Deforestation Planned Across British Countryside

It has been reported that the British government is planning to cut down a significant forest portion of Britain’s countryside – a move that would generate as many CO2 emissions as would be created by over 170,000 cars.  Under the terms of the plan, deforestation would take place across as many as 116 square miles of woodland, and wide, open landscapes be put in their place.

This, said eco-campaigners, would benefit wildlife, especially rare types of birds, lizards and insects.  The total cost to UK taxpayers, however, would exceed £60 million and – according to critics – the deforestation would act against anti-climate change measures by reducing the chances for trees to naturally soak up atmospheric CO2.

The plan is the product of the Forestry Commission, which has deduced that deforestation on the scale proposed would generate 506,000 extra tonnes of CO2 – a tenth-of-a-per cent rise.   According to critics, additional negative effects would include further redundancies among forestry workers and an additional need to rely on foreign timber.

Consequences of Deforestation

The reactions of environmental campaign groups based in the UK to the consequences of deforestation that could result from the plan’s introduction were somewhat mixed.  The likes of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Birds (RSPB) applauded the move on the premise of it opening up more space for wildlife. 

“On the grand scale, the impact on carbon is going to be very, very small”, the society’s policy officer for biodiversity, Robin Wynde, said. 

“We need an ambitious policy with ambitious targets.  Progress on recovering lost habitats and restoring areas to open habitats has been dismal and we really hope the Government is not going to blow this opportunity.

“We have for decades thought that planting trees is essentially a good thing – and it is, when it is in the right place.  But commercial forestry plantations have been put on valuable habitats and now we have a chance to restore some of them.”

The Green Party, however, condemned it vehemently. 

“Climate change is the most pressing issue at the moment and we would be in favour of keeping the woodland”, party spokesman Spencer Fitz-Gibbon stated, adding: “It [the woodland] is able to lock up carbon and provides a good habitat for wildlife itself.”

His comments were echoed by the Confederation of Forest Industries’ Chief Executive, Stuart Goodall. 

“There is very little planting taking place elsewhere, so the level of forest cover would be reduced and England would be a country that was deforesting at quite a rate”, Mr Goodall said.

“There are already areas of existing heathland in poor condition. There is a strong argument that rather than cutting down trees, releasing carbon and putting people out of jobs, we would be better off spending a smaller amount of money ensuring these other areas of heathland are better managed.”

The exact amount of deforestation to take place is still under discussion.  At maximum, it could reach 116 square miles, at minimum, 23 square miles.  In both instances, it would be performed over the course of between 10 and 15 years.

No information is yet available on the exact locations where this deforestation could take place.  However, similar forest-to-open-land conversions have already happened in places like Sherwood Forest and the New Forest.