Costa, but the flavour was like something I’ve never tasted before. Why worry about tomorrow in such surroundings? It may never come!

More survivors. (Image: Supplied)

As we headed back over Rothbury Moor and onto the A697, we passed Thrunton Woods, where vast acreages now lie clearfelled and, as we headed eastwards, we could begin to see the scale of the devastation. I explained to our visitor that apart from its history, one of the defining things about Northumberland is its landscape. I’ve lived here all my life and it’s already beginning to change. Isolated pine plantations on distant hills with dark brooding skies are very much the order of the day. Many field boundaries and road edges are ash and these are now showing signs of dieback. Yes, it can all be replanted and most probably will be, but trees are a long-term investment and results are decades in the making.

As if by chance, we pulled in to refuel at Powburn services, where I happened to collect the latest edition of the Northumberland Gazette. Apart from the usual reporting around summer fetes and pictures of the great and the good, my attention was drawn by an article about help to restore ‘storm-damaged woods.’ A £1.5 million fund of government (i.e. our) money has been allocated to restore 300 ha of woodland following Storm Arwen. Apparently, Northumberland County Council has given a green light to the project which will operate over a two-year period.

It’s now accepted that 16 million trees were lost over an area of 8,000 ha in south-east Scotland and Northumberland as a result of the storm. While £1.5 m is a start, it pales into insignificance compared to the daily costs of other well-meaning projects of far less urgency.  

This does come on top of the 2.6 million trees planted since Storm Arwen (equivalent to 900 ha) and intentions seem to be good. My concern, as always, is the bureaucracy involved in the administration. I have painful experience of what I would call ‘maladministration’. I was once involved in a project to re-thatch a local historical building and heather was the material required. The ‘correct’ heather had to be sourced, cut, baled, transported and then thatched by a master thatcher. The total budget for the project was roughly £220,000 (bear in mind this was some years ago now). As the project was under the auspices of a public organisation, health and safety played a significant role as did solicitors. During the thatching we were visited by several delegations who arrived on a seemingly regular basis in minibuses, stayed in local hotels, ate at local restaurants and all presumably at the cost of that publicly funded organisation. Meanwhile, the people doing the job were crowded into a very cheap, somewhat seedy pub near the site. Our costs, the heather, the thatching, accommodation, wages and transport over a six-week period, came to roughly £35,000.

One is left wondering where the rest went. I believe the solicitors’ fees were more than ours and they were paid immediately, whereas we had to wait three months!
‘Responding to climate change’ was the most featured phrase in the article, followed closely by ‘wellbeing of the community’ and ‘biodiversity’. 

While I welcome the financial and political commitment, no differentiation is made between what kinds of woodland will benefit. Much as I am a commercial forestry supporter and understand the relevance it plays in the great industrial picture, serried rows of conifers will not deliver biodiversity. Nor does it explain how individuals or organisations can claim or apply for it. 

The distant copse is all that’s left. (Image: Supplied)

There will be criteria, but when public money is being spent then it’s good to offer some explanation to the people who are funding it.

At least we have a plan and real money is being directed towards dealing with the aftermath of Arwen and the great Northumberland forest. Fingers crossed the plan is coordinated, workable and comes with some kind of maintenance programme so future generations and their families can enjoy the beauty of the woods. I’m not so optimistic about Colombia!