Applecross Community Company

Torgarve Feasibility Study & Business Plan

First draft: December 2019

Applecross Community Company is a local membership based organisation promoting sustainable development in the small (but amazing) community of Applecross, Wester Ross.

Jon Hollingdale, Community Woodlands Association For Applecross Community CompanyA Company Limited by Guarantee SC342845Scottish charity SC042865

1

2

Contents

1 Summary (to be completed)2 Benefits of Community Ownership (to be completed)

2.1 ACC Objectives2.2 Main projects2.3 Key outputs

3 Applecross3.1 National and Regional Policy background3.2 Applecross Community Company3.3 The acquisition process to date

4 Torgarve 4.1 Ownership and Management4.2 The Forest 4.3 Forest Management Constraints

5 Forest Management Options Appraisal5.1 Harvesting Options 5.2 Timber Access options5.3 Restocking5.4 Grant aid5.5 Modelling of clearfell and timber access options5.6 Small-scale harvesting and timber access options

6 Community development proposals6.1 Social and Recreational6.2 Biodiversity and conservation 6.3 Economic development6.4 Renewable energy 6.5 Education6.6 Miscellaneous

7 Analysis and appraisal of community development proposals7.1 Recreational facilities7.2 Organised recreational activities7.3 Environmental enhancements7.4 Woodfuel and timber7.5 Economic development7.6 Employment

8 Alternative Tenure options (to be completed)8.1 Lease8.2 Management agreement

9 Development Plan (to be added)10 ACC 5 year and indicative 25 year Cashflow (to be added)11 Workplan and major milestones (to be completed)12 Monitoring and evaluation (to be completed)13 Analysis of major risks14 Explanation of abbreviations (to be expanded)

Appendix 1 Director Biographies (to be completed by ACC)Appendix 2 Compartment descriptionsAppendix 3 Inventory results (to be added)Appendix 4 Applecross Household Firewood Survey (to be added)Appendix 5 Wind risk modelling

3

1 Summary (to be completed)

Applecross Community Company (ACC) is a charitable company limited by guarantee operating as a community development trust. It is governed by a volunteer board of directors and currently has 114 members. ACC represents the Applecross community: its purpose, as defined by its articles of association, is “to manage community land and associated assets for the benefit of the Community and the public in general”.

Applecross Community Company is considering the acquisition of the 14.56ha Torgarve wood which is currently owned by the Applecross Trust. (See Map1: Torgarve supplied separately)

This plan once completed is intended to fulfil several functions: It outlines the community’s objectives for management and assesses the

feasibility of a range of projects and activities which might deliver those objectives

It lays out and costs the community’s preferred plans for future forest management and other development projects.

It supports ACC’s fundraising for the costs of acquisition and subsequent management and development of Torgarve wood.

Torgarve was planted in 1973 and is comprised predominantly of well-grown Sitka spruce, with small areas of European larch and broadleaves. Approximately 40% of the site is open ground. There has been minimal woodland management to date, but there is considerable community recreational and educational use of the woodland. ACC wish to acquire the woodland to maintain and enhance these, and to develop projects which will deliver a range of economic, social and environmental benefits.

The purpose of the feasibility study is to help ACC assess the viability and potential options for community ownership of the Torgarve wood, as a means to achieving a range of long term economic, environmental and community benefits.

The business plan describes the woodland and the background to community involvement, details the community’s plans and aspirations for the site, provides a 25 year indicative cashflow and detailed income and expenditure projections for forest management and development projects to be taken forward in the first five years of community ownership, as well as outlining a range of potential future developments.

After acquisition ACC will finalise forest management proposals and seek approval from Scottish Forestry for a Woodland Management Plan.

4

2 Benefits of Community Ownership (to be completed)

ACC wish to acquire Torgarve wood to deliver a range of economic, social and environmental benefits.

Economic (to be completed)Community ownership and implementation of this plan will: Social (to be completed)

Community ownership and implementation of this plan will:

Environmental(to be completed)

Community ownership and implementation of this plan will: enhance the environmental (and amenity) value of the woodland through

greater use of broadleaves and open space in restocking; increase (through education, interpretation etc) public awareness of

biodiversity; support local woodfuel supply allowing substitution of fossil fuels and

reducing timber miles for low grade material.

2.1 ACC Objectives

The community woodland group have identified the following five objectives for community ownership of the Torgarve wood: Enhance social and recreational opportunities in the community Make a greater contribution to biodiversity and conservation Explore opportunities for economic development Explore opportunities for increasing community access to renewable energy Create opportunities for learning in a woodland setting

2.2 Main projects (to be completed)

ACC will deliver the above objectives through a number of projects:

Longer term projects include

2.3 Key outputs (to be completed)

Implementation of this plan will deliver a number of key outputs:

5

3 Applecross

The Applecross Peninsula is located in Wester Ross, covering around 26,000 hectares and with a population of 225. Almost all the land on the peninsula is owned by the Applecross Trust1, a charitable company limited by guarantee2.

There are two road links: the historic Bealach na Ba (The pass of the cattle), one of the highest roads in Britain (626m), or the winding coast road to Shieldaig, completed in 1975. Both roads are part of the North Coast 5003 route which has sparked a considerable increase in tourist traffic.

Approximately 1,900ha of the peninsula is either forested or under some form of woodland planting or regeneration scheme, including: 539ha of forested areas under the management of the Trust; the 1,262ha North Applecross Woodland Project regeneration area and 112ha woodland regeneration in the southern crofting township of Toscaig. The remainder, and majority, of the peninsula is crofting common grazings and a central high mountain plateau.

The 539ha Applecross woodlands currently managed by the Trust generally fall into three classes: Ancient semi-natural woodlands which are relics of clearance and are

generally located on steep inaccessible cliffs; Policy woods around the Applecross Estate house with a history of

development since the 1700s to the present day; Conifer plantation woodlands dating from the 20th century in three different

locations, comprised of Sitka Spruce and Lodgepole Pine for the purposes of deer shelter and timber production.

Applecross is part of a large, rural data zone which includes Lochcarron and Shieldaig and is just above mid-ranking in Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation4. There is considerable variation in the scores for component elements: the area is in the 10th decile for crime, and 9th decile for health and education/skills, but in the 3rd decile for housing and the lowest 0.2% (10th of 6976 zones) for geographic access.

Applecross Primary School5 has a roll of 11 and falls within the catchment of Plockton High School where children from Applecross board from Monday to Friday each week.

The remoteness of the peninsula and its diverse landscape of mountains, moorland, sea, islands, woodland, and distinct Gaelic heritage make Applecross a special place to live, work and visit. However, there are also a number of challenges, many of which are familiar to remote Highland communities but which are particularly severe here:

1 https://applecross.org.uk/ 2 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC294897 3 https://www.northcoast500.com/ 4 https://simd.scot/2016/#/simd2016/BTTTFTT/11/-5.6847/57.4682/ 5 https://applecrossprimary.wordpress.com/

6

The area has a higher than average number of elderly and older residents (35% are over 60 years of age and nearly 65% are over 45) and relatively few working age (and younger) permanent residents.

There is a lack of affordable housing, transport, services and employment opportunities. This is linked to the availability of land to allow market and community-led development to address these deficiencies.

There is a disproportionate number of holiday homes: 33% of the housing stock is a second home or holiday home (cf. Highland average of 6%)6

Increased tourism through the NC500 has brought its own added pressures on inadequate infrastructure

Fuel poverty

Local employment is dominated by tourism, which brings issues around seasonality, skills development potential and sustainability, particularly in terms of retaining young people within the community over the long-term. An additional challenge is that the lack of local and available affordable housing provides an extra challenge for local businesses in terms of retaining staff.

Together these challenges play a significant role in the declining population of Applecross and its overall sustainability. In response, the vision of the Applecross Community Company (as set out in its 2020-2025 Strategic Plan) is for “the small (but amazing) community of Applecross to be sustainable, resilient and prosperous”.7

3.1 National and Regional Policy background

Scotland's Forestry Strategy 2019–2029 presents a long-term framework for the expansion and sustainable management of Scotland's forests and woodland. There are three objectives for the next ten years: Increase the contribution of forests and woodlands to Scotland’s sustainable

and inclusive economic growth; Improve the resilience of Scotland’s forests and woodlands and increase

their contribution to a healthy and high quality environment; and Increase the use of Scotland’s forest and woodland resources to enable

more people to improve their health, well-being and life chances.

The Strategy has 6 priorities, including: Enhancing the environmental benefits provided by forests and woodlands Engaging more people, communities and businesses in the creation,

management and use of forests and woodlands.

The Applecross area is covered by the West Highland and Islands Local Development Plan (2019)8 the headline outcomes for which are grouped into 4 themes: growing communities, employment, connectivity and transport, and environment and heritage. Community ownership and management of Torgarve could contribute to several aspects of this, including providing better access to facilities,

6 Census 2011, quoted in Community Land Use Plan7 http://www.applecrosscommunitycompany.org/index.asp?pageid=7045048 https://www.highland.gov.uk/downloads/file/21199/westplan_adopted_september_2019

7

community control of local resources, and safeguard the natural and cultural heritage.

Applecross is considered as part of the Wester Ross and Lochalsh sub-area. The plan identifies the following specific issues for Applecross: A challenging population age profile with too few working age (particularly

younger) permanent residents and a higher than average number of elderly residents.

A lack of access to suitable, energy efficient, affordable housing made worse by high second/holiday home demand.

Most local employment opportunities are low paid, seasonal and part time. An inadequate supply of affordable employment premises and land. A high number of tourists passing through the peninsula.

Remoteness from commercial and community facilities and poor transport accessibility to those facilities.

A lack of critical mass to make the community self-sustaining in terms of attracting and keeping people, facilities and a volunteering spirit.

The vision of the Highland Council Forestry and Woodland Strategy (2018)9 is that “the forests, woodlands and trees of the Highlands will be prized elements of our economic, environmental, community and cultural fabric, fulfilling valued and sustainable roles in realising their productive potential (where relevant) and enriching the quality of life for all who live, work and visit here.”

The Strategy has 8 themes, all of which community management of Torgarve could contribute to: Expanding the area of forests and woodland; Achieving the economic potential of forests and woodlands; Developing resilience to climate change; Encouraging community engagement and empowerment; Protecting and enhancing Highland’s natural capital; Integrating with development and tourism; Strengthening connections with health, access and recreation and learning; Promoting business and skills development.

3.2 Applecross Community Company

Applecross Community Company (ACC) is a charitable company limited by guarantee10 with community membership established in 2008.

ACC’s community area of operation is formally defined by the postcode units: IV54 8XF, IV54 8XU, IV54 8XX, IV54 8XT, IV54 8ND, IV54 8LN, IV54 8LR, IV54 8LS, IV54 8LT, IV54 8LP, IV54 8LU, IV54 8LQ, IV54 8LX, IV54 8LY, IV54 8LZ, IV54 8XL and IV54 8NE as shown in map 4 below.

9 https://www.highland.gov.uk/downloads/file/891/highland_forest_and_woodland_strategy10 https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC342825 https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=42865

8

ACC’s object is “to manage community land and associated assets for the benefit of the Community and the public in general following principles of sustainable development, where sustainable development means development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”.

ACC has been a registered charity since January 2012, its charitable purposes are: The advancement of citizenship or community development The advancement of environmental protection or improvement

ACC has 114 members and is managed by a Board of 6 Directors (brief biographies are contained in Appendix 1)11. The company currently employs two part-time local development officers (fully funded by Highland & Islands Enterprise until March 2021) to manage the development of projects.

Map 2: ACC community area

3.2.1Applecross community assets and activitySince establishment in 2008 ACC has been responsible for a number of community projects including: the purchase and management of the local filling station (2008);

11 Constitution allows maximum 13, minimum 5 directors, a majority of whom must be elected from the ordinary membership

9

the purchase and management of the local public toilets (2012); the establishment and management of the local community broadband

(2014); and the establishment of a local 90kW hydro scheme (2016).

More recently, ACC has been working on the development of affordable housing. The Camusterrach Housing project is a £459,000 project for development of three two-bedroom houses for affordable rent to Applecross residents. The land purchase was via an asset transfer from the NHS Highland and ACC are working with Highland Small Communities Housing Trust to deliver the project. Funding has been secured from Scottish Land Fund, SSE Sustainable Development Fund and Rural Housing Fund. The project is at tender stage and has an expected completion date of March 2021. Housing allocation would prioritise older residents who have care needs, residents with disabilities and vulnerable adults.

ACC have also recently launched Active Applecross, a project to promote cycling in the community with the provision of 10 electric bicycles. The E-bikes are for community hire, and the project includes community events and maintenance training. This exciting project is in collaboration with Applecross Hall and funded by Cycling Scotland and the Energy Savings Trust.

ACC are currently undertaking a feasibility study for affordable housing in Applecross. This £31,648 project is joint funded by the Scottish Land Fund and Rural Housing Fund. The feasibility study is investigating three potential sites which were identified by the community and the Applecross Trust through the Community Land Use Plan project.

