Arboricultural Journal
The International Journal of
URBAN FORESTRY
HERTFORDSHIRE’S GREEN MANTLE
Summary
The country of Hertfordshire and the evolution of its landscape and green mantle are
described. Information on the type and extend of the tree cover is given, with
reference to special trees in the county and their value and use. Social factors such as
people’s attitudes towards trees and their perception of the green mantle are discussed.
Current land use issues in town and countryside are considered and analysed,
especially planning policies, responsibilities legislation and current agricultural
activities.
The role of the local government is described, and the author’s approach to his work
stresses the importance of voluntary co-operation with the farming/landowning
community, and of increasing awareness through education, demonstration and
training.
Future changes in agriculture and the countryside are predicted, and the paper calls for
a more integrated approach towards protecting, conserving and enhancing the green
mantle. Town Tree Plans and urban forest parks are considered, and the need for a
change of emphasis to achieve ‘greener-cities’ is suggested.
The County
The claims of natural and semi-natural vegetation to a place in our plans for the
future are many and fundamental. First of all the existing beauty of England depends
largely on it. It is perhaps the most important reason why we should preserve it as far
as we can.
Sir A.Tansley, Britian’s Green Mantle.
Hertfordshire occupies about 160,000 hectares and the population is about 1 million.
Some 125,000 hectares (77 per cent) is countryside, of which 110,000 hectares (71 per
cent) are farmland and woodland. The county lies immediately to the north of
London, and the capital exerts considerable influence. The south is largely suburban,
the north and north-east, rural, and the most attractive being the Chilterns, where the
escarpment runs north-east, south-west down the western edge. Nowhere is ever far
from large towns in Hertfordshire, but their presence does not dominate the landscape.
Throughout threes and woodlands dominate the horizon and extend and weave
through the large urban areas, presenting an illusion of greenness.
Hertfordshire’s landscape is undulating, and gently rolling with meandering streams,
varied farmland, winding lanes broad-leaved woodlands and notable trees, forming a
kaleidoscope of farming and rather soft, subtle and pleasant scenes described by
Charles Lamb as “Hearty, homely and loving”.
Hertfordshire is also noisy and suburban, “full of Metropolitan restlessness”
RICHARD MABEY (1983). There is the constant roar of traffic, trains and
aircraft;roads and railways leading to and from London criss-crossing fields and
linking towns. There is always activity; things seem to happen faster and with more
zest with hint of a faster pulse rate on entering the county. The county is also renowed
for its New Towns-Letchworth (the first Garden City), Welwyn Garden City, Hatfield,
Hemel Hempstead and Stevenage. Letchworth and Welwyn Garden City have now
matured and Ebeneezer Howard’s concept of the Garden City has been realised.
Letchworth is perhaps now greener than the surrounding countryside.
The underlying geology of Hertfordshire is basically chalk-beds sloping down to the
south-east. These form the scarp of the Chilterns. In the south the Eocene deposits of
London clay, Reading beds and pebble gravels overlie the chalk, and there are mixed
glacial sands and gravels on the surface with an extensive area of fertile boulder clay
in the east.
The county is steeped in history, having been settled and formed for at least 5,000
years. Substantial tracts of land were undoubtedly cultivated throughout the
prehistoric period, and the intensive occupation known in the late Iron Age and
Roman periods, required a massive agricultural base. Agricultural development
continued right through the later historical periods, encouraged by population pressure
and the influence of wealthy landowners, like St. Albans Abbey, creating the chequerboard pattern, usually thought of as a traditional farmed landscape. Deep parks,
chases, woodland, county estates and the Parliamentary Enclosures of the 18th and 19th
Centuries all contributed to diversity. The 18th and 19th Centuries saw the
establishment of country houses and the creation of landscape parks by Capability
Brown, Humphry Repton and others, and these man-made landscapes, often with
introduced species, are a particular feature. Hatfield House, Brocket Park,
Panshanger, Gorhambury and St. Paul’s Waldenbury are notable examples.
Because of its long history and extensive settlement, it follows that there is an
extensive system of old tracks, green lanes and public rights of way criss-crossing the
county, and today these form the basis of a most valuable network providing access.
