Y Pwyllgor Newid Hinsawdd, Amgylchedd a Materion Gwledig - Y Bumed Senedd

Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee - Fifth Senedd

19/11/2020

Aelodau'r Pwyllgor a oedd yn bresennol

Committee Members in Attendance

Janet Finch-Saunders
Jenny Rathbone
Joyce Watson
Llyr Gruffydd
Mike Hedges Cadeirydd y Pwyllgor
Committee Chair

Y rhai eraill a oedd yn bresennol

Others in Attendance

Arfon Williams RSPB
RSPB
Clive Faulkner Ymddiriedolaeth Natur Maldwyn
Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust
Dafydd Morris Jones COPA
COPA
Elwyn Vaughan COPA
COPA
Hilary Kehoe Rhwydwaith Ffermio er Lles Natur
Nature Friendly Farming Network
Jerry Langford Coed Cadw
Woodland Trust
Professor Alastair Driver Rewilding Britain
Rewilding Britain
Siân Stacey Prosiect O'r Mynydd i'r Môr
Summit to Sea Project

Swyddogion y Senedd a oedd yn bresennol

Senedd Officials in Attendance

Andrea Storer Dirprwy Glerc
Deputy Clerk
Elizabeth Wilkinson Ail Glerc
Second Clerk
Katy Orford Ymchwilydd
Researcher
Lorna Scurlock Ymchwilydd
Researcher
Marc Wyn Jones Clerc
Clerk

Cofnodir y trafodion yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir trawsgrifiad o’r cyfieithu ar y pryd. Lle mae cyfranwyr wedi darparu cywiriadau i’w tystiolaeth, nodir y rheini yn y trawsgrifiad.

The proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in the committee. In addition, a transcription of the simultaneous interpretation is included. Where contributors have supplied corrections to their evidence, these are noted in the transcript.

Cyfarfu'r pwyllgor drwy gynhadledd fideo.

Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 13:45.

The committee met by video-conference.

The meeting began at 13:45.

1. Cyflwyniad, ymddiheuriadau, dirprwyon a datgan buddiannau
1. Introductions, apologies, substitutions and declarations of interest

Prynhawn da, good afternoon. Can I welcome people to the meeting of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee? We've had an apology from Neil Hamilton. The meeting is bilingual and simultaneous translation from Welsh to English is available. And can I tell people, you do not have to operate your microphones; they'll be operated for you? If I drop out, Jenny Rathbone will take over. Are there any declarations of interest? No. Okay, thank you.

2. Sesiwn ragarweiniol gan Rewilding Britain
2. Introductory briefing by Rewilding Britain

This takes us onto the first item, on biodiversity. Can I very warmly welcome Professor Alastair Driver, director of Rewilding Britain? And you've got a short presentation of about 10 minutes, so over to you Professor Driver.

Okay, thank you very much, Chair. I hope, folks, that you have a copy of that presentation in front of you. I'll just quickly talk you through it. What I wanted to do was to give a quick overview of rewilding, briefly what it is and what it isn't, and also update you on where we're up to with rewilding in Britain as a whole. And then, I want to particularly emphasise policy opportunities that might be applicable in Wales in order to generate a discussion around that, because I'm keen to try and help as best as I can.

So, first of all, just quickly to start with, just to emphasise this premise, and I feel I can say this, having worked in conservation for over 40 years, I've worked on thousands of projects with hundreds of organisations and it's been an absolute privilege to do that across the country. I was formerly head of conservation for the Environment Agency and used to cover England and Wales in that capacity until Natural Resources Wales was set up. And there's no doubt that if we hadn't had all this amazing conservation effort, agri-environment schemes and great planning policies, et cetera, there's no doubt that we'd be in a really dire position. But we also know that all of this stuff is not enough to achieve significant wildlife recovery, so we need something else additional—not instead of; additional—and we firmly believe that rewilding is one of those very significant additional things.

It's very important that we're on the same page in terms of an understanding of what rewilding is. This is Rewilding Britain's definition in a sort of tweetable format, if you like: the large-scale restoration of ecosystems to the point where nature is allowed to take care of itself. And it's very important here to remember that this is about reinstating, restoring natural processes at scale, and gradually over time—and over quite a long time—allowing nature to take more control, and for us to be less driven by intensive management.

In considering this, we need to think about the scale of what we mean, the fact that we need to be aiming for perhaps 5 per cent rewilding in this country, and we need to be remembering that it is a spectrum of activity. This 5 per cent would sit alongside 25 per cent of nature friendly farming, and it's very important to remember that these two can complement each other. So, I would encourage you to remember this: the 5 per cent would sit alongside a total, another total of maybe 25 per cent of our land and water in nature friendly land uses.

And very importantly, we need to remember that this is a spectrum of activity, and I wouldn't want you to get frightened, if you like, by the fact that we're suddenly going to jump to a situation where nature is totally taking care of itself. That is a very long way away, probably decades, if not more than a century away, and it may never happen in many places. But what we must try to do is move along this rewilding spectrum, and the graph entitled 'The Rewilding Spectrum' shows you sites that I'm calling here 'nature reserves'—a generic term for sites that are managed, really, for conservation, which are generally fairly small and quite intensively managed. And then the rewilding sites in blue—they're often quite small as well, but in Scotland, for example, there are much larger sites. But we really have to go to eastern Europe and the USA et cetera if we're going to get to the kind of scale of huge rewilding, and that's not possible in this country, we need to recognise that. We don't have the space. But if we can move along this spectrum towards that bottom right hand corner, then we will be making significant progress.

The next slide is the principles of rewilding, and I want to emphasise this: it's very important that this involves people making their own decisions at a local level to work alongside nature recovery. It's very important that we work at nature's scale, which means working at such a scale that you can be relaxed about where you withdraw from management in order to allow nature to lead, but in some cases, accepting that you might have to keep managing certain areas for the time being, in order for those species to spread across a much larger site. But if you're working at a big enough scale, you can relax over time knowing that certain species may disappear from one part of the site, but then reappear in another, because natural processes are allowing the right kind of vegetation and habitat development. So, over time, letting nature lead more and more. And in so doing, creating resilient local economies, creating nature-based tourism opportunities and diversifying income opportunities. In other words, trying to move away from putting all your eggs in one basket. And also, alongside that, delivering multiple ecosystem services—public goods, if you like; better flood-risk management; improve water quality; carbon sequestration; health and well-being et cetera. 

And finally, the fifth principle is all about long-term benefits. I described rewilding as a marathon with a sprint start; you need to sprint to start with to carry out lots of interventions, to help kick start the restoration of natural processes, but then gradually, over time, you ease off. But it needs to be multi-generational, this change. It's not going to happen overnight.

The next slide just highlights the new Rewilding Britain website, which we've recently revamped and added a lot of information on to. And I would encourage you, if you haven't already, please take a look at that, because it describes all kinds of opportunities for rewilding, from literally rewilding your garden through to small-scale farming, to much larger landscape-scale activities. And not just on land, but in the marine environment as well—very important.

And we're also now establishing—if you go to the next slide—the Rewilding Network. We have now also set up this rewilding network for the country, and it is already attracting a huge amount of attention. I've got some stats on that, if you're interested later. And we are starting to put onto that network examples of case studies of various rewilding projects around the country, and there's 17 case studies on there at the moment; I have to write up quite a few more. These are all just the very large-scale projects we're focusing on to start with, but there will be examples from all scales in due course. So, please check that out.

Now, if I can move on to the policy aspects. Well, I have to say—and I was aware of this when I was in the Environment Agency—you have some superb pieces of legislation. The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015 is a pioneering piece of legislation, and the Environment (Wales) Act 2016 also gives you all the incentive and support that one needs, I think, in legislative terms, to go about this large-scale restoration of ecosystems. It's all there, the wording is in those documents and very supportive of this approach. You also have the natural resources policy, which, again, recognises the value of nature-based solutions, and you have state of natural resources reports, which, obviously, tell you where you are at any point in time, and I know have recently indicated that there is very low resilience in our ecosystems, which, to be honest, is exactly the same across Britain as a whole.

So, the opportunities are many and varied, but by far the most significant one, I believe, is the opportunity for a new land management regime post common agricultural policy. I'm just sharing this English example with you because I've been focusing on England in my role, and I've been heavily involved in trying to influence the environmental land management scheme. This schematic shows you rewilding core areas and how they would fit within wider nature friendly farming landscapes.

The environmental land management scheme in England is proposed to be a tiered scheme, and I'm recommending to Government—and I'm now getting a certain amount of traction, and that was actually reflected in the announcements this week—. I'm recommending, we are recommending, that we look for core areas of rewilding, which would be part of the highest tiers of the environmental land management scheme, which would then be buffered and connected by nature friendly farming networks, which would probably be part of a middle tier of such a future scheme.

Also, this schematic serves to remind us that we're not just dealing with the land here. There are also opportunities to extend these approaches in terms of rewilding principles and working with natural processes into the marine environment. But, for the purposes of land management, I do see this public money for public goods scheme as being the greatest opportunity we've got to develop nature-based solutions and restore landscapes at scale for many generations. As I say, I've been working in this for 40 years, and this is the greatest opportunity we've had to restore biodiversity and to deliver public goods ecosystems services.

There are multiple other policy opportunities. You will have tree targets in Wales, and I want to just emphasise here the importance of natural regeneration. The England tree strategy was pretty weak on that when it was consulted on a month or so ago. We have been at pains to emphasise the importance of allowing natural regeneration. This image from Haweswater, which is one of the lakes in Cumbria, shows you the contrast between a naturally regenerating hillside, which is part of a rewilding project run by the RSPB, compared with an intensively grazed hillside on the opposite bank.

Natural flood management solutions should become commonplace. I worked for the Environment Agency and, indeed, helped to produce the policy for the EA on this. But, it's still not routine. It's still pretty piecemeal, and I would encourage NRW and others to focus more and more on natural flood management solutions. Water company price reviews give us opportunities. 

Biodiversity net gain through the planning process—perhaps we can have a chat about that. I've been involved in negotiations on that. Carbon trading markets, and then individual organisations who are major landowners, like the army—. They now have this net-zero target, and they've contacted me about rewilding on the army estate, with a view to it helping them to achieve this net zero by 2040. So, big landowners with policies particularly focused on net zero can also be great allies.

And then there's the opportunity to establish national nature reserves for rewilding to help evaluate natural process recovery. We need more and better information on this. These are all the sorts of things that I'm discussing now with Government in England. Then, there are various other random initiatives that might be of interest and are relevant. Species introductions: as you know, beaver, white-tailed eagle, pine marten, et cetera, are all species that are now being reintroduced around the country.

The promotion of rare breed livestock—we need grazing in these environments. It's not about removing grazing. We still need to have these in natural environments managed by herbivores. We need to manage the herbivores, so why not produce food from that? Of course we should. All of the rewilding projects that I'm dealing with still produce food from their landscapes.

Then, there are exciting initiatives like virtual fencing, which is essentially GPS collars on cattle, which are set up so that they do not encroach into certain areas but are focused in other areas, which makes extensive grazing across large landscapes much more practical and possible.

So, that's just a quick run through, folks. The bottom line is we really do need to act now. We have a climate emergency. We have a biodiversity crisis. It's time to act, and we firmly believe that rewilding has its place. I'd just like to quote from, actually, an RSPB colleague of mine who wrote a blog, which I saw recently, and he summed it up perfectly:

'Rewilding isn't a silver bullet, but it is undoubtedly part of a multifaceted solution to the wickedly complex problem of biodiversity decline.'

Okay, I'll leave it there. Thank you very much, and I'm happy to take questions.