3.2.2Applecross community planningACC has engaged in community planning to underpin future activities; this has included:

The development of a 5-year strategic plan12. This is based on a 2018 community survey the purpose of which was to understand the community’s current needs, ideas and aspirations for the area. The plan has 3 themes, the third being Community and Well-being, which focuses on supporting existing amenities and developing new provision to ensure “that Applecross remains a beautiful and amazing place to live, work and play”, in order to build “A stronger community with more community-led activity.” One of the key actions under this theme is “investigate the development of a community woodland that would have social, educational and environmental objectives”

The development of a Community Land Use Plan “Plan It Applecross”13. This project was developed by Planning Aid Scotland, and was carried out in close collaboration with the Applecross Trust, local stakeholders, the wider community and the Highland Council. The project was community-led and involved a community charette and extensive consultation. Key priorities for the plan are:

12 https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3.spanglefish.com/s/19408/documents/acc_5yearplan_underreview_digital.pdf 13 http://www.applecrosscommunitycompany.org/index.asp?pageid=695244

10

Making the most of Applecross's unique environment Better managing traffic, and improving community health & wellbeing Making it easier to live in Applecross Making it easier to work in Applecross and maximising community and

tourist spend locally Making the community more energy efficient Facilitating and encouraging community/social interaction, health &

wellbeing, managing tourist activity and creating a self-sufficient community

3.2.3ACC Communication and Community EngagementACC has a website http://www.applecrosscommunitycompany.org/ - a new site is under development and due for launch early in 2020.

The ACC Facebook page is at https://www.facebook.com/ApplecrossACC/ and twitter page is https://twitter.com/ApplecrossACC.

Regular newsletters are emailed to members, posted on local notice boards, printed in An Carrannach and are available on the website. http://www.applecrosscommunitycompany.org/index.asp?pageid=704507

ACC provides monthly reports to the Applecross Community Council and attends their monthly meetings. ACC also provides quarterly reports to the Applecross Forum and attends the meeting.

ACC has undertaken considerable community engagement and consultation during the development of its 5-year Strategic Plan and the Plan-It Applecross Community Land Use Plan. This includes a community survey and series of workshops and meetings.

Since the proposal for community ownership of the Torgarve Woodland was put forward at the end of 2018 (see below for details), ACC, supported by the Community Woodland Sub-Group, have undertaken a number of public meetings and events, as well as visits to the Torgarve Site.

3.3 The acquisition process to date

Community ownership of woodlands in Applecross has been an aspiration of some members of the community for a number of years and was first raised with the Applecross Trust in 2010. More recently, the idea of a community woodland project was raised during the ACC 2018 community survey, as part of the development of the 5-year Strategic Plan. In late 2018, the Applecross Trust initiated a conversation with ACC and other community representatives about the possibility of community ownership or leasing of the Torgarve Woods. Since then ACC has been developing a proposal and initiating community discussions about the potential for community ownership of the Torgarve site, with support from a community woodland sub-group.

11

The Community Woodlands Association (CWA) made an initial site visit to the woods on 12 April 2019, in the company of community woodland group members to understand community ideas and objectives for the site, this was followed by a round table discussion with members of the woodland working group at the village hall talking through first impressions, pertinent issues, opportunities and potential next steps.

ACC decided to go ahead with investigating acquisition, drew up a tender brief and issued an Invitation to Tender on 5 August, with a closing date of 26 August. CWA were confirmed as preferred contractor 9 September.

An application to the Scottish Land Fund to fund the feasibility study and valuation was submitted on 6 September, approval was confirmed 9 October.

ACC and the Community Woodland Group developed their objectives for the site, producing a “long list” of potential projects and activities and identifying priority actions. CWA drew up a document outlining the key constraints on management at Torgarve, and presented some initial options for forest management and thoughts on ACC’s long list of projects and activities, these were presented at a public meeting at the village hall on 12 November.

12

4 Torgarve

4.1 Ownership and Management

The Torgarve Wood is currently owned and managed by the Applecross Trust. It is surrounded by land also owned by the Applecross Trust: on the east side by deer-grazing hillside, on the southwest side by the Milton crofting township common grazings and on the northwest side by a small field of uncertain tenure and the Carnach ancient hazel woodlands (on the west side of the access road) and a thin strip of mature broadleaves, beyond which is tenanted farmland used for sheep grazing, to the east of the access road.

The Applecross Forest Plan records that “In the 1960s and 70s several areas of conifer afforestation were carried out by the landowners. The areas were selected to provide deer wintering, shelter for farmland and with an expectation of future revenue from timber production. The plantings followed the usual techniques of the day, being fenced and ploughed before planting. Poor soils and drainage led to the selection of Lodgepole pine as the main species, with Sitka spruce on more fertile areas.”

There has been no recent woodland management at Torgarve (except for the construction of a new deer fence on the eastern side of the block). The 2012 forest plan says “The plantation at Torgarve (compartment 20) is similarly of good quality and is not due for harvesting within this plan. In future both can be relatively easily redesigned and replanted with mixed broadleaves and conifers with some attention to the external margins in order to improve their relationships to the landscape.”

The plan schedules Torgarve for felling in the 2017-21 period, with an estimated volume of 7650 m314. As the proposed felling date was outwith the plan period a restocking plan was not produced.

4.1.1Previous grant schemesThe Scottish Forestry Map Viewer15 records that Torgarve has been included in two previous woodland management grant applications:

SFGS 30900605 Applecross Woodlands approved 5/11/2004 SFGS 30901081 Applecross Recreation approved 22/12/2006

The Carnach woods, the adjacent grazing field and the broadleaved strip were all included in two 2017 Forestry Grant Scheme Sustainable Management of Forests grants

Livestock exclusion ref 17FGS21917 Native Woodlands ref 17FGS21917 29/01/2018

There is a native woodland creation scheme planting scheme (from the 2007-13 SRDP) to the south of the site (nearest point ~100m)

4.1.2Geology, soils & landform

14 Our assumption is that this is an estimate of the future volume, at time of felling, rather than at the time the plan was written15 https://forestry.gov.scot/support-regulations/scottish-forestry-map-viewer

13

Whilst the majority of the Applecross peninsula is dominated by Torridonian sandstones, Torgarve is underlain by younger Jurassic and Triassic sedimentary rocks.

“The Triassic rocks are red in colour and consist of mudstones with some beds of pebbly conglomerate. They are poorly exposed on the hill above Loch a’Mhuillin [NG 713 432]. The Jurassic rocks, are chiefly limestones with some mudstones and sandstones. A sloping pavement of pale grey limestone, which looks almost man-made, forms the foreshore to the south of the Applecross Inn [NG 710 444]. Fossils such as ammonites have been found in these exposures in the past. The limestones are also exposed in some of the streams behind the village, and were quarried in the past for use in the village’s lime kiln16.”

The geology of the site has had a considerable impact on the woodland, with the underlying limestone geology permitting free drainage across the majority of the area, which has minimised windblow impacts. It is difficult to be sure without detailed investigation but it may be that the differential success and growth rates across the site reflect the underlying geology, with Cpt 1 and southern half underlain by Triassic rather than Jurassic formations.

16 Text from GOODENOUGH,KM AND FINLAYSON,A.2007. Geodiversity of Applecross: Statement of Significance and Identification of Opportunities. British Geological Survey Open Report, OR/07/020. 18pp.

14

Map 3 : Geology17

The woodland contains two entrances to extensive thin Jurassic limestone caves (Uamh nam Fior Iongantais) which are reportedly important in terms of scale and beauty18. If there are large voids underlying the woods this may have implications for the movement of harvesting and forwarding machinery.

Topographically, the site ranges from 40m above sea level at the western tip of Cpt 1 to ~100m ASL along the eastern boundary. Most of the site has a westerly aspect, but there is a small hill in the middle of the block (the track to the cottage runs along the crest which gives Cpt 3 an easterly aspect.

The average gradient across the site is relatively shallow, steepening close to the eastern boundary, however, there are a number of small “steps” within the wood that will impact forest management by constraining vehicle movement.

The majority of the forested area is very dry underfoot, except in Cpt 1 where there are some wetter patches. The open area at the southern end of the site is peatier and boggier.

17 ibid18 http://coilleais.com/liars-sink/

15

A small stream runs northwards through the middle of the wood, disappearing underground at one point, whilst another occasional stream drains the southern portion of the open ground in a southerly direction

4.1.3 Climate

Detailed climate data to be added

NB wind exposure has a significant impact on management as discussed in section 4.3.1

A fuller analysis of the wind risk is presented in Appendix 5

The expected impact of climate change is that the climate will remain wet and mild, but with an increased frequency of extreme weather events. This is unlikely to affect species choice, however more frequent gales may further constrain silvicultural options, whilst the creation and maintenance of habitat networks will be important to help mitigate climate change impacts on other species.

4.1.4 Fauna

Detailed fauna information to be added

(NB No significant impact on management)

4.1.5 Flora

Detailed flora information to be added

(NB No significant impact on management)

4.1.6DesignationsThere are no statutory environmental designations on the site19. The site is approximately 400m inland from the Inner Hebrides and the Minches Special Area of Conservation.

Canmore, the national record of the historical environment, records two sites in the woodland

Farmstead at NG 7121 436420

Field system at NG 714 43621

19 This was checked using the Land Information Search on the Scottish Forestry website https://forestry.gov.scot/support-regulations/land-information-search and the map search facility on the SNH website https://sitelink.nature.scot/map . 20 https://canmore.org.uk/site/108681/milton “A farmstead comprising one unroofed, one partially roofed and two roofed buildings, an enclosure and a length of field wall is depicted on the 1st edition of the OS 6-inch map (Ross-shire 1880, sheet cii). Two unroofed buildings, an enclosure and a field-system are shown on the current edition of the OS 1:10000 map (1971).”21 https://canmore.org.uk/site/108684/allt-breugaireachd “A field-system is depicted on the 1st edition of the OS 6-inch map (Ross-shire 1880, sheet cii) and on the current edition of the OS

16

Future forest management and other operations will be designed to ensure that no damage is done to recorded sites or their surroundings.

4.1.7 ArchaeologyTorgarve contains a diverse range of archaeological sites from across the historical and prehistorical periods; from iron age round houses to grain dryers to 17th and 18th C field systems and homesteads.

A full archaeological survey was undertaken in November 2019 by Cathy Dagg. This itemised and described the known features and identified a possible new hut circle site, and gave recommendations for future management – see section 4.3.4 for implications for management.

4.1.8Fencing responsibilities to be completed/confirmed

Eastern deer fence: responsibility of ACC if site acquired

Western deer fence: joint responsibility with crofters if site acquired

Northern boundary: current boundary is broken dyke / fence, assumed that it will be ACC’s responsibility if site acquired.

1:10000 map (1971).”17

4.2 The Forest

The Torgarve woodland site covers 14.56ha and lies approximately 1km south-east of Applecross. The woodland is predominantly spruce plantation, with small areas of larch and broadleaves, and a considerable area of open ground. There is pedestrian access and a waymarked route within the wood, whilst rough road access is shared with Torgarve Cottage just beyond the South-western boundary, but there is no visitor parking or buildings in the wood. The site is enclosed within a larger deer fenced area, and is trisected by SSE power lines.

For mapping and descriptive purposes, the forest has been divided into 9 compartments, 7 of which are stocked with trees, the other two being areas of open ground. A more detailed description of the compartments can be found in Appendix 2.

4.2.1 SpeciesThe forested, northern part of Torgarve is dominated by Sitka spruce, with small areas of European larch and broadleaves and a few Lodgepole pine in Cpt 1 at the western tip of the block.

A considerable portion of the site is open ground: there are some very small internal glades, wayleaves for power lines, and large areas in the southern portion of the forest which are completely unstocked. It is unclear whether these areas were left unplanted, or some initial plantings failed and were never replaced.

There is no apparent reason for failure: ground conditions are wetter and geology may be different but existing ground flora, and in particular the preponderance of bracken, suggests reasonable fertility and thus suitability for most species.

As part of the process of developing this plan a more detailed appraisal of species present and compartment areas in the woodland has been undertaken. A revised compartment and sub-compartment map and schedule has been drawn up, subdividing the proposed acquisition area into 3 compartments: see Map 1: Torgarve (supplied separately) for details.

SpeciesArea in ha

% of total

Sitka spruce 8.40 58%European larch 0.45 3%Broadleaves 0.40 3%Open ground 5.31 36%Total 14.56

Table 1: Torgarve area by species

4.2.2 AgeSpruce and larch crops were planted in 1973. Broadleaves are of variable age, there is one very mature Ash tree in woodland. Very little spruce regeneration is apparent, either within the forest (there are few areas where sufficient light

18

reaches the forest floor) or in the power line wayleaves and adjacent open ground.

4.2.3 QualityWith the exception of an area of ~0.5ha at the western tip of the forest (Cpt 1) and the scattered trees in Cpt 7 in the southern part of the forest, growth rates have been good or very good, with the tallest trees reaching 30m.

Tree form in Sitka stands seems generally good – as expected it is better in the stands with higher growth rates. Stocking rates vary considerably across the site, from ~2000 stems / ha in Cpt 1 to as low as 500 stems / ha in some localised areas. The extent of lower branching and the lack of stumps demonstrates that this low stocking density was apparent early in the rotation (rather than resulting from mid-rotation thinning), but it is not clear if this reflects the original planting plan or whether there were significant early failures, perhaps of another species.

