Commercial forests and biodiversity claims | Letters

Paul Brannen extols the benefits of commercial forestry, while Dr Andrew Cameron warns of Britain ‘offshoring’ its timbers supplies, and Jane Gifford calls on the Scottish government to review its forestry policy

Last week you published a well-balanced piece on the success story that is Kielder Forest (How England’s largest forest went from commodity to conservation haven, 2 June). At the heart of this achievement has been learning from the planting mistakes of the 1970s. Today Kielder is successful both as a commercial forest, producing 25% of England’s homegrown timber, and in its biodiversity – providing habitat for red squirrels, voles and ospreys, for example.

It was therefore disappointing to read your article on commercial forests this week (Tax-break trees: how woodland became a store of wealth for the rich, 7 June). Disappointing because it contained an unchallenged and outdated trope from Camilla Fowler, chair of the Lilliesleaf, Ashkirk and Midlem community council, who stated: “This kind of forestry scars the landscape and replaces it with monocultural, dark trees that harms our biodiversity.”