The Green Resource
What has Hertfordshire got in the way of trees, woodlands and hedges? How is this
perceived and how valuable is it? What are the specialities and characteristics of the
green mantle of the County? Some 12,000 hectares (7 ½ per cent) of Hertfordshire is
woodland, and this total has not significantly changed since the 1920s, but their
composition and structure has. In 1930 about half of the woods were ancient, seminatural (some 6,000 hectares). Since then, over 2,500 hectares (43 per cent) have
either been falled and replanted or grubbed out. Six thousand hectares (50 per cent) of
the woodland is neglected and unmanaged, and therefore underused. In the last 20
years at least 1 million trees, approximately 15-20 per cent of the tree population, have
been lost due to changing agriculture, new developments, the old age of trees, disease
and neglect. The ravages of Dutch elm disease have greatly denuded the landscape,
and about one third of this million were elms. The woods are not natually
regenerating, and young trees are unable to grow up in hedges due to regular hedge
trimming and there are few others spaces where young trees can naturally colonise and
grow up as features in the landscape.
Hertfordshire’s Specialities and Characteristics
The county has long been famous for its trees and writers such as COBBETT in his
“Rural Rides” refers to the splendid elm trees near Hemel Hempstead, as does
TOMKIN (1903).
“Its trees have elicited the admiration of many, particularly its oaks and elms, of which
colossal specimens are found here and throughout the count, and its beeches, of which the
beautiful woods on the Chiltern slopes and elsewhere in the west are largely composed”
There are records of numerous special trees, and many outstanding or ancient
specimens remain today. The ancient oak trees at Hatfield House and Brocket Park
are among the most notable, some being reputed to be up to 1,000 years of age.
Perhaps the most famous tree of all in the county is the Panshanger Oak, (Quercus
robur), which is alive, and in reasonable health today. GEORGE STRUTT (1826)
drew and etched this tree, and described it as follows:
“This elegant tree, according to tradition was known as “The Great Oak of Panshanger” more
than a century ago. It appears however even now to have scarely reached its prime, the
waving lightness of its feathered branched dipping down towards its stem to the very ground,
the straightness of its trunk and the redundancy of its foliage, all give it a character opposite
to that of antiquity and fitted for the cultivated and sequestered please grounds belonging to
the mansion of Earl Cowper…of which it seems at once the guardian and the pride. It
contains 1,000 ft of timber and it is 19ft of circumference at 3ft from the ground.”
Previously in 1789 GILBERT WHITE of Selborne had visited this tree and described
it as “probably the finest and most stately oak now growing in South East England.”
In 1936 its girth at 5ft from the ground was measured at 21 ft 4 ins.
Other special trees were the tree planted in 1066 by Sir Theobold Goffe, which
survived until the 1950s and gave its name to the town of Goff’s Oak. A giant walnut
(Juglans regia) is recorded at Codicote, which apparently had a diameter of 170 ft, the
ancient sweet chestnuts (Castanea sativa) at Little Wymondley and Chipperfield, the
lime (Tilia sp) avenue in Cassiobury Park, Watford, planted by Moses Cook in 1672,
the cedars of Lebanon (Cedrus libani) at Bayfordbury planted in 1756, the sycamore
(Acer pseudoplatanus) avenue at Hatfield House, the magnificent stand of beech
(Fagus sylvatica) at Frithsden in the Chilterns, swamp cypresses (Taxodium
distichum) at Brocket Park and the Pinetum at Bayfordbury. The hornbeam (Carpinus
betulus) is particularly associated with Hertfordshire woodlands, and some fine
standard trees occur at Gobion’s Wood near Brookmans Park and Brocket Park. The
wild service (Sorbus torminalis) is scattered throughout the county in the hedges and
woodlands on heavier soil.