Stem damage is apparent in some areas, most notably at the west end of Cpt 2. This appears to be bark-stripping by red deer: this is usually more common on Norway spruce (and some other species) and unusual in its severity for Sitka spruce, and is likely to have an impact on timber quality: where rot has set in material that is sawlog-sized may only be usable for firewood or pulp.

Cpt 7 comprises lines of Sitka planted down the slope in clumps three or four lines wide, with gaps between clumps – suggestive of a partially failed mix planting. Growth rates of the spruce are notably poorer here, being more typical of a west-coast moorland planting, presumably reflecting poorer fertility as well as increased maritime exposure resulting from the low density stand.

There has been remarkably little windthrow to date considering the location and exposure: just the occasional Lodgepole pine in Cpt 1 and a few trees on the northern edge of Cpt 2. This is a reflection of the generally well drained nature of the majority of the woods, derived from the underlying geology.

Tree form in the larch stands is generally poor, with most trees displaying curved stems. Stocking density in the larch is also low, with a few well-spaced trees – as with the spruce it is not clear if this reflects the original planting plan or whether there were significant early failures.

4.2.4 Yield ClassYield class is an index which is conventionally used in British forestry to describe the potential productivity of even-aged stands of trees. It is based on the maximum mean annual increment of cumulative timber volume achieved by a given tree species growing on a given site. It is measured in units of cubic metres per hectare per year (m3/ha/year) and conventionally expressed in increments of 2. The range of values found in GB is from 2 to 30.

Spruce stands show considerable variability across the site, reflecting ground conditions and exposure: the best growing stands in Cpt 4 reach YC 22, whereas in the most exposed areas stands are only YC 10.

19

Larch growth rates are consistently around YC 12, however poor form and wide spacing mean that timber quality and total volume are low.

4.2.5Volume

Species Standing Volume (m3)

Tonnage

Sitka spruce 7188 5796Larch 124 91Lodgepole pine 17 14Total 7329 5901

Table 2: Torgarve: estimated standing volume and tonnage (conifers)

Our estimates of the standing volume in the conifer stands at Torgarve, based on commissioned inventory work, is shown in the table above. Note that standing dead trees are not conventionally included in inventory calculations. It should also be noted that timber volume estimates have a significant margin of error, and that the standing volume is never fully recovered at harvest.

There is a very small volume in the broadleaved areas, maximum 20-30m3, but it is not anticipated that there will be any felling of these trees in the foreseeable future and this volume has not been included in any production calculations.

4.2.6Timber breakdownThe majority of the Sitka spruce volume is to be found in well-grown and often well-spaced stands (stocking density of just over 1000 trees/ha) in Cpts 2,3,4,5 & 6. Mean tree size is 0.9m3 and over 75% of the volume is sawlogs (material with a top diameter of > 20cm).

Species Sawlogs Palletwood

SRW total

Sitka spruce 5396 1075 717 7188Larch 105 11 8 124Lodgepole pine 4 7 6 17Total 5505 1093 731 7329

Table 3: Torgarve: estimated standing volume (conifers) by product type

Sawlogs = >20cm top diameterPalletwood = >16 cm top diameterSRW = short roundwood, material below 16cm top diameter

In theory 75% of the material harvested could be sawlogs, with 15% palletwood and the remaining 10% as short roundwood. In practice however poor form (notably in the larch) and stem damage of Sitka, which is especially apparent in the western portion of Cpt 2, is likely to reduce the sawlog percentage considerably.

Nonetheless, the bulk of the timber volume is anticipated to be sawlogs, which would be expected to fetch a higher price than smaller diameter material, which would be better directed to local firewood markets if available.

20

4.2.7 Access and RoadingThere is one vehicle access point to the wood, via the rough track which runs from the gate at NG712443, through the Carnach hazelwoods, entering Torgarve wood at NG713438 (point A on Map 1) and terminating at a turning circle / parking area adjacent to Torgarve Cottage at NG712435.

This track, which is passable by 4x4, provides the only road access to the cottage.

There are two pedestrian access points to the wood: At NG712435, beside Torgarve Cottage, where an unsurfaced and

sometimes boggy path leads approximately 500m WSW to meet the rough track beside Loch A Mhuilinn. (This is point C on Map 1)

At NG714438 (point B on Map 1) where the waymarked trail leads through a gap in the stone wall on the northern boundary of the wood. The path runs along the outside of the wall for ~160m before crossing the Allt Breugaireachd and leading to Smiddy Wood

The eastern and south-western boundaries of the site are deer fenced, without stiles or gates (except by the cottage): it is unlikely that any other routes are used for access.

In addition to the central track running to the cottage, there is a 800m waymarked route within the woods, established through the Applecross Landscape Partnership Project in 2013 (??). This path is unsurfaced, rough in places (exposed tree roots, etc.) but rarely boggy, reflecting the well-drained geology of the site. An un-waymarked route connects the main entrance and the point where the waymarked trail leaves the wood (points A and B on map 1)

With the exception of rough seating in the area used by the forest school in Cpt 2 there are no other recreation facilities in the forest (interpretation, benches, etc.).

4.2.7 Recent ManagementOther than the new deer fence along the eastern boundary there has been no recent forest management in Torgarve. There is no evidence of any previous felling or thinning operations.

4.2. Phytophthora ramorumPhytophthora ramorum is an algae-like organism called a water mould. It causes extensive damage and death to more than 150 plant species, including some forest species. Larch trees are particularly susceptible, and large numbers have been affected across the UK.

We are not aware that P. ramorum has been identified at Torgarve, however were it to be so, it is likely that Scottish Forestry would serve a Statutory Plant Health Notice (SPHN) requiring the felling of infected larch stands as well as all larch in a buffer area around them.

21

The P. ramorum update map22 shows a pre-2015 SPHN for Applecross.

The requirement to fell larch at Torgarve would not in itself be a massive task or a great loss to woodland cover, but would have very significant potential on the windfirm-ness of the remainder of the forest.

22 Available from https://forestry.gov.scot/sustainable-forestry/tree-health/phytophthora-ramorum

22

4.3 Forest Management Constraints

There are a number of significant constraints which impact on future forest management option:

Windblow risk Access Markets Archaeology Power lines

4.3.1WindblowThe forest is vulnerable to windblow. It comprises predominantly single age (p1973) Sitka spruce (with some small pockets of larch and broadleaves, and occasional Lodgepole pine). With the exception of an area of ~0.6ha at the western tip of the forest (Cpt 1) and the scattered trees in Cpt 7 in the southern part of the forest, growth rates have been good or very good, with the tallest trees reaching 30m.

Stocking density varies considerably and in some areas the trees are well spaced. There is no evidence of thinning so this may have arisen by early mortality or use in some areas of another species in mixture which either failed completely or was suppressed early.

There has been remarkably little windblow to date: a few Lodgepole in Cpt1 and a few spruce on the northern edge of Cpt 2 – this is probably related to the generally well drained nature of the majority of the woods, derived from the underlying geology.

Nonetheless the potential for windblow is a significant constraint: there is an on-going and growing risk of catastrophic windblow which would require major and costly clearance: generally timber can be salvaged after storms but it would need to be done within a couple of years and it is inevitably a slower and less profitable operation.

The wind risk has been modelled using Forest Research’s Forest GALES decision support system – more details in Appendix 5. It is impossible to accurately predict when significant damage will occur, especially as the surrounding topography offers shelter against storms from some directions: the whole forest could blow this winter or survive more-or-less unscathed for 20 years. We can be fairly sure that any significant opening of the canopy (e.g. by thinning) will promote windblow.

If sections of the forest were to be felled separately then these should, wherever possible, be to windfirm or “green” edges (i.e. where there are already established edges to blocks, where the trees have to some extent adapted to increased exposure. At Torgarve the power line wayleaves provide edges that may be partially windfirm, whereas e.g. the track running N-S through the largest area of forest is relatively narrow and would not provide a windfirm edge.

23

4.3.2AccessThe only current vehicle access to the wood is the track running along the eastern edge of the Carnach hazelwood for about 650m before it reaches tarmac – there is a further 150m to the junction with the main road (at the hairpin bend). The track appears reasonably robust and well-drained but is not of an appropriate standard for conventional forestry forwarding machinery or timber lorries.

The Carnach track crosses a stream by Applecross Mains: it is unclear whether the bridge / culvert would be considered sufficiently robust to cope with loaded timber lorries or forwarders: if Highland Council required reconstruction / strengthening of the bridge this would add very significantly to costs.

Depending on specification, upgrade of the track could have a significant impact on the hazelwood: use by a small tractor / trailer combination would require some trimming of overhanging branches, whereas construction of a full forest road would require significant clearance along either side of the track.

The cost would largely depend on local availability of stone: there are (potentially) considerable cost savings if this could be won locally, but there are no obvious borrowpit sites within the wood. If stone has to be imported a significant distance this will added considerable cost.

A further, related issue is the provision of a stacking area, particularly if as discussed below lorry movements are restricted to 2 per day: extraction from the forest would be at a much higher rate than this so a large store of timber awaiting transport would have to be accommodated.

There is currently no obvious large stacking area for timber at the northern end of the track. It is possible that use of the field opposite Craite Barn could be negotiated, and a new access created, alternatively the timber could be transported further up the public road and stacked at Smiddy Woods.

One possibility might be to stack timber in the forest for uplift by timber lorry, however creating such an area and a turning circle / junction for timber lorries at the forest would be challenging, given the topography and the location of the power lines, so this doesn’t seem a viable option.

Use and upgrade of this access would need to be agreed with the Applecross Trust23, and a further complicating factor is that the track is the only road access for the rented house, ideally work could be scheduled whilst the tenants were away.

A number of options for new routes are discussed in section 5.2 below

4.3.3MarketsApplecross is a long way from conventional timber markets and transport costs can be expected to have a considerable impact on both the profitability and

23 Access to the forest for forest management and other purposes will need to be negotiated as part of the terms of sale.

24

logistics of harvesting. An additional consideration is that timber transport routes are constrained.

On the map below: Red “agreed” routes can be used for timber haulage without restriction as

regulated by the Road Traffic Act 1988 Yellow “consultation” routes are those recognised as key to timber

extraction but not up to Agreed Route standard. Consultation with Local Authority is required and it may be necessary to agree limits of timing, allowable tonnage etc. before the route can be used.

Blue “excluded” routes should not be used for timber transport in their present condition. These routes are either formally restricted, or are close to being formally restricted, to protect the network from damaging loads. Consultation with the Local Authority is required to explore alternatives.

Map 4 : timber routes around Applecross, from www.timbermap.org

Whilst timber lorries can use the coast road to avoid the Bealach, part of Torridon glen is an excluded route and therefore they need to head south through Lochcarron which adds considerable distance / time.

Our understanding is that lorry movements from recent Trust harvesting operations are currently restricted to two a day, this has implications for the extraction of timber from the wood to roadside, as a large stacking area will required to accommodate the volumes produced.

25

It would be possible to export timber by boat, however in the absence of suitable existing infrastructure this is likely to be prohibitively expensive for the volumes available. We note that the 2012 Forest Plan states:

“The idea of a pontoon or pier at Applecross to allow bulk carriers to dock or beach in the bay to take on timber was considered. This was discussed locally and although there was some opposition the main problem became funding a project costing in the region of £400,000. European funding (EAGGF) via Highlands & Islands Enterprise was considered but ultimately the timing was too late as this source was due to close and the available funds had been largely allocated elsewhere. Similarly, applications were made to the Scottish Strategic Timber Transport Fund and the Freight Facilities Grant but only £36,000 was offered from the latter.”

There is a local market for firewood: work is underway to quantify the existing market and the potential for growth.

It might be possible to incorporate some timber from the woods in the affordable housing project planned for the village: but it needs to be stressed that this is a design issue for the housing project and in any case is unlikely to use a significant volume of timber.

4.3.4ArchaeologyAn archaeology survey was undertaken by Cathy Dagg in November 2019. Key recommendations are as follows:

Felling of the timber … has the potential to damage archaeological features and it is accepted that it is impractical to demand equal protection from damage for all features. Should clear felling be considered, it is recommended that the area of Torgarve township and associated enclosures west of the access track be protected. Felling of trees within the protected area should be done in such a manner as to lift cut trees without dragging across the ground and without vehicular access, leaving the roots intact in the ground.

The enclosures and field clearance mounds which cover the area east of the access track are part of a much wider landscape of pre-improvement cultivation and other extensive examples of this landscape are preserved, for example between Torgarve and Milton. While all effort should be made to preserve archaeological features, this should not go to the extreme of preventing tree felling. Good practice can include designing access routes to avoid minor features, the clear marking out of exclusion zones to protect sites 3, 4 and 5.

The greatest threat to the archaeological features within Torgarve Woods comes from windblow and selective, pre-emptive felling is advised should windblow begin.