14:00

Thank you very much. If I can start, I'll start off with a comment that before you came in, we were talking about the use of beavers in terms of dealing with flood management, which is something I feel very strongly about. We use the term 'rewilding'—isn't it about making sure you have the right animals in the right place and that they can fit in with the animals around them? Do you agree that we're better off if we're rewilding with animals that are native, or near-native—i.e. came over with the Romans—to Wales and Britain, rather than bringing in exotic species, which we don't know what they're going to do until they do it? I always think of my favourite, the Japanese knotweed, which came in as an ornamental plant and has created chaos in my area ever since.

Yes, you're absolutely right, Chairman. The thing to focus on, and I often say this when people are talking to me about, 'What do I do about invasive species in my rewilding project?' is: how do we restore natural processes? What are the missing pieces of the jigsaw that would enable natural processes to prevail? And yes, absolutely right, we should be looking to restore those species that had a part to play in this natural food web and in this ecosystem function. You cannot get a better example of that than the European beaver. Their ability to create habitats for other wet river and wetland species is fantastic, but, of course, you've got to take account, then, of the impacts on people and communities. Yes, they can cause flooding in localised areas, which may be a problem. They can feed on crops adjacent to the river bank, et cetera. They might fell trees that you don't want felled. So, you have to have management policies in place and management strategies in place for species like that that are going to have that kind of impact.

There are other species like, say, I would argue probably pine martens, to a certain extent, and much more innocuous species like red squirrels and water voles et cetera, where you have to be less management-wary, but certainly for beavers you would. But the other thing I want to say here is that it's about looking to the future. We need to restore an environment that's fit for the future and not looking back to the past to try and recreate some halcyon days centuries ago. It has to be fit for the future, taking account of climate change, population pressure, economic viability et cetera.

Thank you, and good afternoon. Thank you, Chairman. Now, your vision is for at least 5 per cent rewilding and 25 per cent return to nature friendly land. As I hope you will agree, farmers conserve this land, and in 2019 the UK had a trade deficit in food, feed and drink of £24.3 billion. What assessment have you made of the impact of your rewilding targets on food production in Wales, and would it result in us having to have a greater dependency on imported goods?

Food is a very important aspect of the discussion, and to answer your question, I have done some assessments of the projects for which I have data and information. We're gradually building on that all the time, but essentially, I have data on 10 very large projects in England. They're 10 of the biggest and best rewilding projects, so the kind of projects I would wish to encourage across the country, and all of those projects still produce food. They all have livestock on them. Because we don't have elk and beavers and wild boar and bison et cetera, they've got a mixture of animals, a mixture of cattle, sheep, ponies and pigs, and indeed the various wild deer species, and red deer, sometimes harvested. They're all producing food. There is a slight reduction in the production of food, but the calculations that I've done show that we are looking at—. If we were to assume that all of this land was of good quality productivity, which, by the way, it's not—all of these projects are on marginally productive land—but even if we assumed that they were all on productive land, they represent an approximately 1 per cent reduction in meat production, if you were to deliver that percentage of rewilding. So, when you stack that up alongside the other trends in food and meat consumption, et cetera, and all the challenges around imports and exports, it really, honestly, pales into insignificance. It certainly pales into insignificance alongside food waste, which is around 40 per cent, as you know. So, we shouldn't dismiss it, it is important, but we have to balance it against all of the other benefits that rewilding this marginal land can deliver for society as a whole.

14:05

Thank you. And then my next question: you noted that key policy opportunities include tree planting and natural flood management solutions—how do you think that the Welsh Government should assess the value of such land usage and decide on grant amounts to compensate or support farmers for diversifying the use of their land away from food production? And could you give examples of where land has been rewilded in a way that supports tree planting and flood management solutions, but also continues to be used for food production as well?

Well, if I could take the latter first, I would encourage you to look at the case examples that we've now got on the website, of which, as I say, I think there are 17 across England and Scotland. They are these projects all of which have food production within them—. Sorry.

I'm sorry to interrupt you there, and I have to. England, Scotland—I'm talking Wales, because—. Sorry.

No, no, I understand, Janet; it's a perfectly valid challenge. The thing is, I don't have any examples from Wales yet. All of these examples that we have are ones that were either already happening before people like me came along, or they are examples where I've been invited in to talk to the landowner to encourage them to rewild, and they have become projects. So, I would love to have Welsh projects on there, and, please, if there's anyone out there that knows of them, let us know.

Well, that leads beautifully on to my final question on this. You referred to species reintroduction. Now, such a project is being pursued by Wilder Britain for golden eagles in Snowdonia. Now, I've been asking for a copy of Lancaster University's feasibility study, and I think it's Professor O'Donoghue. We've made contact, but we're not getting a lot of feedback as yet. But I fear the project is relying too much on a Wales-wide approach, instead of local area feasibility studies, and, indeed, very local dynamics. Would you agree with me that, where species introduction is being considered for a specific area, there should be a feasibility study focused on that area, rather than Wales as a whole? And for me, if you're going to do this, we have to bring the people with us—we have to bring our farmers, our landowners and those who use this land for other purposes.

Yes, you're absolutely right. It's absolutely essential that you get the consultation right at local scale. The pine marten reintroduction project, for example, was, I think, a great example of how to do it. I don't have any—we don't have any—connection with that organisation that you've just mentioned, but, yes, essentially, you start the consultation locally and build up from that. It's important, obviously, with certain species, that you take account of their impacts further afield, because some of these species will travel huge distances to feed. But you're absolutely spot on, that is how it should be done, and, indeed, all of these projects that I'm dealing with, they are driven from the bottom up, from within the community. They are either individual landowners or clusters of landowners who've got together and are starting to communicate outwards, and building up and expanding outwards from that point is the way to go.

I just wanted to probe a little bit some of the wicked issues that we have to confront, as well, particularly things that come from abroad. So, Japanese knotweed is practically impossible to eliminate, the ruddy duck nearly eliminated our native ducks, and the grey squirrel has almost eliminated the red squirrel. So, rewilding is great in many aspects, but what's your position—of rewilding and you and your colleagues—on how we at some times have to very ruthlessly intervene to try and prevent the spread of, you know, trees with disease and other things coming from elsewhere?

14:10

There's no doubt that disease security and non-native species are a significant issue, and they are an issue in individual projects. Examples include rhododendrons, which can completely blanket the forest floor and prevent natural processes, soil processes and invertebrate community activity and ground flora, et cetera. So, there are cases, and this is a classic example of—I talked about a marathon with a sprint start; well, this is a classic case of intervening hard in the early years in order to overcome these significant impacts. So, I would put invasive species like rhododendrons, like Japanese knotweed, in that category alongside, for example, needing to do tree planting, or allowing natural regeneration or reconnecting a river with its floodplain. These are really important interventions, and of course, importantly, they cost money, and that's why all of these kinds of activities need to be built into the arrangements for a future land management scheme if it's going to deliver these kinds of public goods at scale.

Good afternoon. I did support your rewilding project in the early days. I found I was the only politician, I think, that did, in the area. But, anyway, the question is—. Of course, it went a bit wrong, because there was huge opposition to it. So, how are we going to address that? That's my first question. And then the other question is about the geographical area that was identified in the Summit to Sea project. So, those two things—you identified an area, and then we had this kickback.

Forgive me, Joyce, I've agreed with the other partners that I won't talk about specific projects.

But I can answer your question in a generic way. You've got far more expert people later on after me speaking, so I'll leave them to talk about that, but what is clear is that the best and most—the easiest projects to communicate on are those where the idea comes from within the community. It can come from a landowner or indeed an organisation that has credibility from within a community, and this is happening all over the country, where there are little groups starting to form that are usually based on a mixture of landowners, interested enthusiasts, maybe the odd—not 'odd', 'odd' isn't the right word; the occasional—academic; groups of people with a shared interest who bring different things to the party. And these local networks are starting to develop now, and they are finding places where people are interested in making it happen. That is, for me, the perfect way for it to happen, and I honestly don't see any reason why that can't happen across Britain.

Okay, and if I can just give an example of a project, and that was the reintroduction of ospreys, which has been hugely beneficial, I would argue. I could say the same for red kites as well. Going back to one of the answers that you gave to Janet about, sometimes, you will have to look beyond the local, because they don't know any boundaries—

Exactly.

And I'm an avid birdwatcher, as everybody knows, and a member of the RSPB. So, those are two really good examples—I picked those birds particularly—where wider considerations would need to be taken into account. So, the question then is—. You will start at the local, obviously, and it'll be driven, usually, by very few individuals, but then you've got to expand that out and engage many, many more people and groups. So, in your experience that you have, how have you gone about that bit of expansion from the local to, perhaps, eventually, national?

14:15

Well, certainly one could look at sub-county scale, and that's quite a significant scale. You could be looking at, say, a 10,000 hectare area project. But I think it's important to remember a couple of things. First of all, it would be almost impossible to find everyone within, let's say, a 10,000 hectare area who wanted to sign up to the same thing at the same pace—almost impossible. So, you have to accept that you're going to have to feel your way into certain parts of that area to work with those who are interested and gradually, as those who are interested start to deliver this kind of approach, what we are finding is that their neighbours start to think, 'Well, actually that's not as scary as I thought it was—well, I'll start talking.' And gradually you get this building. But there will still always be some who would rather carry on as they are, which of course they're entitled to do. This should not be imposed on anyone; it has to be voluntary. 

The other point I wanted to make is that, when these initiatives happen at scale, at a reasonable scale, there are always going to be some people who are not on board and not happy. I think it is almost impossible to bring absolutely everyone with you, but if you can work carefully and communicate properly at the right speed and not run before you can walk—if you can do that, then you will bring the majority with you, and we can see this kind of transformation in the right areas at the right pace.

Diolch, Cadeirydd. Dwi jest eisiau holi os ydych chi—neu pam fod gymaint o bobl yn teimlo bod y term 'ailwylltio' mor toxic

Thank you, Chair. I just want to ask you whether—why so many people feel that the term 'rewilding' is so toxic.

Yes, good question, Llyr. I think, inevitably, it's partly driven by the extreme language that has been used by what I would describe as rewilding purists. Now, we've needed a conversation about this for a long time, so it's great that people have been out there for five years or more creating this conversation. It creates a space for people like me who have come from a public service background who need to work through partnership and collaboration. It creates the space to operate in. But I firmly believe now that we're in a position where we don't really need that anymore. We have enough dialogue going on, constructive dialogue going on, with all sectors of society—private landowners, environmental organisations, Government agencies, private businesses. Everyone is now starting to talk about rewilding. So, our firm belief is that we continue to promote our principles, which I hope you'll agree are rational and reasonable, as I describe them, and we continue to work in the way that we intend to work. And we are now, perhaps, left, if you like, to get on with it and see what we can deliver with all our partner organisations, like those you're going to be speaking to later. But the answer to your question is that it's because it was initiated some years ago in quite a provocative, aggressive way. Good side: it promoted a conversation; now the downside is that people are slightly scared of it.