The Ancient, semi-natural broadleaved woodlands are perhaps the most special
feature of Hertfordshire’s green mantle, particularly those lying on the heavy clay soils
in the south, such as Cuffley Great Wood and Wormley and Hoddesdon Park Woods
in the Broxbourne Woods area. These latter two woods recently purchased by the
Woodland Trust contain the most wonderful variety of sessile oaks (Quercus petraea)
and hornbeam. Indeed, Wormley Wood is possible on one of the finest
oak/hornbeams woods in Europe. To ensure that these woods are perpetuated and
managed in the way that is beneficial to both wildlife and landscape, efforts are being
made to revive the long standing tradition of coppicing.
Hedge greens are also a speciality of Hertfordshire’s green mantle, and ARTHUR
YOUNG in his 1771 Farmer’s Letters praise the mown hedge greens around the fields
and recommends that trees be planted in them rather than the hedges, so as to avoid
the problems associated with trees in hedgerows, SIR JOHN PARNELL in his
journal written in 1769 says “I know of no part of England more beautiful in its stile
than Hertfordshire. Throughout, the oak and elm hedgerows appear rather the work of
nature than plantations, generally extending 30 or 40 ft broad.” (PHIBBS 1984).
Hertfordshire was also renowed for the condition and management of its hedges, and
both KALM writing in the early 18th century and YOUNG in the 19th Century,
commented that they had seldom seen such well-managed and well-laid hedges as
those in Hertfordshire. Here the plashing or laying of hedges seems to have been
practised from very early on, and people were experts at their craft.
Hertfordshire is still benefiting from the foresight of the pioneering landscapers, of the
18th and 19th Centuries, who enhanced the parkland landscapes with extensive tree
planting of native and exotic trees such as oriental plane (Platanus orientalis), silver
maple (Acer saccharinum), tulip tree (Liridendron tulipifera), wellingtonia
(Sequoiadendron giganteum), cedars (Cedus sp), North American pines (Pinus sp)
and evergreen oaks (Quercus sp).
With the creation of the Garden City and New Town in the 1920s new tree planting
concepts were introduced. Each of the New Towns has a particular style of planting
the trees throughout the urban area blending them with the surrounding countryside
and softening the mass of buildings. At both Letchworth and Welwyn Garden City
the approach was formal with grand avenues and vistas emphasised by trees such as
Lombardy Poplar, which perhaps today has rather fallen out of fashion. The later
New Towns such as Hemel Hempstead and Stevenage showed more informal planting
and the use of reliable, quick establishing species such as Norway maple (Acer
platanoides), ash (Fraxinus excelsior), wild cherry (Prunus avium) and field maple
(Acer campestre).
The Value and Use of the Green Resource
Trees matter. There is a great deal of concern about the loss of trees and the neglect
of woodlands that have occurred throughout the county during the last 35 years.
Trees, hedges and woodlands are a vital part of the green mantle of Hertfordshire.
Trees have great symbolic value as features or landmarks of stability on the fastmoving and fast-changing world. They inspire poems and essays, paintings,
philosophy and wisdom. Trees are a constant source of beauty and delight. They
provide play features for children, they reflect the seasons, they soften the hard-faced
building, they blend town and county, they screen unsightly structures, they enclose
open spaces, they contain the edges and sprawl of towns, they improve the climate by
filtering wind and dust, they reduce noise from roads, they provide shade on hot
summer days and a home for wildlife. Trees are a major natural feature of the
countryside and of priceless value for amenity and recreation. On the farm they
provide shelter and shading for livestock. They improve the microclimate for crops,
they provide timber and fuel and woodlands are used for field sports. Above all. They
are a renewable resource which can provide many of modern mans industrial
chemicals, and in tropical countries fodder for livestock. They are also of historic,
cultural and scientific value, especially ancient semi-natural woods, which are living
records of centuries of land use activity. These woodlands represent a climax
vegetation and have taken centuries to develop and evolve as diverse, rich
communities of plants and animals. They are the last remaining habitats of some
plants and because they approximate to natural areas and are therefore irreplaceable
assets of the greatest important, it is imperative that they should be preserved.
The People
Local and national attitudes towards trees are relevant and pertinent to environmental
policies. Likewise social factors, which are often over-looked, affect these attitudes.