4.3.5Power linesA considerable proportion of the standing crop is within the red (within one tree length of OPHL vicinity zone – no working with line live) and amber (within two

26

tree lengths of OPHL vicinity zone – precautions need) safety zones for the overhead power lines (OHPLs) that cross the site. Safe working practices to be followed by those working on forest operations near overhead power lines have been published by the Forest Industry Safety Accord (FISA)24. Discussions with the Network Operator are required well before work starts, usually at least two months, where operations are to be carried out within 2 tree lengths plus the vicinity zone of the OHPL.

24 https://www.ukfisa.com/assets/files/safetyLibrary/FISA%20804%20-%20Electricity.pdf27

5 Forest Management Options Appraisal

This section of the study analyses options for forest management; covering in turn harvesting, timber access and restocking, considers potential grant aid and presents initial results from modelling permutations of options.

5.1 Harvesting Options

Five main options for future harvesting have been identified, as follows:

Clearfell the entire forest in one operation Clearfell the forest over 10-15 years in 2 or 3 tranches Fell the forest over 25 years or more in smaller coupes as a rolling operation Continuous cover forestry Small scale salvage felling for firewood

NB There are various sub-options or combinations possible: e.g. the first option could exclude Cpt 7, the second option could include some salvage felling in the blocks not felled in the first tranche, etc.

5.1.1Clearfell the entire forest (or entire forest except Cpt 7) in one operationThis is the most economically efficient option in conventional harvesting terms as it only requires bringing machinery to the forest once, and one set of roading works. Depending on costs and prices at the time of felling it could deliver a substantial cash sum to support future management.

It would pre-empt the risk of catastrophic windblow: if ACC buy the forest and then it blows badly, clearing it up will almost certainly be less profitable than felling it whilst it’s still standing.The obvious disadvantages are that this option removes forest cover (and thus public amenity) across the entire site. Restocking from scratch means a gap of at least 10 years until there would be any sort of replacement forest cover.

This option minimises the opportunity for local utilisation of timber: it would be possible to retain some material for firewood (or timber for housing) but this would be a lower proportion of the crop than if harvesting was phased over a longer period.

If ACC were buying Torgarve as part of a package including other woods and it was clear that harvesting the entire site in one tranche would deliver a very significant cash sum for reinvestment here and elsewhere, then this would be an attractive option, and a straightforward recommendation.

It also allows the quickest possible transformation of the woodland to a more diverse range of species, with the consequent environmental benefits that this might bring, and would reduce the risk of spruce regeneration in the neighbouring Carnach hazelwood becoming an issue.

28

However, given the current circumstances and ACC’s objectives it may be difficult to reconcile clearfelling all or most of the site with some of the desired social objectives.

5.1.2 Clearfell the forest (or entire forest except Cpt 7) over 10-15 years in 2 or 3 tranchesThis approach attempts to reconcile the need to pre-empt windblow and realise the value in the standing crop over a longer period whilst maintaining the amenity provided by forest cover.

Felling would still be by conventional harvesting machinery, but operations would be less efficient economically (machines will have to be brought to and from site more than once – although it’s possible that harvesting could be coordinated with other felling work on the peninsula in other woods owned by the Trust).

It would still result in a limited number of large (2000m3) felling operations at a time, with the majority of the material harvested destined for export so it is likely there would be limited local utilisation.

Clearfelling just part of the site would increase windblow risk in the remaining stands. Cpt 4 is bounded on two sides by power lines so felling this block, perhaps in conjunction with the neighbouring Cpt 5, might leave the rest of forest reasonably windfirm, but it would be harder to subdivide the block containing Cpts 1, 2 and 3.

Depending on scheduling, it might be possible to have at least some woodland cover established in the first restock site before the final fellings take place, which would go some way to preserving forest amenity and allow the continuity of delivery of social objectives.

5.1.3Fell the forest (or entire forest except Cpt 7) over 25 years or more in smaller coupes as a rolling operationThis option envisages clearing small coupes of ~0.3ha every year (or possible cutting twice the area every two years), probably using motor-manual (chainsaw) methods as it would not be cost effective to import harvesting machinery for a few hundred tonnes at a time, and gradually working through the forest, probably from east to west.

This might be expected to produce ~300t a year for 25+ years25. The income from this volume would not justify significant road construction or upgrade, so extraction would have to use the Carnach track. It’s also unlikely it would be cost effective to bring in specialist forwarding equipment, so extracting sawlogs for export would be challenging unless there is appropriate machinery available on the peninsula and the great majority of material would have to go to local markets, primarily woodfuel.

25 There is currently less than 6000t available but (if they don’t blow over) existing stands will continue to grow significantly for the next few decades

29

This option optimises local utilisation if there are suitable local markets, and also higher local employment, although this is likely to be contractors rather than direct employees.

This option would enable a gradual transition to a more mixed forest: with areas restocked a year or two after felling it would be possible to have woodland cover established in the first felling coupes well before the final fellings take place, which would maintain some forest amenity.

This option brings considerably higher windblow risk than either options 1 or 2 as stands will be left with un-windfirm edges, however these would be temporary as cutting progressed. There is of course an ongoing risk that felling starts at the E end of the forest but (unconnected) catastrophic windblow occurs elsewhere. Felling windblown stands by chainsaw is particularly hazardous for operators.

Given the high proportion of the site within the red zone of the overhead power lines this option would require regular line de-energising, which might not be popular with the local community (or SSE).

It’s also unclear whether such a felling pattern would be acceptable to Scottish Forestry. The UK Forestry Standard says:

“In forests characterised by a lack of diversity due to extensive areas of even-aged trees, retain stands adjoining felled areas until the restocking of the first coupe has reached a minimum height of 2 m; for planning purposes this is likely to be between 5 and 15 years depending on establishment success and growth rates.”

which is usually understood to mean that you can’t fell an adjacent stand until the first one has been successfully restocked, however it may be acceptable in this given the small scale and complex nature of the wood.

5.1.4Continuous cover forestryContinuous cover forestry (CCF) seeks to create a permanently irregular structure by felling individual or groups of trees, with natural regeneration favoured over planting in resultant clearings in forest canopy cover. If CCF could be delivered it would support higher local utilisation and employment (felling would have to be motor manual), however it seems unlikely that this could be a practicable option at Torgarve because of windblow considerations. Additionally, any natural regeneration that occurred would almost certainly be Sitka spruce-dominated, which is unlikely to deliver ACC’s longer term silvicultural objectives, so additional enrichment planting would be required as well as spruce seedling/sapling removal.

Implementing CCF would be extremely challenging, as opening the canopy sufficiently to allow natural regeneration would almost certainly promote windblow, and we do not recommend this option is taken forward.

Note that the next rotation could be managed under a form of CCF, if intervention began early enough in the rotation.

30

5.1.5Small scale salvage felling for firewoodThis option envisages only limited intervention, with small scale recovery of already dead and suppressed stems from the woodland, for processing and use in local firewood markets. Such operations should not promote windblow, because they wouldn’t open the canopy or leave vulnerable edges.

Selective ring-barking, to pre-empt natural mortality, could be employed, although this would require great care to ensure that a closed canopy was maintained. There might also be concerns about promoting copycat behaviour.

This method of working would make a limited contribution to local employment and utilisation, but would be the best option in terms of maintaining the forest amenity.

However, it does to some extent simply delay the inevitable: that sooner or later the forest will begin to blow over, and as a consequence, will require relatively swift clearfell intervention to recoup maximum timber value from a now-depreciating asset. Such a reactive felling might not be have the benefits of a pre-emptive plan in taking advantage of fluctuating market prices and seasonal sensitivities (tourism and environmental impacts, efficiencies in haulage, working day-length etc.).

Finally, such limited forest intervention doesn’t begin to advance the transformation of the forest structurally or in species composition.

(NB it would be possible to combine this with options 2 and 3 above – but that is dependent on there being a significant enough local market to use the material produced).

5.2 Timber Access options

Six potential access options for timber extraction were identified, as follows:

Upgrading the Carnach track for use by a forwarder Upgrading the Carnach track for use by large tractor / trailer combination Use and repair of the Carnach track for small scale extraction A new route linking the NE corner of Torgarve to Smiddy Wood A new route west from the forest to meet the public road near Loch a

Mhuilinn A new route through the fields parallel to the Carnach track

5.2.1Upgrading the Carnach track for use by a forwarderUpgrading this track to accommodate conventional forwarders (carrying ~20t of wood) would be expensive, and would require significant widening of the track, with a major impact on the hazel wood. If this option were preferred then it would be necessary to come to an arrangement with the tenants of Torgarve Cottage to ensure they were away for the period of the works, as it would be

31

difficult to maintain car access during this period. The road will need to be repaired to the necessary standard once extraction operations were complete.

Whilst the construction of the road is straightforward, there are other logistical issues with this option, notably the probable requirement for bridge works at the burn by Applecross Mains, and the need to identify a suitable stacking area: the forwarder would be running on bandtracks and thus unable to continue on the public road (or double handling would be required).

5.2.2Upgrading the Carnach track for use by large tractor / trailer combinationUpgrading the track to facilitate timber extraction using a ~10 tonne tractor & trailer combination (such as that run by the Knoydart Forest Trust, which has recently been working on Eigg) would necessitate some initial work to improve the track surface and cutting back of some hazels, but at a relatively smaller scale and lesser cost than for the 20 tonne forwarder. As above, an agreement would need to be reached with the tenants of Torgarve Cottage and the road repaired to the necessary standard once extraction operations were complete.

Critically, this option may not require bridge works at Applecross Mains, and the tractor/trailer would be able to continue to stack timber for uplift at Smiddy Wood (subject to agreement with the Trust).

5.2.3Use and repair of the Carnach track for small scale extractionThis option involves using a small tractor trailer combination for intermittent use, extracting small volumes at a time (~2 tonnes). Some initial upgrade work might be needed, e.g. at the right angle bend near the northern end of the track but otherwise ongoing patching work should be sufficient, especially if care is taken over timing of usage (i.e. not when very wet or thawing). Some minor trimming of overhanging hazel is likely to be required.

5.2.4A new route linking the NE corner of Torgarve to Smiddy WoodThe most practicable alternative access route would appear to be to create a new road running north from the NE corner of the forest to link up with existing extraction routes in Smiddy Wood (i.e. from point D to point E on Map 1 – approximately 300m).

This route crosses the rocky gorge of the Allt Breugaireachd, it would require temporary closure / rerouting of the ALPS footpath (and restitution afterwards), as well as breaking through the stone dyke on the forest boundary and (temporarily) moving the stock fence at the east edge of the field. Costs per metre are probably higher than other options but the overall cost may be lower because the distance involved are shorter. Importantly, this route avoids using the Carnach track and impacting the access to the cottage, and obviate the need to stack timber by the campsite / Craite Barn.

5.2.5A new route west from the forest to meet the public road near Loch a Mhuilinn

A second possibility would be to create a new access route across grazing land west of Torgarve, meeting the public road by Loch a Mhuilinn. This would require the construction of at least 800m of new road and would almost

32

certainly be the most expensive of the three options, as well as the most intrusive from a landscape perspective.

A further consideration is that timber lorries would have to negotiate the narrow road by Shore Street; this, together with cost implications means that we do not consider this a viable option.

5.2.6A new route through the fields parallel to the Carnach track Finally, an option considered by the Trust is to drive a new road through the grazing fields to the north of the forest, meeting the main road at Craite Burn. This would avoid disturbing the Carnach wood route and bypass the bridge over the burn by Applecross Mains. This route could potentially be built to the FGS grant standard, to permit timber lorries to drive almost to the edge of the forest, giving forwarders a relatively short haul route.

5.3 Restocking

There will be a requirement to restock after clearfell operations: this would affect felling options 1, 2 and 3. The restocking plan has to be approved by Scottish Forestry before felling works begin, either through an approved management plan or a felling permission.

Modern forestry standards ensure that “like for like” restocking with 90% Sitka is not an option, with the UK Forestry Standard specifying minimum levels of species diversity and open ground. It would be desirable to keep future planting further back from power lines (or use lower growing species close to the lines). Additionally, a potentially significant proportion of the site should be left unplanted as buffer zones around archaeology: exactly how much will be subject of negotiation with Scottish Forestry.

For the purposed of modelling we have assumed a restocking requirement of 8ha if the entire forest is felled (the actual area may well be less), 2.5 ha if Cpts 4 & 5 are felled.

5.3.1SpeciesACC’s objectives include enhancing both the environmental and amenity value of the wood, and there appears general consensus that this should entail a significant shift towards native species in the wood. The most appropriate species are oak, hazel and birch, with smaller proportions of holly, aspen and rowan. Ash clearly grows very well and would previously have been favoured but its use is severely constrained by the current Chalara fraxinea outbreak26.

At the same time, given the prevailing climate, there will be advantages to including a proportion of conifer species in the mix: these will give more shelter from the elements and, as is already demonstrated, can provide a more

26 The Plant Health (Forestry) (Amendment) Order 2012 prohibits all imports of ash seeds, plants and trees into Great Britain, and all inland movements within Britain of the same material. Ash could only be used if grown from seed collected within the wood, or by natural regeneration.

33

“atmospheric” locale for forest school and other similar activities. Conifer blocks may also provide more shelter for adjacent broadleaves.

