Letter: Tree target risk

While the Scottish Government's aim to cover 25 per cent of Scotland with trees in a bid to capture carbon may seem laudable at first glance, on closer inspection it is, in fact, simplistic.

There is no doubt that tree cover brings about environmental and economic benefits, but it must be done intelligently to ensure we don't see perversely negative effects on Scotland's ability to produce food and protect its valuable landscapes, biodiversity and fragile rural communities.

Targets to mitigate against climate change are rightly driving policy. However, the science behind carbon capture and storage is embryonic, and it is vital that we look at existing evidence and conduct further research to define exactly how Scotland's land use practices and ecosystems contribute to our carbon balance sheet.

The 25 per cent "national" tree cover target is too crude; much of Scotland could not support this intensity of afforestation because it is too rocky, cold and windy for trees to grow successfully, or because it has peat soils which are carbon sinks; disturbing them would defeat the point of the exercise.

Other parts of Scotland are already densely forested, ruling them out too. Many of the remaining areas are the engine house of Scottish agriculture and we must think carefully to ensure we safeguard the nation's ability to produce its own food in an increasingly uncertain world.

This is not to deny that farms and crofts have a significant role to play in increasing Scotland's tree cover; we just have to be more sophisticated about it and take into account the great number of roles Scotland's terrain provides, be it food production, biodiversity, tourism or as a home to a number of communities.

Nigel Miller

NFU Scotland

West Mains

Edinburgh