WH Auden observed that the state of nation’s trees reflected the state of society
prevailing at the time. The trees of the county of Hertford, like those of the whole
country are over-mature, declining and neglected. The loss of familiar trees on village
greens and along the country lanes has concerned many people, has opened their eyes
to their value and emphasises the urgency of replacements for the future. The
catastrophic loss of elms through Dutch elm disease has contributed greatly to the
significant change from complacency to an awareness of the contribution made by
trees to both the rural and urban landscape. The paradox of differing attitudes towards
trees is demonstrated every day. Over-mature trees are retained for nostalgic reasons
or because of fear of change thereby preventing regeneration or replacements to be
effected. At a personal level, where a tree is thought to be too close to a house or
building, there is usually a clamour of excuses, relevant or irrelevant, to have it
removed. The study of trees in proximity to buildings has been sadly neglected in the
past and is only now receiving attention. Compared with elsewhere in Britain, the
people of Hertfordshire enjoy an affluent and buoyant economy with high property
values and low unemployment. It has long had a reputation for high standards in
education, a consequence of which is environmentally conscious communities who
comment and complain when changes are contemplated or planned. Because of the
comprehensive environment watchdog systems, landowners are obliged to ensure that
their proposals are aesthetically acceptable as well as being ecologically and
economically sound. This neighbourliness factor is often overlooked, but it is very
important influence.
The people of Hertfordshire are as diverse as its landscape and consequently their
demands on and expectations of the landscape are varied and even opposite.
The FARMER regards the countryside as the place in which to earn a livelihood and
is suspicious of the town dweller, seeing him as an ignorant intruder. The TOWN
DWELLER may or may not be interested in the countryside and usually does not
understand either the farmer of farming. Similarly the CONSERVATIONIST does
not understand farming or agricultural practices and mostly coming from an urban
background is antagonistic towards the farmer. With dedicated and passionate beliefs,
based on as academic approach, conservations affect a greater interest in wildlife than
in people and because of this distance themselves from the farmer. The VILLAGE
COMMUTER’S interest is based on a delightful idyll regarding the countryside as an
unchanging playground for recreation. As an intelligent articulate and vociferous
protector of the countryside and as such representing a powerful lobby, the village
commuter still does not understand the farmer. The DEVELOPER/LAND AGENT
exists to exploit opportunities for developing land and to make a profit. Trees and
woodlands are often seen as nuisances rather than an asset and few developers want to
retain trees when, by removing them they can more profitably construct additional
properties.
The Issues
Popular Perceptions of the Green Mantle
The green mantle has not been consciously planned, but as evolved over centuries by
exploiting the environment for personal advantage. Change can only be influenced by
human endeavour. The green mantle is a vibrant mixture of natural and man-made
elements; an intricate and complex jigsaw of innumerable pieces dependent on natural
forces of change, the demands of society and the landowners.
Every piece of land is different so a blanket approach to its management or regulation
is not possible or even desirable. The backbone of the landscape is the landform
remaining immutable except through long term weathering and erosion. Vegetation
on this land form changes–forests, woodlands, parkland, arable cropping, pastures,
and meadows. The emphasis therefore is to ensure that an acceptable and wise pattern
of land utilisation is maintained and perpetuated. The crux of the matter is wise and
prudent land use-the stewardship by those heritage is the land.
It is equally important that in an aesthetic appreciation of the landscape all senses
should be employed-sight, sound, smell and movement-a field of corn; a landscape
devoid of birds is equally unacceptable. Diversity is more appealing than
monoculture. Many people see the agricultural landscape as one of convenience with
monoculture devoid of wild life. Consider then the components of a more diverse
land use.
1. where does the problem lie?
2. what causes the problem?
3. how can the problem be put right?
There is little point in attempting to alter the whole landscape; it is the components
which require to be examined as these parts comprise the whole.
Land Use Change
In a county such as Hertfordshire, considerable pressure to develop land at the
expense of agriculture are inevitable. In the past fifty years, on average 300 hectares
of farmland per year has been built over resulting, with each passing year, greater
urbanisation. Residential properties and new roads now spread over these 15,000
hectares of former farmland. There is no dispute over the need for housing, improved
communications in the form of motorways and wider roads to relieve traffic
congestion, but the continued loss of farmland should be strongly resisted. Better use
could be made of larger acreages devoted to golf courses where the land between
fairways could perhaps become wildlife habitats and in some measure replace those
acreages formerly associated with the rural landscape.