Cost-wise there is little difference per hectare: conifers are typically planted at higher density but broadleaves cost more per plant. Larger plants cost more (and are marginally more demanding in terms of transport and layout on site) but are generally considered to have a better chance of rapid establishment. The mix of species used will have to be agreed with Scottish Forestry, we would suggest a roughly two-thirds / one-third mix of broadleaves and conifers

5.3.2Ground PreparationGround preparation for restocking in west coast Scottish conditions very often involves mounding, which typically performs two functions: providing a raised position for planting so that the young tree avoids waterlogging, and providing sufficient well-spaced clear sites for planting amidst the debris from felling operations.

Given the very dry conditions across much of the forested area at Torgarve it’s unlikely that a raised planting position would afford any advantage (and exposing bedrock might overly encourage drainage and promote drought). There is little or no ground flora at present within the areas to be felled so manual screefing of the ground by spade to clear space to plant should suffice, although some localised brash clearance may be required.

5.3.3ProtectionTorgarve is within the deer-fenced area, and broadleaved planting should not therefore require treeshelters to protect against browsing. However, there are deer currently within the wood, these need to be removed / shot before restocking.

The deer fence also prevents sheep / cattle ingress, and there is currently no sheep or cattle grazing in the Carnach wood; if this was introduced in future it would be necessary to repair / replace the stock fence along the northern boundary of the forest.

We are not aware of hare or rabbits in the wood. Currently there is very limited ground flora to give cover for voles but if restocking is delayed significantly and the site grasses over this might increase the risk of vole damage.

Hylobius abietis (large pine weevil) is a very significant pest of restock sites. Clearfelling stimulates a short-term population boom for Hylobius, which causes damage by eating the bark of seedlings around the stem, thus 'ring-barking' the tree. Historically, chemical spraying either at the nursery or in the field has been the primary method of defence but there are increasing calls to restrict the use of chemicals in the natural environment, and research is ongoing into a variety of alternative options.

Post clearfell survey should be carried out to assess Hylobius population and determine what protection methods, if any, are required. The Trust’s experience at Smiddy Wood may also give valuable pointer: Hylobius are weak flyers but Torgarve is just about within range.

34

5.3.4Fertiliser The site appears fertile and we would not expect it to required general fertilisation, although there may be merit in supplementary fertilisation of specific species, such as oak, to help ensure successful establishment.

5.3.5MaintenanceRestock sites typically require some “beating up” after a couple of years, i.e. replacing trees that have died. There may also be some vegetation control required, especially in the Cpts along the southern fringe of the forested area if bracken becomes an issue.

5.3.6CostsAs restock sites will not need ground preparation this should reduce costs significantly to ~£2000/ha, with a further £500 for maintenance/beat-up. Volunteer planting could reduce costs further: the site is small enough that even a complete restock would only amount to ~15,000 trees, which wouldn’t be beyond the range of a concerted volunteer effort (especially if Scottish Forestry allowed it to be phased over 2 planting seasons).

5.4 Grant aid

5.4.1Forest Infrastructure grantIf ACC acquired Torgarve it would be eligible to apply for a SRDP Forestry Grant Scheme (FGS) forest infrastructure grant27 which could contribute £25.80 / linear metre towards roading costs. This is intended to help finance new forest roading to bring unmanaged and inaccessible woods into management - allowing timber and income recovery and long term forest management to sustain productivity and viability of the forest.

To be eligible for the grant the applicant must own or lease the land on which the road is to be constructed, so this would need to be negotiated with the Applecross Trust. A further consideration is that the road must be built to the minimum road specification28 (and presumably maintained as such), key features of which include: felled width: 25 metres average road width: 3.4 metres running width maximum gradient: < 8 per cent preferred, up to 10 per cent acceptable,

short lengths (< 200 metres) up to 12.5 per cent minimum gradient: two per cent except over short sections on crests and

sags

5.4.2Restocking grantACC would also be eligible to apply for FGS grant aid for restocking (known formally as “restructuring regeneration” grants29) after clearfelling. Two grant

27 https://www.ruralpayments.org/topics/all-schemes/forestry-grant-scheme/forest-infrastructure 28 Full specification in Appendix one https://timbertransportforum.org.uk/attachments/article/126/TTF%20The%20design%20and%20use%20of%20the%20structural%20pavement%20of%20unsealed%20roads%202014.pdf

35

rates are available, based on the species composition at year 20 across the whole forest plan area.

For the basic “Delivering UK Forestry Standard Woodland” grant rate (£300/ha) the level of tree species diversity must the UK Forestry Standard so that no more than 75 per cent is allocated to a single species, and a minimum of 10 per cent ‘other species’ must be present within each application/claim.

For the higher “Delivering Diversity and Resilience Woodland” grant rate (£550/ha) the level of tree species diversity must go beyond that required by the UK Forestry Standard so that no more than 60 per cent is allocated to a single species, and a minimum of 20 per cent ‘other species’ must be present within each application/claim.

Minimum stocking densities (for both rates) are 2500 stems per hectare for conifers, and 1600 stems per hectare for broadleaves and native Scots pine (higher densities are required where broadleaves are intended to be commercially productive).

Given ACC’s objectives to significantly diversify the species mix at Torgarve it seems certain the higher rate will be applicable.

5.5 Modelling of clearfell and timber access options

In theory the 5 harvesting options and 6 access options give 30 permutations, however, as detailed above, we have discarded the continuous cover option and the west route to Loch a Mhuilinn as non-viable. It is also clear that only the first two harvesting options would be able to generate sufficient initial income to justify significant roading works.

We have drawn up indicative costings for 8 permutations, covering two harvesting options: Felling the entire wood in one go – estimated volume recovered: 5500t (of

which 4000t is sawlogs and 700t palletwood) Felling compartments 4 and 5 (the eastern section of the wood) - estimated

volume recovered: 1900t (of which 1400t is sawlogs and

And four extraction options: Using the Carnach track by a ~20 tonne forestry forwarder, requiring bridge

works at Applecross Mains Using the Carnach track with a ~10 tonne tractor /trailer combination, not

requiring bridge works Building a temporary forest road through the fields to enable lorry access

close to the forest Building a temporary link road to Smiddy Wood

To cost these options we used a range of information including estimates of harvesting and forwarding costs, current mill gate prices and haulage costs and 29 https://www.ruralpayments.org/publicsite/futures/topics/all-schemes/forestry-grant-scheme/woodland-improvement-grant/restructuring-regeneration/

36

figures provided by the Trust for some options. FGS restock grants have been included, but not the grant for Forest infrastructure (roads) as it is unclear whether the suggested works would meet the required specification..

In both harvesting options the sawlogs and palletwood are sold and exported, whereas the short roundwood (SRW - spruce material below 16cm diameter or of poor quality, and almost all the larch and Lodgepole) is retained for fuel wood at a cost of £15/t30 . This accounts for 800t if the whole forest is felled, 200t for the smaller felling. Retaining more material would be possible but would reduce profitability. If this material were exported it would be make little or no profit31.

Modelling is based on the following estimates

Costs of harvesting and haulageCut and forward to in-forest stack £15/tCut and forward to new forest road £16/tCut and forward to remote stacking area £18/tAdditional cost of tractor / trailer extraction £10/tHaulage to mill £23/t

Price of produce at Mill gateSawlogs £70/tPalletwood £52/tPulp / SRW £43/t

RoadingCarnach track for forwarder 900m @ £35/m + £30k for bridgeCarnach track for Tractor & trailer 900m @ £20/m (£15/m for small felling)New forest road across fields 800m @ £75/mNew link to Smiddy Wood 400m @ £100/m

Roading costs do not include any “rental” costs. The estimated unit cost for the Smiddy Wood route does not include extensive road works or repair within Smiddy Wood.

Felling / extraction unit costs for the smaller harvesting operation have been increased by £1/t (£2/t for the T&T option) to reflect the higher unit costs of machine deployment.

The initial results of this analysis are shown in the table below:

Carnach by forwarder

Carnach by T&T

New link to Smiddy Wood

New road through fields

Felling entire wood 39,100 45,200 56,100 46,200 Felling Cpts -21,775 8,125 -4,775 -19,675

30 i.e. what the harvester / forwarder would need to be paid to cut and stack it in the wood31 i.e. the mill gate price would do little more than cover harvest, extraction and haulage costs.

37

4 & 5Table 4: Estimate net surplus of various felling and extraction options

We must stress that these figures are indicative and required more detailed and specialist work to quantify roading costs. All potential extraction routes and stacking areas require approval from the Trust and costs and other terms and conditions would be the subject of negotiation.

It should be noted that timber prices fluctuate considerably, are driven by international events and are difficult to predict: there are no guarantees that prices available now will be achievable in the future. Timber values have been high recently (relative to the last 10 years), largely reflecting the fall in the pound after the 2016 referendum. However, prices have fallen back from their peak a year ago, due to increased supply of timber from Europe resulting from salvage felling following storm damage and spruce bark beetle attacks.

5.5.1Minor clearfell sub-optionsFelling most of the forest but leaving Cpt 7 (the area of scattered spruce in the SE of the forest) would have very minimal impact: this area contains at most 150t, and a significant proportion of that will be short roundwood.

Felling Cpt 4 but not Cpt 5 (the triangular area SE of the power line) would have a greater impact, as this would remove ~250t, and reduce the profitability of all options by ~£3,000.

5.5.2Clearfell options: modelling resultsThe most profitable option is to clear fell the entire forest in one go. All extraction routes show a surplus, but the most profitable is a new link route to Smiddy Wood. As noted above our estimates have a broad margin of error, but the figures do strongly suggest that Smiddy Wood should be the preferred route financially, in addition to the other advantages of limiting disruption on the Carnach track or through the fields.

If the option to fell a portion of the forest is taken, then the only profitable option is to extract down the Carnach track by tractor/trailer combination, assuming a suitable stacking area can be found: the additional costs of double handling are more than compensated for by the reduced roading costs. We have only analysed the first tranche of felling, but most cost elements would remain the same for subsequent tranches, perhaps with marginally lower initial upgrade costs. As noted previously timber prices are notoriously unpredictable: any surplus would be erased by a relatively small fall in the market.

As noted all figures have a considerable margin of uncertainty that could only be eliminated by detailed specification and tender, and is some cases by discussion with Highland Council. It does appear to confirm, however, that whilst clearfelling the entire wood (or all but Cpt 7) would generate a substantial cash surplus, this is unlikely to be the case with the option of felling approximately a third of the wood, which may well do little more than break even.

38

5.6 Small-scale harvesting and timber access options

Two other harvesting options were considered32. Fell the forest over 25 years or more in smaller coupes as a rolling operation Small scale salvage felling for firewood

In either case the only viable extraction is by small tractor trailer combination down the Carnach track, with costs for maintenance and repair proportionate to usage: the main difference for extraction is the volume to be extracted annually, which will be significantly less under the salvage felling option.

One major potential concern with these two options, particularly the “Fell the forest over 25 years or more in smaller coupes as a rolling operation” option, is that there is a growing risk that plans could be overtaken by catastrophic windblow. It is worth noting that, based on the figures in section 5.5 above, which suggest a net surplus on harvesting of ~£11/t, is likely that, at current timber prices, a post-windblow clearance operations, whilst several £ per tonne more expensive than felling standing timber, would still be profitable. However, if timber prices fall substantially this would not be the case.

32 A further option: continuous cover forestry, was discarded as impractical given the windblow risk

39

6 Community development proposals

The community woodland group identified five main objectives for community ownership of the Torgarve wood, with various project ideas suggested within these 5 objectives and an initial prioritisation made based on discussions within the group and the results of the survey of the members of the CW group undertaken earlier in October 2019.

6.1 Social and Recreational

Priority projects under this heading were: Walking (including groups and guided tours) (on existing paths, with some

new benches / resting areas) Building a woodland playpark (current one available on peninsula is very

poor quality) Organising workshops, storytelling and artistic and cultural activities within

the woodland (e.g. sculpture trails)

Other activities which were not an immediate priority for the group include orienteering; constructing an outdoor gym; and outdoor cooking and bivvy areas

6.2 Biodiversity and conservation

Priority projects under this heading were: Restoring and expanding native woodlands within the plantation area Establishing a tree nursery focused on growing local trees from seed (e.g.

oak), growing trails (school could get involved in collecting and growing trees from seed) (could involve a polytunnel and sheds at the far corner, currently unplanted)

Habitat improvements within the plantation, e.g. ponds

Other activities which were not an immediate priority for the group include management of foraging and including wild orchard species in any replanting plans.

6.3 Economic development

Priority projects under this heading were: Job creation in woodland management Expanding local markets for timber from the plantation area (e.g. woodfuel,

coppicing etc.) Green burials Huts / Bothies for renting out

Other activities which were not an immediate priority for the group include harnessing increasing tourist visitor numbers; increasing the value of forestry to local communities; a tree sponsorship scheme; providing opportunities to buy shares in the project; enquiring if a job could be created as a part-time woodland manager and part-time countryside ranger.