Ie, achos dwi'n meddwl, pan ydych chi'n cael trafodaeth am ailwylltio, mae parameters y drafodaeth yna'n wahanol iawn i drafodaeth o gwmpas ffermio amgylcheddol gyfeillgar. Mae holl agwedd pobl ar gychwyn y drafodaeth yn wahanol, ac wedyn dwi'n meddwl bod yna broblem gyda'r derminoleg a gyda'r baggage efallai sydd o gwmpas y term 'ailwylltio' yn meddwl nifer o bobl. Ond, wrth gwrs, beth sydd hefyd efallai wedi cyfrannu at y broblem sydd gan rhai pobl gyda'r agenda ailwylltio yw'r canfyddiad yma, wrth gwrs, mai beth sydd gennym ni yw pobl gyfoethog o ffwrdd yn penderfynu eu bod nhw eisiau, wrth gwrs, gwneud cyfraniad positif tuag at fioamrywiaeth ac adfer bywyd gwyllt, ond yn gwneud hynny mewn ffordd sydd, i raddau, yn cael ei weld fel gormesu cymunedau gwledig drwy ddod â'u dymuniad a'u buddsoddiad mawr—rhyw gwmni wedi ei gofrestru yn Llundain yn buddsoddi pres mawr—er mwyn gwireddu hynny. Ac, wrth gwrs, mi wnaethoch chi bwysleisio yn eich cyflwyniad bwysigrwydd ymgynghori lleol a gweithio o'r gwaelod i fyny, ond y canfyddiad, yn sicr, yw mai rhywbeth top i lawr yw hwn ac nad yw e efallai wedi ei wreiddio yn rhai o'r cymunedau sy'n cael eu heffeithio fwyaf ganddo fe. Felly, beth sy'n digwydd i drio mynd i'r afael â'r agwedd neu'r canfyddiad yna o beth mae ailwylltio yn ei gynrychioli?

Yes, because I do think that, when you have a discussion about rewilding, the parameters of the discussion are very different to a discussion around environmentally friendly farming. People's attitudes at the outset of the discussion are very different, so I do think that there is a problem with the terminology and with the baggage that surrounds the term 'rewilding' in the minds of many people. But, of course, what perhaps has contributed to the problem that some people have with the agenda of rewilding is the perception, of course, that what we have is wealthy people from outside deciding that they want to make a positive contribution to biodiversity and wildlife recovery, but doing that in a way that, to an extent, is seen as oppression of rural communities by bringing their aspiration and their major investment—a company that's registered in London investing lots of money—in order to realise that. And, of course, you did emphasise in your presentation the importance of local consultation and working from the bottom up, but the perception is that this is something that is top down and isn't perhaps rooted in the communities that are most affected. So, what is happening to try and tackle that perception of what rewilding represents? 

14:20

Yes, all valid issues. It's interesting for me, because, when I first started, I was putting feelers out for this four years ago, when I started in this organisation. I was putting feelers out across England to find out who was doing what and were there any opportunities for rewilding. Within two years, I wasn't doing that anymore, because I was absolutely inundated with people coming to me—landowners, organisations, the army, Enfield Council. The list is a huge list, and every day it just keeps coming. So, it is no longer a situation of being seen to be muscling your way in to try and find out if anyone is interested in rewilding; it's quite the opposite.

So, things have turned around quite a lot, and I just wanted to flag some interesting information, which I just literally got stats for today. So, when we set up the rewilding network on our new website, two weeks ago, we set up a system that meant we could log interest from people—landowners—becoming part of the network. And, just to let you know, in those two weeks, we've had—it's not a huge number, but it's a lot more than I knew about before—21 small-scale landowners contact us from Wales, and two medium scale, and, by medium scale I mean 250 acres to 1,500 acres. So, there are people out there who are interested and we now need to start following up on that. I admit I've neglected Wales. I've focused on England because there's been so much demand, and that demand's been driven by the environmental land management scheme. There's absolutely no doubt about that. The public money for public good ELM scheme focused landowners interest in, 'Oh, what am I going to do? What am I going to do when basic payments get phased out?'. And, so, that incentivised them to look at these things, but all of these landowners are telling me they're doing it because they also believe it's the right thing to do, and I've no doubt there'll be plenty like that in Wales as well. 

Right. NFU Cymru has long expressed concern for the tenanted sector and farm businesses who do not own the land that they farm in the development of new policy. It is my understanding that sustainable land management can deliver environmental benefits, such as air quality, high water quality and biodiversity. How do you think that our tenanted farm sector can achieve these benefits should rewilding measures have a long-term impact on the land they rent? 

Yes, this is a really tricky issue. I deal with a lot of landowners who've got tenants and, I'll be totally open and honest with you, there is a whole range of responses—responses in terms of views, but also responses in terms of who goes on to do what once the rewilding project starts. So, the ideal situation is—. This has happened a few times, but not enough really, and I'd like it to happen more. A few times, I've been called in for the first advisory visit to a landowner at the same time as his tenants are present. So, on other occasions, probably more often, the landowner speaks to me first and then, later, I come and talk to the tenants as well. But, a few times, it's happened with the tenants and, where it happens with the tenants at the same time—

—it's better. In those cases, the project has developed, because the tenants become less afraid of the possibility of change seriously affecting them. Actually, there's one example that stands out to me in Northumberland. They were really excited about the—. Once they know from me what it was and what it wasn't, and that it wasn't somebody coming along with a bus load of wolves, they realised there were opportunities for diversification. They knew that basic payments were going, they knew that it was a tough, tough landscape to be operating in, and they saw that there was this opportunity, actually, to diversify and, in their case—and it's happened several times, particularly in the northern upland sites—develop a better quality of life with a modified version of what they were doing.

So, it is tricky. I'm not running away from that. It is very, very important to bring tenants with you. In that situation, the tenants are the farmers; the landowner is not driving the tractor round. So, these are the people we need to keep on the land. But don't forget the 25 per cent nature friendly farming—that's where most farmers, in moderately productive land, will sit. They'll be in that 25 per cent nature friendly farming, and it's really the very marginal land and, indeed, the big areas of land owned by organisations like NRW and Dŵr Cymru and RSPB and the Ministry of Defence that are the opportunities, I think, where we've got a great, great chance to do things at scale. I recognise they've got tenants as well, but there's a great opportunity there, I think, for rewilding in those sorts of places.

14:25

A final question from me: I think it comes down to what you're rewilding with, doesn't it? We've all received The State of Mammals in Wales. Amongst those mammals under threat are black rats. I know very few people who would like to see rewilding with black rats. But rewilding with deer, with eagles, with voles, I think, would be much more popular. So, it's species specific. The two animals that have almost died out are black rats and house mice. I would guess that most people would not want to rewild with those. 

No. Well, I don't think you need to worry about that from our perspective. I don't think you'll see either of those species on our list of possibles.

But I think the point I'm trying make—and I hope relatively successfully—is it all comes down to species. It's species specific. If you've got animals that people generally like, then there's a big difference to that than animals that people don't want and don't want to be around. And lots of the indigenous species—if we take Roman times as the start—a lot of people would like to have some of those. 

Chair, if I could make just one point on this, I wouldn't focus too much on species reintroduction. The main purpose of rewilding is to restore natural processes in the landscape, and that means healthy soils and water, healthy vegetation, the right mix of herbivores, which will usually be rare breeds or livestock and, occasionally, carnivores like pine martin, et cetera. The arguments around these top-end predators are so difficult. That's for a future generation to deal with, in my view—to deal with wolves. That's many generations down the line. In an intensively populated area, let's focus on the land and the vegetation diversity.

Thank you very much. We've got two minutes left, and Joyce Watson.

That's what I want to ask you—exactly where you finished. How do you see this fitting into the Welsh Government land management, going forward, because that's basically what we're doing?

I really hope, and I would encourage you folks to pursue this public-money-for-public-goods approach, and not to water it down. The principles are really sound, and we have to think about the future health of our natural environment and, thus, the health of our future generations and economies. Having been embroiled in these negotiations with DEFRA in England for the last three or four years, I'm certain it's the right approach. It will be very complicated, I know that. If you're going to properly assess the value of a whole suite of public benefits, it will be complicated, but it is the right principle, and what we have to do alongside that, and, again, I would encourage you to do, is to try to find the private investment through water companies, through carbon offsetting, through other activities and businesses that benefit from a healthier landscape. We need to find that private investment to top up the public money for public goods because there simply won't be enough to go around if we just focus on public funding.

14:30

Okay. We've run out of time. Can I just thank you, Professor Driver, for coming along—I say 'coming along'—for sharing your thoughts with us and answering our questions? It's probably been a lot easier than you having to make your way to Cardiff to do it.

I always like coming to Cardiff. Thank you.

We'll have a five-minute break before the next group.

Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 14:30 a 14:35.

The meeting adjourned between 14:30 a 14:35.

14:35
3. Bioamrywiaeth ac Ailwylltio: Sesiwn dystiolaeth 1 - Sector amgylcheddol
3. Biodiversity and Rewilding: Evidence session 1 - Environmental Sector

Prynhawn da. Good afternoon. Can I welcome to this session discussing biodiversity and rewilding representatives of the environmental sector? Can I welcome Clive Faulkner, chief executive of Montgomeryshire Wildlife Trust; Hilary Kehoe, Wales chair, Nature Friendly Farming Network; Jerry Langford, public affairs manager, Woodland Trust; Siân Stacey, project developer officer, Summit to Sea; and Arfon Williams, head of land and sea policy, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Cymru. Welcome, and thank you very much for coming along this afternoon.

If I can start off with the first question: what do you all mean by rewilding? It's terminology that has been used a lot and different people mean different things by it. So, who wants to go first? Clive. 

I think you've hit the nail on the head there with the first question. Basically, the issue here is the definition of rewilding. I think it's actually caused a lot of problems. I would always go down the route that rewilding is the restoration of natural processes. I think that if you have any other sort of more extreme, I would actually say, definition of rewilding, I think you start to look at unsustainable land management. So, yes, basically, there is no definition of rewilding, but I would ask for it to be associated all around the concept of restoration of natural processes.

Diolch. Thank you, Chair. Just to add to Clive there, it's a divisive kind of definition. It's poorly understood, but I think if we look at the objectives, if the objectives are restoring nature and natural processes, then we'd agree with that, and we'd put forward that there are multiple ways you can achieve this, including through restoring peatlands, connecting buffering woodland, including through natural regeneration, targeted conservation actions, and also, importantly, supporting high-nature-value farming—important for restoring and maintaining semi-natural habitats. So, I think rewilding has proved to be a very unhelpful definition, but there are an awful lot of tools in the box when it comes to restoring nature and natural processes that I think we utilise and we'd agree with.

Thank you. Anyone else want to add anything? Yes, Hilary.

Yes, I would agree with that. In the Nature Friendly Farming Network, we're all about farming alongside natural processes and wildlife-friendly farming. But rewilding sounds like introducing pumas and all sorts, and that isn't really very helpful to farmers.

Well, I certainly agree. Because of these difficulties with the definition and interpretation of 'rewilding', I'd just say that we prefer to try and avoid using the term and use instead this language of nature-based solutions and managing natural processes, which allows more emphasis on this being a targeted and managed process.

Does gen i ddim byd yn ychwanegol i beth sydd wedi cael ei ddweud yn barod, ond yn sicr mae'r gair yn gallu bod yn reit problematig. Ond, yn sicr, mae e wedi ysbrydoli nifer fawr iawn o bobl, felly dwi'n meddwl bod ffordd i fynd i ddeall o le mae'r cyffro yna wedi dod a sut ydyn ni'n gallu creu'r cyffro yna mewn ffyrdd sydd yn bodoli'n barod yn y byd cadwraeth a ffermio.

I have nothing to add, really, to what's been said already, but certainly the word can be problematic. But, certainly, it has inspired a great number of people, so I think there is some way to go to understand where that excitement has come from, and how we can create that excitement in ways that already exist in the conservation and farming world.

Thank you very much. I'll call on Llyr Gruffydd. Llyr.