Agricultural Change
Agricultural practices have evolved beyond all recognition since the beginning of the
century. In 1901 there were11,000 working horses in Hertfordshire while 50 per cent
of the farm income was derived from livestock and only ten per cent from cereals.
To-day 58 per cent of agricultural land is devoted to cereal production with a
corresponding loss in dairy and cattle. The intensification of farming since 1945
aided by Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food incentives and grants to increase
yields is common knowledge. The countryside has been opened up by the removal of
hedges to accommodate the larger, the more powerful and efficient farm machinery.
Agriculture is facing its greatest change since the 1930’s, The phenomenal increase in
yields achieved by British farmers has been praise, butsurplusses expressed as food
mountains and milk lakes, supported by subsidies from the taxpayer’s pockets has
become unacceptable. Farming is no longer seen as just a food producing industry,
but as rural communities conserving the landscape and wildlife and encouraging
recreation.
Farm incomes have fallen in real terms and MAFF grant aid for environmentally
damaging work has been withdrawn, and there is now debate about taking land out of
food production and setting it aside or finding alternative uses for it. There is a
revival of interest in managing woodlands and the production of timber and fuel on
form woodlands, and incorporating woodlands as part of farming enterprise. There is
growing interest in the value of native hardwood trees, especially oak, ash, sycamore
and wild cherry, and with good silviculture practice should help to reduce the current
annual £4,500 million timber imports.
The Forestry Commission’s Broadleaf Woodland Grant Scheme is a welcome
encouragement, but its success will depend upon acceptance by the farmer that the
first income to be realised comes at the time of the first thinning-a concept which the
forester understands and accepts. There is no doubt that formers needs advice on the
economies of silviculturally based managed woodlands and plantations.
Land Ownership
Most of Hertfordshire’s green mantle is privately owned either as owner-occupied,
tenanted or, especially in the south of the county, publicly owned. Land ownership
patterns should have a fundamental effect on planning policies as landowners and
tenants aspirations have to be considered in projections for the future.
Planning Policies
Landscapes are too intricate and complex to be categorised into neat and tidy areas or
zones. The different landscape definitions adopted by local planning authorities is
confusing. Landscapes simply do not end at county boundaries but the myth is
perpetuated by the jargon adopted to identify similar features. By adopting the
recommendations of the UK Conservation and Development Programme a more
coherent approach to regional and national landscape designations and classifications
could be obtained thereby eliminating the confusion of different identities. More
flexible policies which emphasise the conservation of existing landscapes and the
development of derelict and degraded areas could be advocated. One of the major
problems of the country is that planning policies and procedures seem to be powerless
to prevent strong market and economic forces leading to the fragmentation of farms
and particularly on the urban fringe where marginal farmland is to be found. Urban
fringe farmland is vulnerable and threatened by the ‘hope value’ of the prospect of
being able to build on the land. Many farm holdings have been split up and developed
or used for pseudo-farming activities-pony paddocks or riding centres-thereby
jeopardising the country’s green mantle. Many of the incongruous developments have
resulted in planning decisions taken through the appeal system. If unsatisfactory
developments are to be prevented on the urban fringe, increased landscape and
environmental valves have to be appreciated and accepted not only by the developers
but also be the whole community.
Responsibilities
Attitudes towards woodlands, trees and hedges vary from one landowner to another,
take public land ownership as an example. Within local authorities responsibility for
the green mantle is spread over different departments, with the possible exception of
new town corporations. In the countryside, public land may be owned by county,
district or parish councils, or is may even be common land. In towns, likewise, there
will be trees on land owned by county and district authorities. Private ownership of
land is equally diverse with attitudes towards trees differing in accordance with land
use for example, railway land and woodlands management for game cover. The
environment is not seen as a totality, approaches and attitudes inevitably being
polarised by individual or sectional vested interest. The sterile mown grass mentality
prevails in parks, a pre-occupation with safety and crime prevention which regards
trees and shrubs as providing sanctuary for undesirables. All too often new
developments are designed and landscaped in isolation, and mature trees are not
adequately protected. There may also be conflicts of interest between the professional
dealing with the urban environment, and not providing for rate payers aspirations. As
an example, a recent improvement scheme in a Hertfordshire town involving the
planting of 8 trees in the High Street took nearly 2 years to negotiate, with a local
preference for car parking facilities instead of environment improvement.