40

6.4 Renewable energy

Priority projects under this heading were: Providing a long-term, local and more sustainable supply of wood-fuel to the

community (including replanting programmes, wood-drying facilities and investigation of opportunities such as wood-chipping)

Supporting sustainable forest management

6.5 Education

Priority projects under this heading were: Ensuring continued space for Forest School and Nursery (every Friday

morning during term time, throughout year) Supporting the heritage aspects of woodlands in Applecross (archaeological

trail and sites, Gaelic, as well as fuel, crofting, building, crafts etc.) Increasing the skills base of the community

Other activities which are not an immediate priority for the group include providing interpretation boards and leaflets for visitors (above what is already produced under the ALPS project33).

6.6 Miscellaneous

Other potential project ideas for which support was unclear but on which advice was sought included: woodland crofts woodlots

33 http://www.visit-applecross.org/ 41

7 Analysis and appraisal of community development proposals

For ease of discussion the initial list of community development proposals (and some additional ideas) has been reorganised into 6 groupings as follows: Recreational facilities Recreational initiatives Environmental enhancements Woodfuel Economic development Employment

Most individual proposals are not specifically costed at this stage, however we have sought to outline the likely scale of costs, both in terms of initial capital outlay and ongoing management / insurance costs for ACC.

In many cases development proposals would be the subject of a standalone grant application (or part of a bundle of proposals in a single application) and would therefore only go ahead once funding was secured. However, ongoing management / insurance34 costs are typically difficult to grant fund, and would usually have to be borne by ACC from general funds.

Similarly, some proposals are intended to provide long term income streams: we have not attempted to quantify these at this stage as they are very dependent on scale of operation, however, none of the development proposal seems likely to deliver a significant annual income over and above what might be need to cover on-going management costs.

Most of the activities discussed below are deliverable regardless of ACC’s preferred forest management plans, however these will inevitably have an impact on location of some proposals, and their relative priority, e.g. the whole forest is to be felled then provision of shelter for forest schools / volunteer groups will be a very high priority. Likewise, clearfelling will require additional work to clear and maintain paths.

On the other hand, such a clearfell operation should deliver a significant cash sum for ACC to use as investment capital / match funding to help employ staff / deliver development proposals: in the absence of timber income ACC will be dependent on securing grant aid.

7.1 Recreational facilities

Torgarve Wood has high amenity and recreational value, but is some distance from the village and campsite. The absence of car parking (and the difficulty of making such provision) means that most if not all visitors will have to make a 1km walk to reach the wood: this both limits the absolute numbers likely to visit, and defines a minimum level of ability for visitors.

34 Insurance costs will vary according to level of activity: at a minimum public liability and employer’s liability insurances will be required, costing a few hundred pounds a year but costs can be substantially more for certain projects. External contractors would be expected to provide their own insurance cover.

42

If ACC acquire Torgarve and recreational facilities are enhance then there should be appropriate promotion, e.g. through the ACC website as well as Visit Applecross35.

7.1.1Recreational facilities – paths The existing path network is relatively limited but appears to meet demand, and there is limited scope for expansion, except through links to specific developments noted below. There is no evident demand for additional access points to the wood, or obvious routes / destinations where such additional access would add value.

However there is scope for path upgrades and additional provision to improve accessibility: the current path is rough and narrow in some places, with various trip hazards which could be ameliorated to improve accessibility36. There would a cost to acquiring small volumes of stone for surfacing (potentially delivered as part of a package of delivery for road construction) but the actual path work could be carried out by volunteers.

Once felling operations commence it will be necessary to protect and subsequently repair paths. Removal of tree cover will increase exposure and may temporarily at least increase surface water / erosion, so if the decision was taken to feel the entire wood, or a significant portion of it, then additional path works would be necessary to maintain a dry trail.

Capital grant aid through the Forestry Grant Scheme for paths and other recreational features has been focussed on Woods In and Around Towns (woods within 1km of a population >2,000), with rural woods able to access the Improving Public Access option of the Agri-Environment Climate Scheme (although this was over-subscribed and closed early).

The FGS does include a Public Access – Rural Woods37 option which supports the cost of maintenance of public access in woodlands, eligible activities are: carrying out annual tree and path safety inspections; keeping access routes free of litter and tree debris; keeping paths, signs and recreational facilities up to an acceptable

standard.The rate is £100 per eligible hectare (calculated using the length of path with a 25 metre buffer on either side) per year for up to a maximum of five years.

7.1.2Recreational facilities – seatingA further limitation on access is that there is no seating available for those who might wish to rest. This could be addressed through the installation of 4-5 simple benches around the Archaeological trail (i.e. roughly every 150 metres).

These could be made and installed by volunteers or acquired as a part of a grant-aided programme, with limited ongoing maintenance needed.

35 https://visitapplecross.com/ 36 As none of approaches to the wood are all-ability standard it wouldn’t make sense to build to that standard within the wood, and such a path would be out of keeping with the setting37 https://www.ruralpayments.org/topics/all-schemes/forestry-grant-scheme/sustainable-management-of-forests/public-access-rural-woods/

43

7.1.3Recreational facilities – shelterExperience from other community woodlands suggests that construction of a simple roofed shelter is one of the most effective means of increasing the recreational and community value of the wood, providing a focus for activity as well as a shelter for volunteers / forest school participants during poor weather.

There is a wide range of possible designs and specifications: our expectation is that a shelter at Torgarve would be towards the smaller / simpler end of the scale, utilising timber from the forest as much as possible. This initiative would be best taken forward as standalone project with specific funding, and should not bring substantial ongoing maintenance costs.

7.1.4Recreational facilities – woodland playparkWe understand that the current playpark on the peninsula is very poor quality and there is demand for a replacement. Such an installation would be possible within the wood but it is unclear why the woodland would be the best location, given that it is 1km from village and campsite.

Cost, specification and scale can vary considerably and more discussion would be needed on these elements if it was decided to proceed.

Such a project would require specific standalone funding, e.g. from a LEADER replacement fund or the Lottery Awards for All fund, who might well query the location and thus the likely level of usage. It would also bring a substantial annual insurance cost to ACC which would have to be met from general funds, as well as an ongoing monitoring requirement.

7.1.5Recreational facilities - outdoor gymThe establishment of an outdoor gym raises similar issues to the woodland playpark with respect to location, specification and scale, but it would be easier to make a viable case for a low key installation that was linked to more general health promotion.

7.1.6Recreational facilities – signage and interpretation Following acquisition ACC could install simple threshold signs (and fire beaters) at the three main access points, identifying the land as community owned, giving a contact number and web address etc.

As Cathy Dagg notes in the Archaeology report, the addition of some interpretation panels may enhance the experience of the trail for visitors. This might be particularly the case if, following clearfell and restocking, a substantial area was left unplanted to preserve the setting of the township. Additional features of interest, such as the corn kiln, would benefit from some simple interpretation.

7.1.7Recreational facilities – compost toilet If increased recreational use of the forest is to be encouraged, particularly through organised activities, then consideration should be given to installation of a compost toilet. These have been widely installed by community woodland groups. There are various models available: we are aware that some issues have recently been raised by Highland Council Planning over one of the most

44

popular models, so acceptable design and specification will be important.

There would be scope for volunteer involvement in construction with capital costs met through a standalone project or as part of a wider funding application. The on-going management burden depends on the model used.

7.1.8Recreational facilities – outdoor cooking and bivvyingDesignated areas for outdoor cooking and bivvying could be established. There would be very limited capital cost, and these would be enhanced by other provision (shelter, compost toilet) but might require some monitoring and management (e.g. litter clearance).

7.1.9Recreational facilities – orienteeringTorgarve would be an interesting venue for orienteering, especially as part of a map linked up with Carnach and the village, but realistically local usage is likely to be low. Initial mapping costs can be substantial: in most cases these are either met by grant aid or subsidised by organisers planning a large event, although the latter is unlikely to happen at Applecross.

7.1.10 Recreational facilities – artworksSeveral community woodland groups38 have used their woods as venues for art installations & sculptures, some permanent, others temporary. Costs can vary widely, depending on the nature of the project, but could be met by a standalone project.

7.2 Organised recreational activities

The projects and proposals in section 7.1 are all essentially passive: providing facilities and promoting their use. This section covers a range of possible initiatives where ACC (or associated bodies / individuals) actively organise events or activities, in some cases for a fee.

7.2.1Education initiatives – forest school etc.The Forest School and Nursery (every Friday morning during term time, throughout the year) is recognised as an important current use of the forest and maintenance of this is a high priority for ACC. There is limited scope for expansion but it would be possible to enhance the existing provision e.g. through installation of a shelter, compost toilet, etc. as detailed previously.

Currently the Forest School and nursery benefits greatly from the clean forest floor and the dense Sitka canopy which provides a reasonable level of shelter from the elements. If the clearfell option is taken then these benefits will be lost and a shelter will be required: ACC should also ensure that an area clear of brash is preserved.

7.2.2VolunteeringVoluntary involvement is a key component of the sometimes intangible community development benefits arising from community asset ownership. 38 E.g. Dunnet Forestry Trust has a sculpture trail funded through the 2007 Highland Year of Culture programme

45

Whilst some forest management operations in the woodland will necessitate the use of appropriately skilled and qualified professional contractors, many activities (e.g. tree planting, path maintenance) can be carried out by volunteers.

The scale of work needed / available for volunteering will depend on the forest management options taken: if the site is clearfelled then there will be a greater need for tree planting, etc.

The opportunities for involvement, can be promoted on ACC’s website / Facebook page, and in regular newsletters. It will be important to develop and design opportunities for volunteers of all ages and abilities: this could include e.g. environmental monitoring and survey work, as well as the more usual manual labouring tasks.

An organised volunteering programme would benefit from provision of a shelter and compost toilet (indeed these projects could themselves use volunteer labour). ACC would need to acquire appropriate tools and personal protective equipment (PPE) for volunteers, and there would be an ongoing (but not large or onerous) obligation to hold appropriate insurance and produce risk assessments, etc.

Funding to develop and equip volunteers could be sought from the Scottish Forestry Community Fund39. This fund aims to support groups and organisations to encourage and support greater use of woods by people to derive health, well-being and community benefits. Amongst the eligible activities are facilitation of volunteering for skills training, health improvement and community development, establishment of volunteer groups and the induction of volunteers.

7.2.3 Organised workshops, storytelling and artistic and cultural activities A range of potential activities and events could be organised within the woods. Most would benefit from additional provision of facilities: benches, shelter, compost toilet, etc. Such activities could contribute both to community development and to enhancing the tourism “offer”.

Different activities lend themselves to different audiences: health walks, where the walking itself is the key point (and the same individual might attend every week) might be aimed predominantly at locals, whereas themed walks looking at particular aspects of the wood (e.g. archaeology) which are more likely to be repetitive are better suited to tourists.

There are some experienced local guides (e.g. within the Applecross Walks and Traditional Crafts Group), who would be interested in occasionally providing guided walks on e.g. archaeology, Gaelic heritage. These are unlikely to generate much income for ACC but would provide a small source of income to members of the community on an occasional basis.

7.2.4Skills training39 http://scotland.forestry.gov.uk/supporting/strategy-policy-guidance/communities

46

A few community woodland groups have developed their woods as venues for skills training, both in terms developing woodland / land management skills or more using the woodland as a venue for a much wider range of skills training.

However, developing this to any significant extent, i.e. moving beyond ensuring volunteers are appropriately trained (as part of 7.2.2 above) or occasional educational events (as part of 7.2.3 above) to the point where it become an income generating activity, has proved challenging, and requires significant investment in infrastructure, people and promotion.

7.3 Environmental enhancements

The pace at which the woodland area can be transformed from exotic monoculture to mixed woodland is clearly dependent on the forest management model chosen: it would not be possible to plant under the current crop and opening the canopy to let sufficient light in would promote windblow.

There are however a number of other potential environmental enhancement projects, as detailed below

7.3.1Native woodland expansion A new area of native woodland could be created in the open areas (Cpts 8 & 9) at the southern end of the site.

The total area of these compartment is 3.65ha, however respecting the need to keep planting back from Torgarve cottage, keep some land for other projects and to maintain buffer zones around archaeology would reduce the maximum plantable area to ~2ha

New woodland creation is grant aided through the Forestry Grant Scheme40 . There are 9 woodland creation options, each with two rates of grant: “Standard” and “Target”. There is an initial planting payment and an annual maintenance payment for five years, and there are also a range of capital grants available for operations such as fencing, bracken and tree protection.

The “Native Broadleaves” woodland creation option is designed to create native broadleaved priority woodland habitats of a range of National Vegetation Classification (NVC) types. Between 85 and 100% of the grant-aided area must be stocked with at least 1600 stems/ha, with the remainder of the site as designed open ground.

Grant-aidable NVC types include: W6 Alder with stinging nettle W7 Alder-ash with yellow pimpernel W8 Ash, field maple with stinging nettle W9 Ash, Rowan with Dog's mercury W11 Oak (Sessile), Downy birch with bluebell / wild hyacinth W16 Oak, Birch W17 Oak (Sessile), Downy birch with bilberry / blaeberry40 https://www.ruralpayments.org/topics/all-schemes/forestry-grant-scheme/woodland-creation/

47

The FGS Climatic Site Suitability Folder on the Scottish Forestry Map Viewer indicates that the unplanted area at Torgarve is climatically “very suitable” or “suitable” for all of these.