Diolch yn fawr, Cadeirydd. Dwi jest eisiau holi ychydig ynglŷn â sgêl yr approach i ailwylltio. Yn amlwg, mae rhywun yn tybio po fwyaf ydy'r darn o dir neu ddarn o fôr sydd gennych chi, po fwyaf o impact y gallwch chi ei gael, ond wrth gwrs mae natur ddaearyddol Cymru yn golygu bod gennym ni frodwaith o berchnogion gwahanol ac yn blaen—efallai ddim ar y sgêl y bydden ni'n ei weld mewn llefydd fel yr Alban neu'n rhywle arall. A dwi jest eisiau deall faint o'r agenda yma y mae modd ei gyflawni trwy rannu'r defnydd o dir neu fôr gyda phethau fel amaethyddiaeth, achos yn amlwg dyw'r cynfas ddim yn un blanc, a dyw e ddim mor fawr, efallai, ag y byddai rhai pobl yn gobeithio, a dwi'n meddwl bod tipyn o'r gwrthdaro yn dod o hynny. So, dwi jest eisiau clywed mwy ynglŷn â sut mae modd gwneud i sgêl yr approach weithio mewn gwlad fel Cymru.

Thank you, Chair. I just want to ask about the scale of the approach to rewilding. Evidently, one feels that the bigger the piece of land or water you have, the bigger the impact you can have, but of course, the geographical nature of Wales means that we have a patchwork of different owners and so forth—perhaps not on the scale that we'd see in places like Scotland and so forth. I just want to understand, really, how much of this agenda could be delivered by sharing the use of land and the sea with things such as agriculture, because evidently the canvas isn't a blank one, and it's not as big as perhaps some people would hope, and I think that a lot of the conflict emanates from that. So, I just want to hear more about how we can make the scale of the approach work in a place like Wales.

14:40

I think it's about getting connectivity, getting landowners to join together and work out a landscape-scale project on each of their farms—so, different people planting up corners of fields and encouraging connectivity between hedgerows and managing the hedgerows differently, and using river corridors. You can end up having a massive effect over a large area of land by just bringing a lot of different people along with you, and then that can link up with large areas of hill and commons, which can be managed by the farmers, but more extensively and to a co-ordinated plan. I think it's going to be really important for the Welsh Government to think about paying for outcomes and paying for carbon fixing and public goods. It's a different way of doing it from how it's been done up to now.

Absolutely—and just to illustrate that, you'll be aware that we're strongly promoting agroforestry at the moment and, of course, that is an example of doing a lot of little things in lots of places, rather than bigger gestures in a few places.

I might take a slightly different tack on this. Llyr asked, 'Is Wales big enough?' Well, if we reframe this and look at ecosystem functionality, then I think we need to take a Wales-wide approach to restoring nature and natural processes and ecosystem functionality. Large areas for nature are part of that, but RSPB would argue that we've already got a lot of these sites already designated. When you take on board the designated sites network, national parks, the areas of outstanding natural beauty, we've got a significant amount of land that's already identified as being of nature value—or high nature value potential, then. It's a case of managing those sites better.

I also think there's a case for completing those networks. So, in some ways, those are the core sites—and I'm keen to emphasise that those core sites often require management, extensive farmland-type management—and those core sites, to be effective, need to sit within that patchwork of a sustainably managed Wales in which high nature value farming will have a key role to play in buffering and connecting, and will also be an essential component of delivering what these sites are important for. Take, for example, curlews. Curlews might utilise key areas, but they utilise the surrounding countryside as well as key feeding sites. So, it's not black and white; these things need to be looked at holistically, and there's an awful lot of integration across the piece as well. But it's managing what we've got better to start with—I think that's a key first step. 

It goes back to Professor Lawton, who basically said that to make this work, we need nature conservation to work on bigger sites, make those better and make them more joined up. Bigger, better, more joined up—those were the things that came out of that whole review. And the truth of it is that he's absolutely right: if we can get natural processes managed on a Wales-wide scale—all of Wales—that would be great, and that would really work. I really see this dichotomy between nature conservation and farmland as artificial; I don't see it as a real thing at all. All of my nature reserves—we manage 20 nature reserves across Montgomeryshire—produce food because of the way that we manage them, and there's also the Pumlumon project that we've been working on in the uplands of mid Wales. I have to say, we are working with a group of farmers—20 farmers at the moment—and they are managing land, they are restoring ecosystem processes, they are restoring peat bogs, and we are paying them for that service that they've done for us, for the natural environment. I have to tell you that I look at that land—that farmland—and say, 'You know what? I've doubled the amount of Montgomeryshire that's in nature conservation, compared to the amount of my reserves.' I see those sites as part of my nature reserves now, and I think it's crazy, this artificial dichotomy of farmland and wildlife land. The two things can so readily be the same.

14:45

Dwi'n cytuno efo Clive. Dydyn ni ddim yn gallu sbio ar dir cadwriaethol a thir ffermio fel dau beth gwahanol. Maen nhw yr un peth ac mae cydweithio ar draws gwahanol ddefnydd o dir yn hynod o bwysig. Dwi'n cytuno efo beth oedd Hilary yn ei ddweud amboutu cysylltu pethau da sy'n digwydd. Mae yna nifer fawr o wahanol enghreifftiau o hynny yn digwydd yn barod yng Nghymru ac mae'n werth dathlu'r rheini a'r cydweithio sydd yn digwydd yn barod.

I agree with Clive. We can't look at conservation land and farming land as two different things. They're the same thing and collaboration across different land use is very important. I agree with what Hilary said about linking up the good things that are happening. There are a number of different examples of that happening already in Wales, and it's worth celebrating those and the collaboration that's already happening.

Yes, just one quick thing. Just to say that ecosystem processes and restoring natural processes is also something that can be done in an urban context as well. We're not just talking about farmland; it goes right across the board.

Thank you. That brings us on to Joyce Watson, who I'm sure has got a lot to say on this.

I just want to follow on from what Clive—well, what you've all said, actually. We've got to build this in, obviously, to what the Government's doing with their land, but I particularly want to come to Clive, and probably Hilary—. We're seeing policies at the moment that are working against what you're aspiring to achieve when we're talking about intensive farming and the implications and consequences that that has, and can have, on the waterways and the land. So, just some comments around that, please.

The problem with intensification of farming—. Basically, we're looking at an industry where the supply chains and the economics of it aren't actually working properly. Basically, we're not paying the full cost. For every pint of milk we buy, it's not paying for the cost of, first of all, the living of the farmer, but secondly the environmental impact that that, in many cases, can have produced. Basically, we need to look at the way that we support farming, the way that we fund farming, the way that farming works and the subsidies or payments that farmers get. It's distorted the economics, and we really need to fix that. And if we fixed that, and farming practices did actually reflect—or rather, if the price of farm products did actually reflect the cost of producing those products, then we would see a very clear advantage for less intensive farming and more sustainable land management, which is basically what we're all about, surely.

As the Nature Friendly Farming Network, we've been doing work called 'Less is more', and that is about working out the maximum sustainable output from your farm, from your natural environment. You can end up spending money on extra fertiliser and extra feed to get the biggest cow in the market, but that isn't necessarily the most profitable cow in the market. So, if we can start to work towards assessing what nature can provide and managing our livestock and our numbers and our input to balance that, then we're working with nature. Intensive chicken farms aren't doing that. I think Clive's right; people should be paid properly for what they're actually producing. If we didn't have agricultural subsidies, we certainly wouldn't be making any money out of cattle farming, most farmers—certainly for beef farming, and sheep is only a very small margin. So, we need to balance that up somehow.

One of the things I hope a new farm support scheme can do is actually provide more options for farmers so that we do get this sort of diversity of land management and therefore a diversity of landscape, and to lower the dependence on just one or two commodities, both in farming and in forestry. That's the sort of thing that leads to monotonous landscape. There's a debate going on in some quarters between land sparing and land sharing. This sort of multi-objective patchwork landscape is very much on the land sharing side, which is something we support. The land sparing argument favours monopolistic use of large areas for single purposes and I think that's very unsuitable in a Welsh context and for the Welsh landscape. It's an issue in forestry as well as in farming.

14:50

Thank you, Chair. Just touching on the water quality issue, I think the price the farmer gets is important for the kind of—. Thinking about chicken and intensive poultry units—and this is a particular concern at the moment—that also highlights the role that planning and the regulator has to play in how farming develops going forward. So, there's regulation, advice, guidance and the right sort of support and I think clear and unambiguous regulation, and that's well communicated. But there needs to be more of a strategy when it comes to not just farming and land management, but food as well; I think food and supply chains need to be a consideration going forward. Of course, there's a danger in—. Water quality has been badly impacted, but chances are, at some point, there will be an oversupply of a product or a commodity that will then have a detrimental impact on the sector. We've seen that in the past, so I think there needs to be much more of a planned approach to what we do and where we do it.

And just to finish off on the previous point, there's been a lot of talk about land use here, but a lot of this applies equally to the marine environment as well, about the way we manage the marine environment sustainably in cohesive networks with multi-use and all these sorts of things. There is no divide between land and marine; this is one continuous ecosystem.

Thank you. Anyone else? Can I just thank you for that? My colleague Joyce Watson has talked endlessly about the importance of marine and has really moved it up the agenda, because of how important many of us think it is. Do you want to come back, Joyce, or are you okay?

I'm quite happy to come back, because if we're talking about—I won't use the terms 'rewilding' or 'wilding'; 'biodiversity' is what I actually prefer, going forward. We have to look, obviously, at the geography of Wales; the topography is hugely important when we're looking at doing the right thing. And we're talking, very often, about restoring nature and sometimes that moves into keeping what we've got. Well, what we've got isn't good enough anyway. It's been destroyed in many cases. So, what we're interested in knowing is first of all, the lessons that can be learnt from the Summit to Sea programme and why it wasn't received well in some quarters—I'll put it like that—and how we engage stakeholders going forward to come with us on a journey that we will have to make, whether we think we need to or not.

Mae'n gwneud synnwyr i fi ymateb i hynny. Jest cyn i fi gychwyn, roeddwn i'n gwrando mewn i'r cyfarfod yn gynharach a gwnaeth Alastair Driver sôn ei fod e ddim yn gallu ymateb i'r cwestiwn, ond wrth gwrs roedd Rewilding Britain yn rhan o O'r Mynydd i'r Môr yn y gorffennol, ond ers mis Hydref y flwyddyn ddiwethaf, maen nhw wedi gadael y prosiect. Felly, dydyn nhw ddim wedi bod yn rhan o lywio'r prosiect ers hynny, ond buasen nhw wedi gallu siarad am y problemau o'u safbwynt nhw yn y dyddiau cynnar.

Mae'r prosiect eisoes mewn sefyllfa lle rydyn ni'n cyd-ddylunio. Un o'r problemau dwi'n meddwl sydd gyda ni ar y cyfan, nid yn unig o fewn y prosiect O'r Mynydd i'r Môr, yw'r amser sydd angen ei rhoi i drafodaethau digwydd ar pace pobl. So, mae gennym ni bach o broblem lle rydyn ni'n wynebu argyfwng hinsawdd a bioamrywiaeth, ac mae angen gweithredu ar frys, ond ar yr un pryd, mae'n rhaid inni gydweithio gyda phobl ar eu hamser nhw, a rhoi'r amser yna i drafodaethau. A dyna, mewn ffordd, un o'r problemau gyda'r ariannu—bod yna ddim digon o arian yn cael ei roi i mewn i'r amser sydd wir ei angen i drafod pethau gyda phobl, gyda chymunedau eang, gyda thirfeddianwyr eang iawn, a dŷn ni'n byw mewn gwlad—a dwi'n reit browd o'r ffaith ein bod ni'n byw mewn gwlad—efo siẁd gymaint o wahanol bobl sydd yn biau tir. Dydyn ni ddim yn y sefyllfa sydd yn yr Alban neu mewn rhai mannau yn Lloegr lle mae yna landholders reit fawr. Mae yna lot, mae yna foseic reit ddiddorol ac amrywiol, o dirfeddianwyr, ac mae hynny'n rhywbeth i'w ddathlu, ond eto mae hynny'n meddwl bod y sialens o gydweithio yn mynd i gymryd mwy o amser, ac mae'n rhaid buddsoddi yn yr amser yna.

