A confederation consisting of the Northumberland Wildlife Trust and the Wildlife Trust (itself a confederation of the UK's 46 Charitable Trusts) is buying the Rothbury Estate, in Northumberland. Well, to be precise they have bought it on the promise that they can raise a total of £34 million which, they say, is the agreed purchase price.
That shouldn't be a problem as a sum like that is almost a rounding figure for the big beasts of the conservation industry. Thus we can look forward to a new form of estate management led by Craig Bennett, CEO of the Wildlife Trust. Craig has extensive practical experience of estate management acquired during his time at Friends of the Earth (we might have got that wrong), and the new owner's ambitions for Rothbury are clear. They say that they will create a place where 'nature and people can thrive side-by-side. An exemplar of how nature, farming and the community are integrated.'
To be fair even someone whose estate management skills were acquired at FoE should not find this difficult at Rothbury, because it already is an exemplar of how nature, farming and community can be successfully integrated. It is currently doing really very well on all those fronts, and it needs 'saving' like it needs an international airport – that is, not at all.
This is what the particulars and the purchasers say about the place:
'Spanning the moorland of Rothbury and partially in the Northumberland National Park, the land is home to several SSSI. Moorlands teem with endangered species such as merlin and cuckoo, showcasing the importance of preserving these delicate eco-systems.'
'Curlew, red grouse, merlin, cuckoo, mountain bumblebee, emperor moths and red squirrels are among the wildlife found on the land'.
The downside, we are told, is that there are 12 tenanted farms on the estate who apparently engage in 'intensive sheep farming', not to mention a caravan park, a pub and 23 residential properties. These are presumably the 'community' that Craig and his friends intend to integrate with nature and farming. This may come as surprise to the integratees, as they may feel fairly well integrated already, as indeed many unbiased observers would agree.
Be that as it may, change is coming. Obviously there will be consultation. There always is. But consultation is not negotiation and after it is over, the new owners will do as they wish. They always do.
Craig is very clear on this point. The estate, he says: 'Will play a key role in revitalising local economies, delivering multiple societal and environmental benefits and create a national flagship for nature recovery'. So whatever it is now, and whatever the opinions of the residents and farmers may be, the intention is to create something very different from the beautiful, sequestered and wildlife rich enclave that Rothbury already is. That much is obvious.
Will it work? It might, but the precedents are not that brilliant. The purchasers reference Knepp, and point out that this presents far bigger opportunity, but the comparison raises all sorts of issues. Knepp works because it is privately owned and as a result the owners can make fast and hard decisions. Rothbury will be managed by a federation. Knepp was not constrained by the human rights of 12 farming families, 23 residents, a publican and a caravan park operator. Knepp could repurpose agricultural buildings and develop tourist income options without community or tenant veto.
Do the Wildlife Trust want to create another Knepp – and will it work?
Referencing Knepp also raises the spectre of re-wilding, which is hinted at, but not really addressed. Of the 9,486 acres, around 2,200 acres are in hand, so there is an option to simply abandon land management, and it will be interesting to see what happens.
Again, previous experience is not encouraging. The abandonment of management following the community buy out at Langholm has so far bought no conservation benefits. There is no sign of the promised 'nature recovery' unless you count a mass of self seeded sitka spruce and more carrion crows. The hen harriers for which the moor was designated an SPA with a target of 13 nesting pairs, are just about hanging on at a couple of pairs – a level far below the achievement of the old gamekeepers, who regularly exceeded the SPA target.
The conservation industry is sometimes capable of managing small plots of land, especially wetland (which largely manages itself), but it may find even maintaining the existing high environmental quality of Rothbury beyond it. Remember Lake Vyrnwy, where after 40 years of RSPB management the habitat and its wildlife are a self-confessed basket case.
Let's hope the Estate doesn't follow the example set at Lake Vyrnwy
This was underlined at this years RSPB AGM, when their CEO boasted that a pair of golden plover had attempted to nest on the vast moorland estate for the first time in decades, something that no grouse moor would see as in the least remarkable.
The RSPBs explanation for the example of chronic mismanagement that is Lake Vyrnwy is relevant to the brave new world planned for Rothbury. When some of this shambles was discussed in the pages of the Farmers Guardian, RSPB were stung into responding as follows:
"Lake Vyrnwy is a complex, landscape-scale estate, with an array of stake holders involved in its management. The charity said it was working to improve the condition of the area by restoring thousands of hectares of blanket bog and upland heath, removing non-native conifers, re-instating active heather management, creating wildflower meadows and restoring ffridd habitat
It was too complicated for a risk averse, rule based, ethically constrained bureaucracy to manage. Compared to Rothbury, Lake Vyrnwy isn't complicated at all. A few graziers, a billionaire water company landlord, some forestry and a farm. We always thought the RSPB's statement was an excuse – after all the estate was no more complex than any headkeeper deals with every day. But it does raise the issue of how Craig intends to manage 23 tenanted houses, 12 farms, a pub, a moor, 2000 acres of in hand land, 1,800 acres of woodland and a caravan park, to 'create a national flagship for nature recovery'. It also raises the cost.
People think that estates make money. Few do. They often cost a lot to run. It is likely that the grouse moors of England cost their owners £20-30 million this year, all for the reward of not shooting grouse. Obviously, Craig will be crouched beside the grants trough, but even that won't hack it. We suspect that, just like Langholm, they will find that buying an estate is the easy bit.
Again RSPB provides an example. They and their billionaire landlords have for 40 years steadfastly avoided Lake Vyrnwy becoming a drain on their resources. They have sucked in money from the Welsh government, the EU, HLF and many more, but they can only access these eye watering sums of public money to avert a disaster.
Had they sought a million here or a couple of million there on the basis that Lake Vyrnwy was, 'a national flagship for nature recovery', they wouldn't have got a bean. It had to deteriorate to the ornithological equivalent of the M6 or they wouldn't have got any money.
The 'Give us the money or the curlew gets it' option is not available at Rothbury. Too many people know how good it is already. It is too visible, and too valued for anyone to get away with the Vyrnwy model. There is no shroud to wave.
We will see what happens. Let us watch and be aware. This is too important to not apply the utmost rigour to the evaluation of the impact of a giant NGO on the landscape, its existing wildlife and its people. We must not have another Langholm or Lake Vyrnwy.
コメント