Much of the unplanted area comprises shallow peaty and gley soils and new plants would benefit from excavator mounding to provide raised planting positions. As mentioned previously the deer presently within the wood will need to be removed and other deer and stock kept out.

The payment rates in standard areas are:Initial planting payment rate £1840/haAnnual maintenance payment rate for five years £272/haTotal £3200/ha

The payment rates in target areas are:Initial planting payment rate £2070/haAnnual maintenance payment rate for five years £306/haTotal £3600/ha

In order to be eligible for the target area rate the proposed new woodland must be within the area identified as “Highland Native Woodland target area” – the screenshot from the Scottish Forestry mapviewer show that the unplanted areas at Torgarve should qualify.

Map 5: Highland Native Woodland target area

Planting costs (including beating up) are likely to be around £3000/ha (with potential for savings if planting is done by volunteers) so the grant should be

48

sufficient to cover costs.

Scottish Forestry recommends that grant recipients are insured against forest fires, natural disasters and catastrophic events. If the woodland creation area does not establish as a result of these types of events, they may recover all grant funding received.

7.3.2 Habitat improvements Other habitat improvements are possible within the area under consideration. Several community woodland groups have developed new ponds – sometimes with help from Froglife, who e.g. worked with Kilfinan Community Forest41 – or maintained /restored old ponds. These are typically biodiversity hotspots and a good focus for nature studies. The geology could be challenging (a pond may need artificial lining) in much of the forest, but a pond might be possible in the southern (open) part of the site.

A wide range of flowering and fruiting plants, shrubs and trees could be planted as part of or in addition to the woodland expansion discussed in 7.3.1 above. Community groups can obtain small numbers of trees for free from the Woodland Trust.

7.3.3Tree nurseryA small tree nursery can be an effective community engagement tool and could provide some plants for new planting / restocking at Torgarve, although, depending on felling regime, matching production to demand could be difficult. Producing trees for wider sale requires compliance with Forest Reproductive Materials (FRM) regulations which adds a significant burden.

However, such a facility would be better delivered nearer the village e.g. by the allotment site where access is easier and the soil is probably better too. Running a tree nursery can be surprisingly labour intensive at some times of year, particularly if there’s a period of drought, as trees need daily watering so ACC would need to identify someone who was willing and committed enough to be at the forest on a regular basis through the spring & summer.

Similar comments would apply to other community growing projects, e.g. involving allotments or polytunnels: they are technically possible but would be better elsewhere (and are being taken forward by a separate Allotment Group at a different site).

7.4 Woodfuel and timber

As is the case with many community woodlands, the trees themselves represent a significant asset that can be utilised to deliver a range of benefits, most frequently around providing a long-term, local and more sustainable supply of wood-fuel to the community. As noted above the nature of the existing crop constrains harvesting options and markets as much of the spruce is large diameter sawlogs: valuable for export but difficult to handle and 41 https://www.froglife.org/dragonfinder/scotland/practical-conservation/2015-sites/kilfinan-community-forest/

49

extract without large scale machinery, whilst windblow risk limits management options.

Of the four harvesting options modelled in section 5.1, two involve harvesting by external contractor with ACC “buying back” short roundwood at cost (estimated at £15/t) which would then be sold on to e.g. a firewood contractor, whilst two involve smaller scale operations where felling would be undertaken by the contractor.

7.4.1WoodfuelThere is an existing woodfuel business in Applecross and it is not ACC’s intention to set up in competition, however, it is possible that wood from Torgarve could contribute to enhancing this supply, bringing more security / better quantity material to market.

The 4 harvesting options discussed previously would have varying impact, as follows:

Clearfell whole forest: Could prove relatively large volume of material in one go (modelling is based on 800t, but could vary either way). This would need 1 year to season and would then need to be used within 3-4 years, with no further material available from Torgarve for ~20 years, so would provide a short term boost to timber availability but would not in itself be a sustainable supply.

If felled and stacked wood was sold to firewood contractor this would provide useful income for ACC: the sum involved should cover harvesting & stacking cost plus a sum to cover ongoing repair to Carnach track and cover ACC management costs.

Clearfell part of the forest: this option would provide a smaller volume of material (modelling based on 200t, but again could vary). As above, this would need seasoning and would then have to be used within 3-4 years. Further material would be available when the second tranche of felling took place, so there would be ongoing supply, but at a very low level – averaging under 50t a year.

As above, selling the wood to the contractor would provide a (smaller) income stream for ACC.

Fell the forest in small coupes over 25+ years: This option would maximise local utilisation, as it would be difficult to extract timber for export without large forwarding equipment and substantial road works. If it wasn’t possible to extract sawlogs then (unless it could be milled on site) all of the timber felled would be processed for firewood. This option would provide ~300t or more of wood per year for a considerable period of time: at least 25 years or until the forest blew down completely.

If ACC were running a business at this scale of operation it would justify investment in processing facilities: e.g. a wood chipper, to develop additional markets, or a drying shed. However, if timber were to be sold standing then it’s unclear whether it would be possible for ACC to attract funding for such a

50

project. Also, if the forest were to blow down then these facilities would become redundant.

Standing sales could, depending on the rate used, provide a small but regular income for ACC (e.g. 300t a year @ £10/t = £3,000), although some of this would be required to cover restock costs and road maintenance.

Salvage felling of dead wood from the forest: this option would provide a small amount (~30t) of wood a year which could contribute to woodfuel supply for a long period of time (or until the forest blew down). Any income from sales to the contractor would be very limited. ACC have undertaken a community woodfuel survey to attempt to quantify current demand and the potential for growth. A questionnaire was circulated to all households: 57 were returned, of which 50 were from households which burn wood.

A detailed analysis will be presented in Appendix 4

The main points to note were: There is a substantial existing market for woodfuel in Applecross, with

demand met from a local supplier, imported material and scavenging/waste wood (e.g. pallets).

Most of those who burn wood have a wood or multi-fuel stove, but a significant minority burn on an open fire.

There is some scope for market growth through substitution for other fuels (oil, coal, etc.).

The biggest issue raised was quality of material available: in particular the lack of hardwoods & well-seasoned softwood.

Lack of storage space was an issue for a number of respondents.

As noted above, the various harvesting options considered have very different impacts on woodfuel supply. Only Option 3 (felling in small coupes over >25 years) provides the chance of a significant long term woodfuel supply, but it is very unclear whether this is actually achievable (because of the windblow risk).

It should be noted that, the long term post-restock supply of firewood from the forest is likely to be very limited. If, for example, it were completely restocked with broadleaves and there were 2 ha of new planting, then depending on species and stocking density it might be possible to start thinning in year 20 but it is unlikely that the annual sustainable harvest from native species would be more than 30-40t42.

7.4.2Other local timber utilisationThere is potentially a small market for some construction timber for affordable housing but whether or not that materialises depends on design decisions for that project, there may be good financial and logistical reasons why local utilisation can’t be achieved; but even if it could it is unlikely to make a significant positive contribution to the finances for the wood. 42 Higher yields would be possible from sycamore, but that wouldn’t be eligible for native woodland grants or deliver the same environmental benefits

51

In the longer term it might be possible to supply coppice products from new woodland / restock areas but it would take at least 10 years before materials from coppice would be available and there is already a supply of hazel coppice from the Carnach.

7.5 Economic development

There are a number of potential non-timber-based initiatives which could contribute to a long term income generation from the forest and thus help underpin its financial sustainability.

7.5.1Green burialsGreen, or natural, burial is the interment of a person’s body in a manner that allows the body to recycle naturally, and has become an increasingly popular alternative to other contemporary Western burial methods in recent decades, as a response to both the environmental impact and the cost of conventional funeral care. There is no single definition of what constitutes a green burial, but key components are usually: The site serves a conservation purpose Sustainable materials are used for the coffin or shroud There is limited or no demarcation or personalisation of the grave

Proposals to establish new burial grounds are assessed by Local Authorities and SEPA; any new burial site is a material change of use and will require full planning permission. The Local Authority roads department43 determines the access infrastructure required: this can be the biggest cost. The potential for the cemetery to impact on groundwater will be assessed by SEPA, whose officials work to cemeteries guidance44 (note this is guidance not a legal requirement). Key considerations are the depth of unsaturated soil available: The soil cover above the coffin or shroud should not be less than 1m; The base of the grave should be 1m above bedrock or the seasonal high

groundwater level. and the distance from watercourses - SEPA recommends that burials should not be: Within 250 metres of any groundwater abstraction; namely any spring, well

or borehole used as a source of drinking water; Within 50 metres of any other spring, well or borehole or any watercourse; Within 10 metres of a field drain. Cremation burials are considered to present a lesser risk to the water environment, and subsequently face fewer restrictions on soil depth: Cremated remains should not be interred below the water table, and it is

considered preferable, but not essential, to maintain >1m between the

43 Different LAs seem to work to different rules, some expect access to be at the standard necessary for emergency vehicles and tend to default to local authority adoptable standard, although this is not a legal requirement. 44 http://www.sepa.org.uk/media/143364/lups-gu32-guidance-on-assessing-the-impacts-of-cemetries-on-groundwater.pdf

52

planned depth of the buried cremated remains and the annual maximum water table.

An average spacing of at least 0.5m between individual cremated remains is recommended. At the discretion of the Local Authority the burial depth may be less than a metre.

However, standoff requirements from water features (as above) should be maintained. If urns are used, SEPA recommended they are composed of either inert (e.g. ceramic) or biodegradable (e.g. wood) materials.

Although the idea of being buried amongst mature trees may seem attractive, for practical reasons most “woodland” burial grounds are either new woodland sites or clearfelled areas with stump removal and landscaping prior to restocking. There are around 300 dedicated natural burial grounds the UK, including over 20 in Scotland. The Findhorn Hinterland Trust (FHT)45 has operated a green burial site at Wilkie’s Wood for ~10 years and several other groups are actively developing green burial projects, to meet a range of objectives: As a commercial operation to support the community management of the

woodland; To create or support a part-time job; To deliver a service for the community, particularly in those areas with

limited or no alternative burial provision; To develop a deeper sense of connection between the community and the

woodland.

Depending on the site there can be significant set-up costs around clearance and access provision, and then on-going costs of management and promotion. FHT engaged a specialist funeral co-ordinator, whose role includes liaison with funeral directors, family and all other requirements for an individual’s funeral such as supply of coffin, etc.

Potential customers will need to be assured that arrangements for the management of the site are secured in perpetuity, and if taking advance payment for services, such as the long term care of the plot then bonds or insurance to protect the customers’ investment will be required. Funerals typically involve services of other businesses: funeral directors as well as florists, catering, venues. It may be that the community group is able to offer some or all of these services, or there may be opportunities to work in partnership with existing local businesses.

Charges46 for green burials vary, with some sites charging premia for more scenic locations, whilst others are benchmarked to Local Authority rates. Fees have several components, notably reservation of the lair, the interment itself and the long term maintenance of the site, some of which may be payable in advance. In 2013 FHT introduced a “Pay now, die later” scheme which brought in considerable income through reservations.

45 https://www.findhornhinterland.org/green-burial/ 46 See https://www.findhornhinterland.org/green-burial/burial-costs/ for a schedule of charges

53

Given the site conditions at Torgarve cremation burials may be a better option, although the financial returns are likely to be considerably less. Cpt 8 may provide a suitable locale: scenic but relatively accessible and far enough from watercourses.

One key consideration would be the likely market: if confined to the local area demand would (hopefully!) be relatively low. However, there may be scope to develop a larger “import” business, based on Applecross’s recognised brand. This could bring greater financial rewards but would require considerable investment and external promotion.

7.5.2Huts / Bothies There is potential to develop low-key and largely unserviced accommodation at Torgarve: one or more bothies/huts for rental or free use. This/these would be off-grid, but would benefit from provision of a compost toilet.

It would be important not to be seen to be competing directly with the Applecross campsite or other accommodation providers: this may constrain the type of accommodation provision of the market somewhat, however the distance from the village / parking and the lack of servicing are likely to limit the potential market. A quiet location in the wood could be considered: e.g. towards the east end of Cpt 2, or within the scattered trees of Cpt 7.

Costs and income would depend on specification, and grant aid might be difficult to access unless there was a good business case and it was clear that this provision would not cause displacement of existing businesses. There would be an on-going management and maintenance cost.

7.5.3Woodland croftsA croft is a unit of land whose occupation and cultivation is subject to the Crofting Acts and is recorded in the Crofters Commission Register of Crofts. A woodland croft is a croft with sufficient tree cover overall to be considered a woodland under UK forestry policy; it is thus subject to forestry regulation. Note however that ‘woodland croft’ is a descriptive term only: crofting legislation does not recognise woodland crofts as distinct from any other croft.

Woodland crofts are a great opportunity for individuals and communities to build lives and livelihoods based on a woodland resource. However, the potential for woodland crofts on such a small, constrained site with so many other possible uses is limited. Elsewhere demand for woodland crofts is driven by the potential for housing provision but this would be challenging at Torgarve and ACC already progressing affordable housing at another site.