Ac rŷn ni hefyd, o'r ochr gadwraeth—. Dwi'n eistedd ar y panel yma, ac, wrth gwrs, dw i'n gadwraethydd mewn nifer o ffyrdd ond dydw i ddim o'r byd cadwraeth, ac felly mae'n rhaid inni ddysgu ym myd cadwraeth o'r ffermwyr a'r pysgotwyr sydd wedi bod yn trin y tir ers nifer o ganrifoedd.

It makes sense for me to respond to that. Just before I start, I listened to the previous session and Alastair Driver said that he couldn't respond to the question, but of course, Rewilding Britain was part of Summit to Sea in the past, but since October last year, they've left the project. So they haven't been part of steering the project since then, but they could've spoken about the problems from their perspective in the early days.

The project is now in a situation where we are co-designing. One of the problems that we have generally, not just within the Summit to Sea project, is the time that needs to be given for discussions to happen at a pace that people are happy with. So, we have a problem where we face a biodiversity and climate emergency, and we need to act quickly on that, but at the same time, we need to collaborate with people on their time, and give the discussions time. And that, in a way, is one of the problems with funding—that there's insufficient funding being put into the time that is needed to discuss things with people, with broad-ranging communities and with landholders. I'm very proud of the fact that we live in a country with so many different people who do own land. We're not in the situation they face in Scotland or in certain parts of England where there are very big landholders. We do have an interesting and diverse mosaic of landholders in Wales, and that's something to be celebrated, but, again, that does mean that there is a challenge in terms of collaboration in that it takes some time, and we need to invest in that time.

From the conservation angle, I'm in on this panel and, though I'm a conservationist in many ways, I'm not from the conservation world but I'm engaged in it in a number of ways. So, we have to learn in the conservation world from farmers, from people who fish and people who have been dealing with the land for many centuries.

14:55

So, I think the lesson is, as Siân absolutely says, about working with the community. I don't know, it seems ridiculous to me—. As a nature conservationist, I would assess a piece of ground and I would say, 'Oh, well, this soil's quite limey and it faces south,' and all of these factors are important, but the community, the history, the heritage are equally as important as all of those things. So, why wouldn't we take that into account?

Of course, I would actually like to say that we really do, we mostly do. I think perhaps there were special issues associated with Summit to Sea—I don't know; it didn't work. There was a structural problem with the way it was put together, perhaps—I don't know. What I can tell you is that the Pumlumon work that we've done in the same area as Summit to Sea, we started 10 years ago, talking to the farming community, and I have to say that, in those days, it was me, and you can just imagine how it looked with me turning up at a farm gate with my extremely English voice, talking to the farming community about ecosystem services and why we should be looking after carbon sequestration. Well, of course, the truth of it is that we didn't approach it that way. It was all about, 'We'd like to help you make a living off this land and, by looking at the ecosystem services and all these other things—[Inaudible.]—we can make another economic purpose for your farm, in addition to food production.' So, it was all about talking to the farmer and finding ways of working with the farmer in a way that actually made sense to them, and actually worked with them and what they needed. I think if you take that approach, you genuinely find incredible support.

Now, I have to say that, when we started working with farmers, to my shame, I have to admit that I was quite concerned about whether we would get any take-up, whether there would be any interest in what we were doing, and I have to tell you that I was 100 per cent wrong. The farming community in that area get it, they understand. They know what the environment is about, they know how to manage it, they know what the issues are. They see it every day. It's just about finding a way of bridging the gap and working with them, and that's what we managed to do in Pumlumon, so it's absolutely possible.

Dwi'n clywed yn union beth mae Clive yn ei ddweud a dwi'n cytuno—pan fo rhywun yn cael cyfle i eistedd i lawr gyda phobl ac esbonio beth sy'n mynd ymlaen fan hyn, mae llawer o'r gwrthwynebiad jest yn toddi i ffwrdd. Ond mae yna haen arall, wrth gwrs, mewn rhai ardaloedd, onid oes, achos beth sy'n digwydd, neu ganfyddiad pobl mewn nifer o ardaloedd, yw bod pobl o bant yn dod i ddweud wrthym ni sut ŷn ni fod i ffermio. Hynny yw, dyna yw'r canfyddiad, a phan fyddan nhw'n gweld wedyn gyrff sydd wedi'u lleoli yn ne-dwyrain Lloegr a chyfranwyr sy'n buddsoddi miliynau o bunnau, ac yn y blaen, yn buddsoddi yn y prosiectau yma, mae'n cael effaith ar ganfyddiad pobl o beth sydd yn digwydd. Ac, wrth gwrs, mae'n hawdd iawn anghofio wedyn fod ymddiriedolaethau bywyd gwyllt Cymru ac RSPB Cymru a'r holl gyrff Cymreig yma hefyd yn rhan o rwydwaith, ond mae'r naratif yna wedi cymryd bywyd ei hunan drosodd wedyn, onid yw e, ac yn sydyn iawn mae'r brand yn cael ei ddifrodi, a dyna sydd wedi digwydd fan hyn. Felly, tra bod yr ymwneud ymarferol ar lawr gwlad ar un lefel yn gallu llwyddo ac yn gallu bod yn grêt, dwi'n meddwl bod yna rwystr, barrier, ac mae'n rhaid torri drwyddo fe cyn cyrraedd hwnna gyda nifer o bobl, cyn eich bod chi'n gallu cael y drafodaeth yna. Dwi'n deall bod O'r Mynydd i'r Môr wedi gwneud rhyw fath o sifft i'r cyfeiriad yna, wrth gwrs, ond mae hwnna hefyd yn cyfrannu at y drafodaeth—nid edrych ar hwn ddim ond yng nghyd-destun adfer bioamrywiaeth yr amgylchedd. Mae pobl yn ei weld e fel ecosystem sydd yn cynnwys, ie, amgylchedd, ie, economi, ond mae iaith a diwylliant yn gymaint ran o hwnna ag unrhyw beth arall, fel ag y mae e, wrth gwrs, yn Neddf llesiant cenedlaethau'r dyfodol yn un o'r pileri.

I hear what Clive says, and I do agree that when one has an opportunity to sit down with people and explain what's going on here, a lot of the opposition melts away. But there is another layer in some areas, because what happens, or people's perception in many areas, is that people from outside are coming to tell us how we should farm. That's the perception, and when they then see bodies that are located in the south-east of England, with contributors who invest millions of pounds and so forth in these projects, it does have an impact on people's perception of what's going on. Of course, it's then very easy to forget that the wildlife trusts of Wales, RSPB Cymru and all of these other Welsh bodies are part of a network, because that narrative has taken on a life of its own and, all of a sudden, the brand is destroyed, and that's what's happened here. So, while the practical involvement on the ground can on one level succeed and can be great, I think there is a barrier that we have to break through before reaching that position with a number of people and before you can have that discussion. I do understand that Summit to Sea has made some kind of shift in that direction, of course, but that also contributes to the discussion—not just looking at this in the context of environmental biodiversity recovery. People do see it as an ecosystem that includes, yes, the environment and the economy, but language and culture also are a part of that, in the same way, of course, that this forms one of the pillars of the well-being of future generations Act.

15:00

There was a lot in there, Llyr. I'm not sure if there's a question there or not, but I think the short answer is that all those aspects that you've highlighted there that need to be considered, you're absolutely right—those are the types of things that will be part of that conversation and that discussion going forward. As I'm sure you're aware, RSPB is now hosting Summit to Sea to help manage the project through this next sort of phase, which is that kind of rebuilding trust, engaging with communities. Siân is doing a fantastic job with engaging with communities, and clearly demonstrating what you said there about the importance of local people, who know the areas and know the communities, are integrated and part of that, and who understand as well what the challenges are and what the issues are within that area.

I will say it wasn't the best of starts for a project. I'll freely admit that, but I think we're now in a place where, all credit to the farming community, there is still trust there, they are still at the table having this conversation. So, I think it's now a case of ensuring that we build on that, and this is about working together in order to identify what the right project is for that area, the right project that works for people, all people, all communities within that area, works for the environment, works for nature, and helps—. This could be a really good example of what a green recovery looks like within a local context. Thinking about the green recovery, it's very much rebuilding economies in a way that benefits people, that restores biodiversity and helps tackle climate change, and doing so in a way that will build resilience within communities going forward, and, in doing that, you're supporting language and culture and all these other things that are as much the fabric of Wales as its nature and its environment. So, I think the answer is that we recognise that it's a huge challenge, but I think it's something that the project is, hopefully—. That's the direction of travel we want this project to go in.

Ie, jest i adeiladu ar beth mae Arfon yn dweud, ac i roi gwybod i'r panel—dwi wedi dweud hwnna yn y papur ymlaen llaw hefyd fod yna werthusiad annibynnol wedi digwydd dros yr haf yma, ac roedd y project yn reit awyddus i ymchwilio mewn i beth aeth yn iawn a beth oedd ddim wedi gweithio mor dda ar yr ochr reoli, governance a gweithio mewn partneriaeth. Mae hynny yn dod allan o fewn yr wythnosau nesaf. Dwi'n meddwl mai rhywbeth sydd yn reit bwysig yw cyfathrebu lleol. I fi, y trafodaethau gorau rydych chi'n eu cael fyth ydy'r rhai dros baned, efo bara brith, neu yn y dafarn ar ddiwedd y dydd, neu, pan oeddwn i'n byw ar Enlli, wrth aros i'r cwch ddod mewn yn y caban. Dyna pryd mae'r trafodaethau gwir, go iawn yn digwydd, gyda phobl ar y tir, neu wrth y llyw ar y môr, yn gweithio. Ac mae'n reit anodd ar hyn o bryd gyda COVID a'r rhwystrau yna, ond mae e dal yn bosib inni gynnal trafodaeth a dŷn ni wedi bod yn reit ffodus efo niferoedd y bobl sydd yn dal wedi cymryd rhan yn y broses o gyd-ddylunio sydd yn digwydd ar hyn o bryd gyda'r project yma yn lleol yng nghanolbarth Cymru.

Yes, just to build on what Arfon said there and to inform the panel, and I said this in the paper as well, that there is an independent evaluation that happened over the summer, and the project was eager to investigate what went well and what didn't go so well, on the management side, on the governance and looking in partnership, and that is coming out in the next few weeks. I think that something that's very important is local communication. For me, the best discussions that you'll ever have happen over a cup of tea with some bara brith or in a pub at the end of the day, or, when I lived on Bardsey island, waiting in the cabin for the boat to come in. That's when the best discussions happen, with people on the ground or at sea, working. It's difficult currently, of course, with COVID and its restrictions, but it is possible, still, for us to have these discussions, and we've been quite fortunate in the number of people who have still taken part in the process of co-design that's happening at present with this project locally in mid Wales.

15:05

One thing I must say is that Siân, I think, will so certainly make a success of Summit to Sea. She really understands the community, and I think that's the heart of it. She really understands the community. One thing—it's a slight aside—is that it turns out that the global map of diversity of language is exactly the same as the global map of diversity of wildlife. The two things—culture and wildlife—are inextricably linked, and I have to say that this concept that people aren't part of the ecology of an area seems crazy to me. We're not in space; we're part of the ecology of the area. The community and the culture are part of the ecology of the area. It has to be that way, it is that way, so we should never forget that. I'll leave it there, but I don't want people to think that there's a divergence between culture or communities, and I just want to say that local conservation activity, organisations that are part of a local community, that's where you get your results from, and that's how you can fix this problem about a perception of parachuting in weird and wonderful ideas from the south-east of England.