Where new planting is a continual problem. Damage to young trees from mowing
machines, or the recent curse, the strimmer, is all to frequent. Who will consider the
skyline effect and the value of large-scale forest trees in integrating the built
environment and linking town with country? Mature trees, which may have taken 100
years to reach full size are invaluable; newly-planted trees will not be an effective
substitute for several decades.
Legislation
The ability of legislation to control and protect the green mantle can be limited as can
be demonstrated by the many examples of trees which have been damaged on
development sites during construction but have been protected under Tree
Preservation Orders. All too often trees on development sites are inadequately
protected and when damaged no remedial surgery is provided so that not long after the
development has been completed the trees die or are hazardous or unstable and they
have to be removed at considerable expense. Redress is often impossible as
consequences of the developers actions to a legal profession who may not know much
about the growth of trees. Advice on tree protection during development in urban
areas is provided in Guidelines on the Landscape of Building Developments, written
by the author and published by the Hertfordshire County Council.*
Tree Preservation Order legislation is the only protection afforded to trees in the
countryside, but they are totally disliked by landowners and cause antagonism towards
the local authority. Practically, TPO’s are inappropriate to the rural environment
because of their negative restraints and disincentives to management, and
contradictions to silvicultural prescriptions. In an attempt to resolve the problems
created by TPO’s the Hertfordshire planning authority introduced a voluntary Code of
Practice on Landscape Change in East Hertfordshire in 1983. This code has been a
useful means of resolving conflicting interests by bringing together the landowner, the
county and district councils and members of the National Farmers Union to discuss
projected and proposed development which is likely to affect the landscape.
The main form of control to prevent the loss of trees is through the Forestry
Commission’s Felling Licence control. The recent tightening of felling licences
should halt the piecemeal reduction of woodland and tree cover in Hertfordshire.
New calls are now being made by the Council for the Preservation of Rural England
and the Friends of the Earth for new powers to be granted to local authorities to
protect landscape areas by means of Landscape Conservation Orders. To bring all the
many facets under one protective legislation umbrella is considered to be undesirable.
How can landscape conservation be separated from nature conservation, and how can
such areas be defined by their visual attractiveness?
The Action
In order to ensure that Hertfordshire remains an attractive county, the preservation of
woodlands, trees and hedges is essential for the continuity of the green mantle with
emphasis on conserving existing features in preference to creating new ones. The
main objectives are:
To safeguard attractive landscapes
To conserve ancient landscape features
To prevent the loss of important landscape features
To improve and develop degraded urban fringe landscapes and townscapes
The Landscape Action Programme, which forms part of the County Structure Plan,
sets out these objectives and provides a framework of 13 intentions, the most
important of which are:
To undertake landscape enhancement on key sites, with priority directed at the
landscape development areas
To encourage the use of voluntary agreements with farmers and landowners relating to
landscape, conservation and management and provide practical assistance
To promote a wider awareness of the value of trees, hedges and woodlands in the
landscape, and encourage tree planting and woodland management through the
Hertfordshire Tree Scheme
To carry out practical landscape conservation through either an extension of the role
of the Countryside Management Service or Rural Action teams. To give advice and
assistance to agencies and individuals concerned with landscape conservation,
development and management
To give support and provide specialist help when requested, to ensure that landscape
schemes are carried out as an integral part of new developments. To devise a
programme of demonstration projects, publicity and education to promote the
establishment of a Landscape Forum to being together conflicting interests so as to
promote a wider understanding and co-ordination of different environmental interests
and activities.