7.5.4WoodlotsThe basic principal of a woodlot is that the landowner has an agreement covering the wood (or a demarcated portion of it) with a woodlot licence holder who pays rent in return for taking an “annual allowable cut”. Woodlots appear to work best when dealing with larger woods with limited public usage: they can be a good way of bringing woods into management but they have to be manageable using small scale forestry. Given the constraints on forest management and the fact that ACC want to maintain and enhance existing

54

public use there does not appear to much scope for woodlots at Torgarve.

7.5.5GrazingThere might be potential for a short term grazing lease (probably cattle) on some of the open ground, if there is local demand. This would require some temporary stock fencing to keep beast in the required area.

7.6 Employment

A number of community woodland groups, particularly those with larger woods or more ambitious plans, have engaged47 community foresters to take an on-going management role. Their objectives include: To create employment locally, increasing the economic benefit of the forest; To buy in skills and experience which aren’t available within the Board or

membership; To relieve the workload on volunteer Board and membership; To present a professional face for the organisation to funders and

regulators; To provide a public face for the organisation within the woodland.

The community forester role covers a very wide job description, and indeed can have a variety of job titles. In most cases the community forester (whatever their actual job title) role includes elements of what might in other circumstances be three separate jobs filled by individuals from very different backgrounds: Forest Manager: concerned with silviculture and land management, they

may do some “hands-on” forestry as well as managing contractors and processing forestry grants;

Business Manager: concerned with the future business development of the community company, developing projects (crofts, housing, renewables), bringing in investment etc.;

Community Ranger: focussing on community engagement, working with local community, schools, visitors, user groups with specific needs.

The balance between these components will vary according to the local context: the nature of the woodland and the needs, skills and objectives of the community. If considering employing staff, groups must be clear and agreed amongst themselves about what they are looking for in the role, and what the priorities are, as it is usually unlikely that one individual will have all the essential and desirable skills and experience.

It is unclear from initial analysis of development options whether it would be possible to generate sufficient income from the forest to maintain a community forester in the medium to long term, even on a part-time basis: it seems likely that nay such post would be dependent on external grant funding.

47 Usually this has been by direct employment, but in some cases as a self-employed contractor55

However if a post48 could be established, even on a short term (2-3 years) basis this could be very helpful in “jumpstarting” community management: overseeing the production of a formal forest plan, managing harvesting (if that was the option taken), establishing a volunteer group and securing development funding for future projects.

Funding sources for such a development role could include the Scottish Land Fund (however this is currently time-constrained to the end of March 2021) or other charitable funding. Alternatively, income from harvesting could support a development role.

48 ACC currently employs two part-time local development officers: these posts are fully committed to project development and are only funded (by Highland & Islands Enterprise) until March 2021.

56

8 Alternative Tenure options (to be completed)

In brief, there are 2 main alternatives: lease or management agreement with the Trust (which could be more or less formal).

8.1 Lease

Under a lease, ACC would take on full responsibility for managing the forest and the land, but would not have access to grants from the Scottish Land Fund49. Most of the desired projects could be taken forward (unless the terms of the lease were restrictive) however it might be harder to get grant funding for some development projects involving infrastructure. Potential clients of a green burial business might be more assured by ACC’s ownership of the site than by a lease.

8.2 Management agreement

There are various levels of formality possible with this option, from a signed to verbal agreements. Various levels of responsibility could be taken on by ACC, however the community would be severely constrained in its access to grant funding and the types of projects it could take forward.

The Trust would (probably) retain responsibility for managing the forest and would keep the income from timber harvested: ultimately the timing of harvesting would be the Trust’s decision.

9 Development Plan (to be added)

10 ACC 5 year and indicative 25 year Cashflow (to be added)

11 Workplan and major milestones (to be completed)

WS

Task When Who

Table 5: Workplan

12 Monitoring and evaluation (to be completed)

ACC will monitor and evaluate progress in delivering desired outcomes in a variety of ways:

Reports to funders; Preparation of annual accounts and report to OSCR; Recording key outputs from work in the forest:

49 Under a lease, ACC wouldn’t need capital funding for acquisition, but this would also rule out post-acquisition revenue funding e.g. for a post

57

Key outputs and indicators are presented in the table below.Output / outcome Indicators

Table 6: Outputs and indicators ACC will encourage comments on the organisation’s Facebook page and use a range of opportunities such as volunteer days, fundraising events and the AGM to secure feedback and ensure that ACC’s activities and objectives remain aligned with the aspirations of the members and the wider community.

13 Analysis of major risks

Risk Likelihood

Impact Mitigation

Applecross Trust won’t sell

Low Project cannot proceed

Applecross Trust price higher than valuation

Low Match funding necessary

Negotiation with Trust

Funding bid to SLF unsuccessful

Medium Project v unlikely to proceed

High quality application

Community unable to raise match funding for acquisition if required

Low/Medium

Project v unlikely to proceed

Robust fundraising plan and implementation

Significant fall in timber prices

Low Reduced income for ACC

Flexibility in harvesting plans

Issues with neighbouring householders / landowners

Low Delays, changes to plans, loss of community support

Maintain good communications, sensitive management.

Severe windblow in woodland

Medium Reduced income, potential impact on amenity and other projects

Careful management, flexibility if needed

Lack of community involvement / volunteers

Low/ Medium

Delays in implementation, lack of community commitment or buy-in

Active communications and promotion of opportunities

Lack of capacity within group / loss of key individuals

Low/ Medium

Delays in implementation, management failures

Robust governance systems, wider networking and support

Funding bids for development projects unsuccessful

Medium Delays, projects unable to proceed

Good quality applications, flexibility

Table 7: Major risks

58

14 Explanation of abbreviations (to be expanded)

SF CF Scottish Forestry Community Fund FGS Forestry Grant SchemeLTFP Long Term Forest PlanOSCR Office of the Scottish Charity RegulatorPPE Personal Protective EquipmentSLF Scottish Land Fund FHT Findhorn Hinterland Trust

59

Appendix 1 Director Biographies (to be completed by ACC)

Julie Baird

Nicholas Goldthorpe

Valerie Hodgkinson

Owen Kilbride

Kirsten Mackie

Henry Robertson

60

Appendix 2 Compartment descriptions

# Gross Area

Topography

Description Growth, etc.

1 0.55ha More or less flat

Western tip of the forest, internal boundary roughly demarcated by old stock fence.

Relatively poor growth, high stocking density. Occasional Lodgepole pine, some of which have blown.May reflect different geology.

2 4.25ha Slopes to WNW

E boundary is forest track, SE boundary power line wayleave.

The most variable compartment: growth generally good, stocking density varies considerably, some pockets of Larch which is generally low density / poor quality, area of broadleaves on N edge.

3 1.15ha Slopes to ENE

W boundary is forest track, SE and NE boundaries are power line wayleaves.

Good growth rates, some variability in stocking density.

4 2.50ha E part flat (with stream) the rest slopes to W

SE and SW boundaries are power line wayleaves.

Good/ v good growth rates (better on lower ground in the east part of the block), limited variability of stocking.

5 0.90ha Slopes to west

Triangular area to SE of power line.

Good growth but a lot of edge trees, small area of larch.

6 0.35ha Variable, largely flat

Isolated block SE of power line.

Small block of Sitka with reasonable growth.

7 1.00ha Slopes to W

Scattered groups and lines of SS planted up the slope.

Generally poor growth rates and low stocking especially to south.

8 1.20ha Slope to W

Open area on east side of site.

Open, some bracken.

9 2.65ha Undulating , generally flat, rises to east

Open area at south of forest, approx. 0.2ha outside deer fence.

Open, some bracken.

61

Appendix 3 Inventory results (to be added)

Appendix 4 Applecross Household Firewood Survey (to be added)

62

Appendix 5 Wind risk modelling

The risk of wind damage is a significant constraint to forest management in Britain. 7 “major” national wind damage events are recognised since 1953, however smaller storms can also cause significant localised damage.

Whilst there is obviously no accurate way of predicting storms, it is possible to calculate “return periods” for storms of a given intensity based on historic meteorological data. It should be noted, however, that it is expected that one effect of climate change will be to increase the frequency of severe weather events.

It is also possible to calculate the average windiness of a site using the DAMS50 system. DAMS is based on location, elevation and topographic exposure, and gives a good representation of both the average wind speed and the frequency of strong winds at a site. Values of DAMS in Britain typically range from below 10 (sheltered) to over 24 (exposed)51. DAMS scores at Torgarve range from 14 to 16.

Other contributing factors to the risk of wind damage are ground conditions and stand characteristics. Poor drainage can inhibit rooting and, particularly on the cold wet soils found under many Scottish upland forests, leads to endemic, premature windthrow by uprooting. This risk usually increases significantly with tree height, as the tree becomes a longer lever the taller it gets. A second form of damage is through stem breakage – in this case the relationship between tree height and diameter is critical – tall skinny trees are more prone to breakage. Give the very good drainage at Torgarve it was anticipated that stem breakage may be a greater risk for most of the stand than uprooting.

Finally, forestry practice can have a significant impact on the risk of wind damage. The use of wide spacing at planting, or very early thinning may encourage development on heavily tapered tree stems which should be more resistant to wind loading, but at the cost of poorer timber quality. Conversely, later thinning will almost certainly increase the susceptibility of a stand to windblow: opening the canopy generate greater turbulences and allows greater wind penetration of the stand. Likewise, clearfelling, even of small coupes, exposes a “brown edge” of standing trees that is very vulnerable to blow.

We used Forest GALES decision support system developed by Forest Research52 to attempt to quantify the wind risk at Torgarve.

“Forest GALES is a computer-based decision support system that assesses the risk of winddamage to conifer forests in Britain and compares the impacts of different silvicultural practices. Forest GALES is recommended for use at forest scales, rather than for individual stands, because of inherent variability in predictions. It is currently designed for use in stands of uniform age and species. It works

50 Detailed Aspect Method of Scoring.51 DAMS scores for the grounds of Eden Court, Inverness and the top of the Bealach are 9 and 27 respectively52 https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/forestgales/

63

by calculating the wind speed at which damage is expected to occur, based on stand and soil characteristics (the ‘critical wind speed’). It then uses this critical wind speed and the wind climate (predicted from the stand location) to calculate the probability of damage. The model calculates the risk for a representative ‘average’ tree within the stand and, by implication, the stand as a whole53.”

The free web based version does not have all the functionality of the paid version but does allow repeated calculation to test the sensitivity of initial results to small changes in specific variables. We ran various iterations, the results of four of which are reproduced in the screenshots below.

1 The first run of the model used the average values for the main Sitka spruce stand as measured by inventory, i.e. top height 30m, mean diameter 30cm, stocking density 1025 trees/ha. Note that this is the average across the site and there was considerable variation in all three variables between the various sampling sites.

Based on these figures the model appears to suggest that the stand is relatively windfirm: the return periods for storms that would cause uprooting and wind snap are 200 and 32 years respectively.

However, further iterations demonstrated that very small changes in the key variables greatly reduced the return period of the storms anticipated to cause significant damage.

2 The second run made minor changes to reflect areas of the wood where stocking rates are higher but trees are slimmer: keeping the same top height 53 This paragraph from the Forest GALES manual, downloaded from https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/forestgales/how-forestgales-works/

64

but increasing the number of stems / ha from 1025 to 1100 and reducing the mean diameter by 2cm from 30cm to 28cm.

This is a very small change but it has a very significant impact on the projected wind damage risk status, particularly for wind snap – the return period for which is now just 4 years.

This demonstrates how marginal the apparent wind-firmness of the wood is, and how vulnerable the stand is – with the areas of higher stocking / slimmer trees being very susceptible to wind snap

3 The third run of the model shows the effect of increasing the top height to 33m and the mean diameter to 32cm whilst reducing the stocking density by ~10% (reflecting ongoing mortality as smaller trees are suppressed) - this is what the Forestry Commission Yield models say will happen naturally over the next 10 years if there is no intervention.

65

Again, this demonstrates that the current apparent wind firmness is best temporary, and that even without intervention (thinning, etc.), the natural growth rate of the trees over the next decade makes them increasingly vulnerable to damage, particularly wind snap.

4 Finally, the model was run to show the impact of thinning: top height stays the same, mean diameter increases to 32 cm (because smaller trees are removed), the stocking per hectare reduces and there is now a 1m gap between trees in the canopy.

The introduction of gaps in the canopy reduces the return period for overturning and breakage to 2 and 1 years respectively – clearly any thinning is extremely likely to result in wind damage to the remaining trees.

66

Analysis

Forest Gales is only a model and cannot predict when a given stand of trees will blow over or suffer extensive damage. Additionally, as per the quoted text above, it is better suited making projections at the forest scale than for individual stands, because of the inherent variability of site and wind conditions.

Nonetheless, the results obtained provide compelling evidence for the following assessments:

The stand at Torgarve, whilst currently almost undamaged by wind, is vulnerable, particularly to wind snap.

This vulnerability will increase significantly over the next decade as the trees continue to grow.

Any thinning work which opens the canopy will promote windblow in the remaining crop.

67