If I go back to Joyce's question about nature in crisis and what we are going to do about it, it's absolutely right that nature is in crisis. We have an appalling number of reports that are coming out just highlighting how bad the nature crisis is. At the same time, we're getting the same kind of messages about the climate crisis, and what I still don't quite understand is the climate crisis has resulted in declarations of climate emergencies, and that seems to be galvanising action, and there's a response to that right across society. What I guess the question is, more than anything else, is how do we do the same with nature, because there's an equal—. It's a different side of the same coin. The nature crisis and the climate crisis are interlinked. So, I think perhaps a failure to declare a nature emergency—a formal nature emergency—within Wales, that may be a consideration in here.

So, I think a first step may be—. I don't often get a chance to speak to a cross-party representation of MSs, so a plea to MSs on perhaps including a manifesto commitment to declare a nature emergency, going forward, would be a first step to galvanising action that will lead to real, positive steps to address the nature crisis, as well.

Thank you. Jenny—. Sorry, Hilary wanted to come in, did you?

In a way, it's talking a bit about ethics and, specifically, Summit to Sea, but what would help to progress farmers tackling the nature emergency and, equally, the climate one is sufficient long-term funding to help farmers transition to nature friendly systems and continue to reward public good, and enough advice and guidance from people who understand both sides of the coin to help them get through the transition. And then, future schemes need to be available to more people, rather than just a really select few that tick all the boxes, because farmers in all situations can widen their headlands and have better hedges and put purple maize in. I don't know about these intensive chicken farmers; that's the best I can suggest for them. All farmers have got the potential to provide environmental goods and services. And then, if we had financial support to invest in infrastructure, machinery and equipment, things like slurry stores and separating your dirty water from your clean water and planting reed beds and things to clean water up—. And then we need local food systems as well, so my nearest abattoir is—. Well, the nearest small one is 34 miles away, but most of my lambs end up taking a three or four-hour journey to Llanybydder or Preston, and we really need local abattoirs, local slaughterpeople and local markets to feed into, and that's happened over COVID. People have started to appreciate their local farms and the farmers have stepped up and provided food, and we just need to follow that through by getting rid of some of the legislation and enabling some of that with investment. So, these are just practical things that maybe can move towards a more cross-country, nature friendly environment. 

15:10

Right. All of these things are very nice to have, but I think we need to focus on what we're going to do now, because the state of the land that we're in is because of the way in which the different iterations of the CAP have encouraged people to do various things and they've had some pretty horrible perverse consequences. So, I just wondered if we could focus on how you think the Welsh Government's future land management proposals should be directed towards supporting people to earn a living in a satisfactory way, but also ensuring that we are not making the climate crisis and the nature crisis even worse than they are already. 

Thank you, Chair. I'd just like to pick up on something that Hilary mentioned earlier on, about the 'Less is more' work that Chris Clark has done and I think we've probably shared with you all, and I think there's something in there that's worth looking at and, I think, worth looking at as early as possible. Because what worries me about the talk of a sustainable land management policy is, looking at the timeline, well, we're not going to get full transition to a new policy until about 2029, 2030, and that's on the back of reports saying we've got 10 years to turn around the climate change crisis and address the nature emergency. These things need acting now. 

Chris's work basically shows that, often, farmers are operating beyond the safe environmental limits of their land, and it's basically costing them money to produce these artificially high stocking levels, and his work shows that, once farmers reset their stocking to within the productive capacity of their land, they're more efficient, they're more economically productive. And that tends to require a reduction in stock numbers—reduced pressure on the land, but increased profitability. To me, that's a win-win, from an economic point of view and an environmental point of view, and, as a globally responsible Wales, it also reduces not just our domestic footprint but also our international footprint. It reduces the imports—the feed imports—that come from elsewhere. So, I think there's some—. Looking at the business model, I think, is something that could happen as soon as possible.

And the work that Chris has done—certainly 40 upland farmers in the Yorkshire Dales, on all 40 of those farms he found the same thing: they'd gone beyond the point of optimum efficiency and they were operating within the red, because they were trying to keep too much livestock and then having to buy in feed and imports to maintain those stocking levels, which were then having a negative impact on the environment. So, I think that would be the first step—

I completely agree with you, Arfon; that's a complete no-brainer, as far as I understand it. We just need to ensure that farmers understand that, and they won't be wanting to chuck money at making themselves less economical. But it's what we need to do now, beyond that, because can we really be putting public money into allowing people to undermine the environment and the state of nature?

I think it's really important to think about what's going on inside a lot of farmers' heads. So, I work for Pori Natur a Threftadaeth, which a grazing organisation, and we do management of land for wildlife benefit, working always with farmers, and what can be really hard is they say, 'Well, I'm a farmer and I'm producing food—why do you want me to produce these other things?' And I think we need to get inside that mindset and explain how important the other things that we want to produce are—the reductions in ammonia and the sequestering of carbon. We need to make it really current and really appropriate that those things should be happening and when farmers are farming they're farming those things as well, because you've just got to get past that point, I think, to probably more like the older farmers. But even now, in colleges, they're very production focused, and not so much wildlife focused, in the agricultural qualifications. So, you need to get through that. And then the public money side—if it's going for public goods and outputs that benefit everybody, then, surely, that is justified.

15:15

I'd certainly reinforce what Arfon says. Definitely, we need a scheme that supports farmers making interventions, and there are certain no-brainer interventions that are positive all round, and, of course, I would say agroforestry—hedges and edges—is one of those that offers multiple benefits. And, please, can we find ways of making the changes soon, rather than in seven years' time? I don't know how that can best be done, but certainly one of the places to get to is saying more diversity, more options available for farmers to go beyond just the narrow commodity production.

If I could make a link between two areas of Welsh Government policy—the farming policy and the decarbonisation—one of the diversification options is for farming to contribute to the need to increase woodland cover, not just through agroforestry, but also by encouraging the natural spread of woodlands in the uplands, which is one of these nature-based processes that still needs managing and interventions, and particularly some continuation of grazing. So, it's very much an agricultural activity rather than a forestry activity, and needs to be supported as such. I think there are some easy wins out there if we can find a way of administrating them.

Okay. Within the easy wins, what about focusing on the work of the national parks and the areas of outstanding natural beauty? We make lots of concessions to these areas in terms of the way we approach planning, but we could all think of examples where these areas are not optimising the environmental benefits of the land that they're supposed to be looking after.

I think this comes down to providing the right scheme. I think this probably comes down to providing the right scheme, the right support, the right advice and the right guidance. Because, I think, up until now, we have had a very production-faced policy in the form of the CAP, with, almost, agri-environment being its poor cousin. Now, with the absolute right direction of travel towards public good for public money and investing in and promoting food efficiencies—you know, I think that is absolutely the right sort of thing to do.

So, something that we have—. In response to the simplification of the CAP agenda, we've said, 'Rather than just simplifying what we've got, let's take the opportunity now to prepare for the future as well'— so, what can we do now that will help with that transition, so we don't get to five or six years down the line and then start transitioning to a new policy; we actually start doing that hard work now. I think, as Hilary described there, just raising awareness of the value and importance of these sorts of things, how these things can be integrated—and they're often not a choice; it's not one or the other, it's often: how do you farm in a way that delivers these multiple benefits? I think the language is really important here, but I think what I would say is that the Nature Friendly Farming Network are an absolutely fantastic example of what success looks like. So, I think one of the things we could be doing now is highlighting what success looks like and using that to explain to the wider farming sector and community what sustainable land management—what it looks like and how a policy or support system can enable and promote that. I think that's a really key and important thing we can do now.

So, I think it's going to be—. From the farming community's point of view, it's hugely unsettling at the moment with Brexit—deal, no deal, what sort of trade deal, the budget, internal governance. Who knows what sort of operating framework farmers are going to be in in the next few months' time? But I think one thing we do know is that we need our land management to do a lot more than produce food. That food needs to be produced sustainably, but we need it to do an awful lot more. That's essential to society's well-being, and not just us, but future generations as well. We should be thinking about transition now and we should be thinking about how we get this messaging over. What can we do to make farming more efficient through just business advice, but also how do we prepare for sustainable farming, what sustainable farming looks like? So, the Nature Friendly Farming Network—I think they've got a really important role in this.

15:20

I want to bring Janet in. If we've got any time at the end, Jenny, I'll come back to you. But we really are—we're in the last quarter of an hour now. Janet.

Thanks, Chair. Hello, everybody. Really interesting, this, but I want to just touch on the food and forestry production. Given that NFU Cymru have previously told this committee that the natural environment should not be presented as something that should be protected from agricultural communities, and instead should be viewed as something to be conserved by farmers, can the panel clarify your concerns about whether you think these discussions have in fact excluded our key stakeholders, being our farmers? I know that NFUW have raised this concern with regard to the NRW green recovery taskforce. Do you accept that this scheme has been—there have been some problems around communication and possibly a positive message could have been lost, given the internal debates over the words 'rewilding' and 'wilding', and how food producers in the immediate term, how they prioritise concerns over volatile markets? I don't know who wants to go first.

I think the unions are more and more coming towards the environmental side of things now. There used to be a massive gulf between farming and conservation, and now that gulf is definitely narrowing, isn't it? I think there are NRW—what are they doing—area statement workshops going on at the moment over the next—well, over the last couple of weeks and over the next month, and the people on those, there are very few farmers able to speak on those. They're going on during the day, they've not particularly been promoted amongst the farming community, and farmers might think, 'Well, what have I got to say about that?' So, in PONT, we're making sure that we've got a voice in there, which is actually easier now that everything is online, because we couldn't—. We're a self-sustaining organisation; we didn't have the money to turn up at meetings, but we can go via Zoom. But, for farmers, they are busy, and they don't understand where their place is in these workshops, and I think the area statements are feeding into Welsh Government policy, aren't they, at a reasonably high level. So, you need to somehow recruit some farmers with a voice and make it worth their while to appear in these things and understand that they need representation.

I must say I think there's a fundamental point you make there about the concerns about the role, where does food production sit in the future. I think there was a question posed—I think it was probably circulated beforehand—about land sharing, land sparing. I think there's a danger that environment and food production are seen as two separate things, with a clear barrier between the two. That's not a vision, or that's not something that's kind of promoted or put forward by the environment sector, or any of the environment sector—certainly the Wales Environment Link network. And I think what is true is that there is probably a spectrum, when you look at—. There's the most productive land, where it makes sense to prioritise food production and do that—do it sustainably, but you'd certainly prioritise that—and then as you—. I'll choose my words carefully. I'm bound to upset somebody by saying this, but, as you move up the hill, and I use that just to demonstrate moving up a graph, as it were, but as you move away from those productive regions to the more marginal regions, then the opportunity for public goods delivery then increases. But it's public goods, typically, through using grazing as a key management tool, which then has food production inherent in that then. So, food production and sustainability and environmental outputs—they're there right across Wales. The level of either depends, I think, on location, and the capacity of the ground to be—. The most productive ground, as I say, is where we should prioritise food, provided it's done sustainably. And then, at the other end of the scale, you'd look at the other environmental outputs, typically through managing and restoring the habitats that are currently there, and connecting all the things we started with.

15:25

Just to say, to turn the question on its head, in a way, I really don't like the idea that wildlife lives in wildlife places, and food is produced in farmers' fields; it's not how it is. Just to turn it around completely, look at the network of sites of special scientific interest in Wales; they have got an amazing and astonishing diversity of wildlife within those holdings, and they're overwhelmingly farmed. This is farmland we're talking about. So, it's not the case that farming and wildlife can't be done together.