Great emphasis is placed on voluntary co-operation with farmers, and landowners to
improve the green mantle. Information and advice is provided on tree and woodland
management, forestry, landscape improvement and conservation. Financial assistance
is provided through the Hertfordshire Tree Scheme and Landscape Conservation
Grant Scheme acting as agents and receiving funds from the Countryside
Commission. Grant aid is provided for tree planting, managing small woods-natural
regeneration and coppicing schemes-quick setting or layering of hedges, willow
pollarding, pond restoration and creation, tree surgery and in special instances, the
establishment of flower meadows.
The Hertfordshire Tree Scheme originated in 1978, and consists of three types of
assistance-grant aid for private owners, farm free trees, and free tree schemes for
Parish Councils and voluntary bodies. Since then, over 350,000 trees and shrubs have
been planted with an estimated successful establishment of about 75 per cent. In 1985
over 60,000 trees were planted, the gross cost being in excess of £145,000.
In 1984 Landscape Conservation Grants were introduced by the Countryside
Commission which, in conjunction with the county Farming and Wildlife Advisory
Group (FWAG) has led to an increase in conserving and enhancing the landscape.
Under the Whole Farm Plans, suggestions are made for landscape and conservation
improvements, the measure being phased over a number of years. The work can
either be done by the farmer or landowner or by a contractor, with the trees being
provided by an outside nursery. Trees grown in the County nursery established by the
Education Department are supplied to farmers and Parish Councils.
The scheme is run with the minimum of paper work and aims to be flexible to suit
both party’s needs. It has provided a bridge between the local authority and the
farming/landowner communities with much goodwill built over the years.
Very close links are maintained with the FWAG who are provided with administrative
support. The combined efforts of the local authority planning department and the
FWAG is expected to provide a strong and potent force for the rural community.
Farmers want the FWAG to succeed as they appreciate and realise that it was created
to help them and without their help, it would fail.
Education, Farming and Training
Farm open days and courses on work in the countryside have been found to be well
suited for establishing links between the town dweller and the farming community.
As there is an urgent need to improve the standards of tree planting and tree
maintenance simple instructions are provided in demonstrations. Simple practical
training in tree care and maintenance is provided as part of the campaign in landscape
conservation and also to counteract the misconception that once a tree has been
planted, it requires no further attention. Other organisations with similar aims
sometimes overlap, but contributions from other interested parties provide welcome
support to ensure that the landscape will continue to flourish and be attractive.
The Future
In the countryside, economic considerations are causing substantial areas of land to be
taken out of food production and set aside for new use, as yet undecided. Timber
production, farm fuel, landscape and nature conservation and recreation are obvious
choices to provide incentives for improved management.
Many people are calling for an integrated approach to countryside problems. The
Peak Park Authority is pioneering work on integrated rural development, using EEC
grant funds, which could perhaps from the model for the future elsewhere. It has set
up a Rural Land Management Executive Group which is a consortium of organisation,
including the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Country Landowners
Association, National Farmers’ Union, the Peak Park Authority, Development
Commission and COSIRA. Grant aid is given for community development and
business development as well as farming and land management.
The new National Environmental Work Scheme should provide thousands of new
jobs for unemployed youngers in looking after the countryside. It seems likely that the
MAFF’s Agricultural Development Advisory Service (ADAS) will assume a key role
in farming and the countryside in future, closely linked to much stronger Country
FWAGs. ADAS will provide advice on conservation free of charge and give grant aid
and fund management agreements. Perhaps County Councils could act as their agents
in those work, in the same way as currently happens with amenity tree planting and
landscape conservation grants funded by the Countryside Commission.
In urban areas a more integrated and coherent approach to the green mantle with
various departments working in co-operation, perhaps in accordance with an overall
Town Tree Plan is required to achieve common objectives. Consideration should be
given to the development of the Tree Council’s concept of community woodlands
whereby local people-perhaps through parish or community councils-could become
involved in the care of a woodland. There is undoubtedly a growing interest in
greening the towns and in creating and developing spaces more naturally to delight the
eye as well as creating habitats for wildlife. Linked to this movement is the urban
forest park concept to create extensive woodland areas with forest trees in and around
the edges of town.