Okay. Well, I was going to touch, but you've already touched on how you can re-establish natural processes alongside conventional forms of land management, but what assessment have your organisations carried out about the economic impact of such rewilding schemes on our rural communities?

Can I jump in there with a hot-off-the-press piece of news? It's not rewilding as such; it's a piece of work that RSPB has just—it's almost finalised, so you're the first people to listen to this. I hope nobody else is watching this because, as I say, it's hot off the press. But we've done some work on nature-based solutions, and looking at the impact of restoring nature-based solutions at scale across the UK, and looking at the economic impact and also the jobs value—how many jobs restoring nature-based solutions would create. And we've looked at peatland, we've looked at salt marsh, and we've looked at woodland. And the top lines are, from an economic point of view, every pound invested in peatland secures £4.26 of benefit; salt marsh, every pound secures up to £2.48 worth of benefit in return, and woodlands—that's £2.79 worth of benefit in return. And those are the measurable economic benefits, which don't go into things like—. The report is very honest; it says there are things we can measure and there are things we can't measure—things like biodiversity value. It's got water, temperature regulation, noise mitigation—so, all of these things. There's lots of other values in there that these things deliver. You can't value them generally, but there are examples and case studies—local case studies—where you can value those things. The report also goes into the number of jobs this creates, and it looks at the initial restoration jobs and the ongoing management jobs. I won't go into all the details now, but it's looking at the, 'What are the social and economic benefits of investing in ecosystem restoration?' So, there are benefits there, and we're gathering the evidence to highlight that. As soon as that's signed off, I'll share it with the committee. 

Jest i adeiladu ar hynny, mae yna nifer fawr iawn o bobl, yn enwedig yn yr ardal yma o ganolbarth Cymru, lle mae eu hincwm nhw'n ddibynnol ar yr adnoddau naturiol, ac mae'r rhain yn ffermwyr, ond hefyd, yn lot fwy eang, yn cynnwys pysgotwyr, pobl sy'n rhedeg llefydd beiciau mynydd neu sesiynau syrffio neu badl-fyrddio. Mae lot fawr o bobl o fewn yr ardal yma'n ddibynnol ar yr adnoddau naturiol, heb sôn, wedyn, am y supply chain hyd yn oed o fewn y byd amaeth, a pha mor bell mae hynny'n mynd allan i mewn i'r gymuned. Ac mae hwnna'n rhywbeth y mae Iaith y Pridd wedi bod yn sbio ar: pwysigrwydd y Gymraeg o fewn y byd amaeth, a sut y gallwn ni, y tu allan i'r byd amaeth, ehangu ar hynny.

Ond i ddod yn ôl i'ch cwestiwn chi, Janet, o fewn prosiect O'r Mynydd i'r Môr—. Wrth gwrs, ar hyn o bryd, dŷn ni reit ar gychwyn y broses o gyd-ddylunio, felly o ran beth rydyn ni'n mynd i fonitro a gwerthuso, dŷn ni ddim yn gwybod eto achos dŷn ni ddim wedi'i ddylunio fo. Ond, fel rhan o'r cyllid sydd efo ni ar hyn o bryd, un o'n hamcanion ni yw i ddatblygu monitro a gwerthuso traws-sectoraidd i fewn i beth bynnag bydd y cynllun fydd yn dod allan o'r broses yma. Felly, mae'n reit bwysig ein bod ni'n gallu dangos sut dŷn ni'n gweld prosiect fel hyn—eto, nid prosiect ailwylltio, ond dŷn ni ddim yn gwybod beth fydd y prosiect yn edrych fel, heblaw am y prif bwrpas, sef i wneud yr ardal yma o Gymru'n well fyth i fywyd gwyllt ac i bobl, ac i'r economi lleol drwy hynny.

Just to build on that, there are a great number of people, particularly in this area of mid Wales, where their income is reliant on natural resources, and those are farmers, but, more broadly, they are fisher people and people who run mountain biking businesses or surfing or paddle boarding businesses. There are a lot of people in this area who are dependent on natural resources, let alone the supply chain within the agriculture sector, and how far that goes into the community. And that's something that Language of the Land has been looking at: the importance of the Welsh language within the agricultural sector, and how we, outside that sector, can expand on that.

But coming back to your question, Janet, within the Summit to Sea project—. Of course, at present, we're right at the outset of the co-design, so in terms of what we're going to monitor and evaluate, we don't know yet because we haven't designed it. But, as part of the funding that we have at present, one of the objectives is to develop monitoring and evaluation on a cross-sectoral basis in terms of whichever plan emanates from this process. So, it's very important that we can show how we see this project—not a rewilding project, but we don't know what the project will look like—aside from the main purpose, which is to make this area of Wales better for wildlife and for people, and for the local economy through that.

15:30

Just a quick anecdote, really. We wanted to bring cattle back into the uplands to graze some upland sites for us, but although it had been done traditionally in the past, it's not really something that's done very commonly now, and certainly not in that area. So, we had trouble to get people to come and help us do it, the farmers to come and manage the ground for us. What actually happened in the end was that we managed to get the cattle up, we managed to get the cattle grazing, doing a fantastic conservation job, and we then sold that meat to the membership of the wildlife trusts across Wales, and we sold it as a conservation project, as conservation quality, each with a story: 'value-added meat', that kind of stuff, and we got three times the price that we would have got if we'd have just carried—. So, we do know that you have to be careful and you have to be creative, and obviously all these things require a lot of local knowledge and details, but it's possible to make an economic argument for this stuff. 

We're in last four minutes, so I'll unfortunately cut Janet off, because I know she's got more questions, but I want to give each of you an opportunity for a minute or so—under a minute—to tell us anything you'd like us to know that we haven't asked you about, if there's anything. Do you want to go first, Arfon?

Yes, thank you, Chair. Just picking up on Siân's point about monitoring and measuring, something I wanted to say, I think, is, rewilding projects, we'll park those, but any intervention, any project, any initiative that's purpose is to secure genuine biodiversity enhancements, how we measure that is important. What we don't have—. It's clear there's a need for legally binding biodiversity targets in Wales, as across the UK. Recent reports have clearly shown that we've failed to deliver biodiversity gains; in fact, we're going in reverse in some places. So, looking to the future to ensure we avoid the same again. I think the commitment and the establishment of legally binding targets to hold Government to account, also milestones to evaluate progress towards those, I think, is something really important. So, again, in my plea to cross parties here, for commitments to manifestos, let's have something, perhaps, as a suggestion for manifesto commitments.

Thank you. Clive, is there anything you'd like to say?

Yes. Skip away from the concept of rewilding; it's unhelpful. Look at natural processes. Make sure that farmers are paid the proper price for what they produce and that the price of the product is the real true price. Make sure that farmers are paid to do something: active, proactive management. It's important that—. There's a lot of—. Ecosystem processes is all about actively getting involved and managing the land. That's crucial. And then ecosystem services; pay farmers for the ecosystem services that they provide. If you look at the mountains now, they produce a huge amount of ecosystem services. You'd think the amount of people that go up there and the enjoyment they get—farmers aren't paid for that currently. They should be. Farmers should be paid for ecosystem services.

Diolch yn fawr, Gadeirydd. Ie, dwi jest eisiau dweud ei fod e'n amser reit gyffrous i'r prosiect O'r Mynydd i'r Môr. Mae yna lot fawr o waith i'w wneud, a dŷn ni wedi cychwyn ar y gwaith yna. Mae'r gweithdy wedi cychwyn ar-lein. Mae dros 100 o bobl wedi cwblhau ein holiadur ni ar-lein. Dŷn ni wedi cael cyfarfodydd un-i-un efo dros 100 o bobl ers mis Mehefin, ac ar ddiwedd y mis ar y dydd Llun nesaf, 30 Tachwedd, dŷn ni'n cynnal cyfarfod cyswllt efo grŵp cyswllt o stakeholders lleol sydd â diddordeb yn y prosiect. Felly, dŷn ni'n symud yn reit sydyn drwy greu partneriaeth leol. Dŷn ni'n gyffrous am y cyfle yma i gyd-ddylunio gyda phobl. Dwi hefyd yn chwilio am fwy o ddylunwyr, fel y mae, sy'n byw yn yr ardal, i drefnu gweithdai gyda'u ffrindiau, teuluoedd neu grwpiau cymunedol, i fewnbynnu i'r broses yma. Dŷn ni'n hollol agored a dwi'n awyddus iawn i unrhyw un sydd â diddordeb yn yr ardal, neu'n bellach, tu hwnt, ar draws Cymru, sydd eisiau bod yn rhan o hyn a rhan o greu gweledigaeth gyffrous i natur a phobl yng nghanolbarth Cymru, i fynd i'n gwefan i ffeindio mwy o wybodaeth. Diolch am y cyfle i siarad â chi heddiw.

Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to say that it's an exciting time for the Summit to Sea project. There's a lot of work to be done, and we have started that work. The workshop has started online. More than 100 people have filled our questionnaire online. We've had one-on-one meetings with more than 100 people since June, and at the end of the month, on 30 November, we will be undertaking a link group with local stakeholders with an interest in the project. So, we are moving quite quickly through creating local partnerships. We're very excited about this opportunity to co-design with people. I'm also looking for more designers, as it were, who live in the area, who can organise workshops with friends, family or with their community groups, to have an input into this process. We're very open to that and I'm very eager that anyone with an interest in the area or beyond in Wales, who wants to be part of this and part of creating a vision that is exciting for nature and people in mid Wales, to visit our website to find out more information about that. Thank you very much for the opportunity to talk to you today.

15:35

Thank you. I think, doing things to encourage landscape diversity, management diversity and ownership diversity, the reason that we chose to focus on agroforestry, rather than, say, just on planting more woods, is that it hopefully deliberately cuts across sectors and creates a consensual space. It offers tangible benefits to farming in terms of livestock welfare and productivity and also the biodiversity benefits, which are relatively easy to monitor and measure and so it provides a framework for clear reasons for directing some public support to farming. So, it's hopefully providing that opportunity for a consensus.

I'd just like to say thanks for having me here today. The well-being of future generations Act and the environment Wales Act are both good Acts that have got a lot of really useful stuff in that could be applied to the future farming scheme and you need to look at that and then talk to representatives that you've got here and other farmers and stuff about your future planning.

Thank you. Siân, do you want to come back in again?

Ie, sori, jest un peth sydyn iawn. Roeddwn i eisiau codi ymwybyddiaeth a llongyfarch y tîm y tu ôl i'r gynhadledd Gwir Fwyd a Ffermio Cymru, sydd wedi bod yn digwydd drwy'r wythnos yma. Maen nhw wedi cynnal trafodaeth hynod o eang, hynod o amrywiol, sydd wedi bod yn llwyddiannus iawn yn camu'n agosach at ddyfodol o gydweithio efo'n gilydd. 

Yes, sorry, just one very quick thing. I wanted to raise awareness and congratulate the team behind the Wales Real Food and Farming conference that's been happening this week. They've had a very broad-ranging discussion and a very diverse discussion, which has been very successful in stepping closer towards a future of collaboration.

Okay. Can I thank you all for coming along? It's been very helpful and I think it really has taken the knowledge—certainly of me and hopefully, some of my colleagues as well—a lot further forward. It's been very useful. Thank you all very much. We'll meet back again in three minutes.

Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 15:37 ac 15:41.

The meeting adjourned between 15:37 and 15:41.

15:40
4. Bioamrywiaeth ac Ailwylltio: Sesiwn dystiolaeth 2 - Pwyllgor COPA (Cymunedau Oll Pumlumon a'r Ardal)
4. Biodiversity and Rewilding: Evidence session 2: COPA (Cymunedau Oll Pumlumon a'r Ardal) Committee

Can I welcome Councillor Elwyn Vaughan and Dafydd Morris Jones, who are from the COPA committee to a meeting of the Climate Change, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee? Croeso. You've just discovered the committee is bilingual, my Welsh is nowhere near good enough to ask questions at this level in it, but if I can ask my first question yn Saesneg, how do you see the future of nature recovery in Wales?

Well, obviously, nature recovery is key to moving forward post CAP. The question is the integration between nature recovery and the wider land use and agriculture sector, but we do have a vast amount of experience with this in Wales, and what we need to do is learn lessons, actually, from good work that has happened in national parks, areas of outstanding natural beauty, et cetera, rather than think that everything has to be new, fresh and reinventing the wheel.

Dyna ni. Sori, roeddwn i'n aros am y prompt i'm dad-fudo fi. Jest eisiau gofyn ydw i, yn amlwg mae COPA wedi dod i bob pwrpas o ymateb lleol i'r gwaith O'r Mynydd i'r Môr, a dwi jest eisiau holi beth ŷch chi'n teimlo yw rhai o'r gwersi sydd wedi cael eu dysgu o'r project O'r Mynydd i'r Môr hyd yma.

Sorry, I was waiting for the prompt to unmute myself. I just wanted to ask, evidently COPA has come from a local response to the Summit to Sea work, and I just wanted to ask you what are some of the lessons that have been learned from the Summit to Sea project so far.

Wel, yn amlwg, mae yna nifer o wersi. Y wers amlwg gyntaf ydy sut i beidio â gwneud rhywbeth, yn hynny o beth. Hynny yw, dŷch chi ddim yn mynd i mewn i ardal ac yn pregethu wrth bobl beth ddylen nhw ei wneud. Os dŷch chi eisiau i unrhyw gynllun lwyddo, mae'n rhaid iddo gael ei wreiddio yn y gymuned leol. Mae'n rhaid ichi gael perchnogaeth leol, mae'n rhaid i broject o ba bynnag fath dyfu o'r gymuned ac mae'n llawer iawn mwy tebygol o lwyddo wedyn. Ond os dŷch chi'n cael sefyllfa sydd yn creu'r argraff yn gam neu'n gymwys o bobl gefnog a chyfoethog a chwmnïau rhyngwladol o dde Lloegr a thu hwnt yn dod i mewn i ddweud wrth ffermwyr cefn gwlad Cymru beth maen nhw'n cael ei wneud, wel, dŷch chi'n mynd i gael ymateb negyddol, mae'n ddrwg gennyf i. Dyna ydy'r wers a'r gri gennyf i: sicrhewch berchnogaeth leol.

Evidently, there are a number of lessons. The first obvious lesson is how not to do something, in that sense. That is, you don't go into an area and preach to people about what they should do. If you want any scheme to succeed, it has to be embedded in the local community and you have to have local ownership. A project of whatever kind has to grow from the community, and it's much more likely to succeed if that happens. But if you have a situation where you have an impression, rightly or wrongly, of wealthy people and international companies from the south of England and beyond coming in to tell farmers in rural Wales what they're allowed to do, well, you're going to have a negative response. I think that's the first lesson from me: ensure local ownership.

Oes modd i fi ddod i mewn ar hwnna hefyd? Lyfli. Dwi'n credu bod y Cynghorydd Vaughan yn berffaith gywir o safbwynt perchnogaeth leol. Dwi'n credu ei fod hi hefyd yn wers bwysig iawn o safbwynt pa mor niweidiol yw'r naratif ailwylltio, oherwydd yn anffodus mae e'n golygu bod yna lu o anghenion a barn gwahanol yn dod i bwyso ar unrhyw dirwedd lle mae'r naratif yna'n cael ei roi. Mae mudiadau, yn anffodus, fel Rewilding Britain yn gwneud hynny'n waeth, ddim yn well. Dwi'n credu un o'r gwersi mawr ŷn ni wedi gweld yn lleol yw bod ymadawiad Rewilding Britain ac ymadawiad y naratif niweidiol yna wedi galluogi trafodaethau llawer mwy cyfoethog, llawer mwy deallus, i esblygu, sydd wedyn wedi ein galluogi ni i symud ymlaen i fan lle mae'r drafodaeth yn llawer mwy aeddfed na'r un a gafodd ei chychwyn. Y wers ar sail hynny oedd bod yna ddigon o wybodaeth a gallu yn lleol yn barod i ni fedru pennu ein hamcanion ein hunain, ac yn anffodus, pan ffurfiwyd y project neilltuol yna, daethpwyd mewn â chamddealltwriaeth am safon a natur y dirwedd yn lleol, ond hefyd daethpwyd mewn â diffyg unrhyw ddealltwriaeth fanwl a oedd yn berthnasol yn lleol, a dyna le oedd y gwrthdaro. Roedd y bobl leol efo mwy o wybodaeth nag oedd llawer o bartneriaid craidd y project, yn enwedig Rewilding Britain.

Can I come in on that as well? I think that Councillor Vaughan is perfectly right in terms of local ownership. I think it's also a very important lesson in terms of how damaging the rewilding narrative is, because, unfortunately, it means a whole host of needs and different viewpoints are putting pressure on any landscape where that narrative is given. Unfortunately, organisations such as Rewilding Britain are making that worse, not better. I think that one of the big lessons we've seen locally is that the departure of Rewilding Britain and the departure of that damaging narrative has enabled much richer, much more intelligent conversations, to evolve, which has allowed us to move forward to a place where the discussion is much more mature than the one that was started. The lesson on that basis was that there was enough information and ability locally for us to be able to set our own objectives, and unfortunately, when the project was formed, they brought in a misunderstanding about the quality and nature of the local landscape, but they also brought in a lack of any detailed understanding of the local situation, so that's where the conflict was. Local people had more information than a lot of the core partners of the project had, particularly Rewilding Britain.

15:45

Ie, mae hynny'n ddiddorol iawn. Ond i ba raddau hefyd mae gwahanol ganfyddiad pobl o beth mae 'ailwylltio' yn ei feddwl wedi arwain at rai o'r problemau yma?

Yes, and that's very interesting. But to what extent have different perceptions that people have in terms of 'rewilding' led to this situation?

Wel, does dim diffiniad, felly mae pob canfyddiad yn gywir, a dyna'r broblem. Mae e braidd fel 'Brexit means Brexit', onid yw e? Dyna yw'r drafferth. Mae e'n golygu bod pob canfyddiad, pa bynnag mor wyllt yw e, neu ba bynnag mor synhwyrol yw e, yr un mor gymwys, a dyna pam mae wedi bod mor broblematig.

Well, there's no definition, so every perception is correct, and that's the problem. It's a bit like 'Brexit means Brexit', isn't it? That's the problem. It means that every perception, however wild it is, or however sensible it is, is just as applicable, and that's why it's such a problem.

Ie, os caf i ddweud, y wers amlwg ydy, 'Peidiwch â chyffwrdd â'r term "ailwylltio"', achos cyn gynted ag yr ydych chi'n defnyddio'r term hwnnw, mae pob sgwarnog dan haul yn codi ac mae'n siŵr o danseilio unrhyw broject, pa bynnag mor dda ydy amcan y project hwnnw.

Yes, if I could come in, the evident lesson is, 'Don't touch the term "rewilding"', because as soon as you use that term, every hare is set running and it's sure to undermine any project, however good the objectives of the project are.

Diolch. So, jest i grynhoi'r cyfeiriadau penodol yma at O'r Mynydd i'r Môr, allwch chi sôn, efallai, nawr am y lefel o gysylltiad sydd yna? Achos dwi'n gwybod bod yna newid wedi bod mewn pwyslais, mae yna estyn allan wedi digwydd, ac efallai gallwch chi jest grynhoi ychydig lle mae'r berthynas yna arni ar lefel ymarferol erbyn hyn.

Thank you. So, just to summarise these references to Summit to Sea, could you talk about the level of engagement there's been? Because I know there's been a change of emphasis, there's been some reaching out, but could you just summarise how that relationship lies in terms of a practical level?

Wel, ar lefel ymarferol, mae'n llawer mwy positif. Dwi'n credu eu bod nhw'n lwcus iawn o'r swyddog sydd gyda nhw, Siân Stacey, a'r ffaith bod ganddi hi brofiad o fod wedi gweithio ar Ynys Enlli ac efo Menter a Busnes. Felly, mae hi'n deall cefn gwlad Cymru, ac yn deall y gymuned amaethyddol a siaradwyr Cymraeg, ac ati. Felly, ar y lefel hynny, mae'n llawer mwy positif, mae yna ddeialog cyson, a rhannu syniadau a dogfennau. Felly, beth fyddem ni'n gobeithio yw adeiladu ar hynny, a bod hynny yn esgor wedyn ar rywbeth lle mae yna berchnogaeth leol.

Well, on a practical level, it's much more positive. I think they're very lucky in the officer that they have, Siân Stacey, and the fact that she has experience of having worked on Bardsey and with Menter a Busnes. So, she understands rural Wales, and understands the agriculture community and Welsh speakers, and so forth. Therefore, on that level, it's much more positive and there is a consistent dialogue and the sharing of ideas and documents. So, we would hope to build on that, and that that will lead to something where there is local ownership.

Ie, byddwn i'n atgyfnerthu hwnna, yn sicr. Mae'r tryloywder wedi cynyddu, nid o radd—mae wedi cynyddu o ddim byd o gwbl i fod yn eithriadol o dda, mewn tegwch i'r project. Dwi'n credu beth ddaeth yn gwbl amlwg pan ryddhawyd dogfennau gwreiddiol y project dan arweiniad Rewilding Britain oedd pa mor bell oedd hynny o beth oedd ei wir angen ac o beth oedd pobl yn tybio oedd y project hynny. Mae'r ffaith bod hynny wedi nawr bod mor dryloyw ar ôl eu hymadawiad nhw wedi ein galluogi ni i gynnal trafodaeth sy'n edrych yn wirioneddol fel ei bod hi'n symud i'r cyfeiriad cywir.

Ond dwi eisiau ychwanegu at hwnna, mae'n ddyddiau cynnar a does dim dweud beth yw'r project ar hyn o bryd, oherwydd ei fod e'n dal yn cael ei ddylunio, a mater, dwi'n credu, o ailadeiladu ffydd yw e nawr, oherwydd collwyd y ffydd yna yn go ddifrifol ryw flwyddyn yn ôl. Ar hyn o bryd, maen nhw'n gwneud yn ardderchog ar hynny.

Yes, I would reinforce that, certainly. The transparency has increased, not by a degree—it has increased from nothing to being exceptionally good, in fairness to the project. I think what became evident with the release of the original documents of the project under the leadership of Rewilding Britain was how far that was from what was really needed and from what people thought that project was. The fact that that has been so transparent after their departure has allowed us to have a discussion that looks like it's genuinely moving in the right direction.

I wanted to add that, it's early days and there's no telling what the project is at the moment, because it still is being designed, and it's an issue, I believe, of rebuilding trust now, because that loss of trust was quite severe about a year ago. But, at present, they're doing very well on that.

Mae hynny'n galonogol. Diolch, Gadeirydd.

That's very encouraging. Thank you very much, Chair.

Hi. I didn't realise that I hadn't put my camera on. I was here, and then I suddenly realised I didn't have my camera on.

Anyway, in terms of moving on, as you say there is no doubt that there was a lot of mistrust of people, but I think what there is a considered opinion on is that the environment is critically important to all of us, whether we're managing or farming the land or whether we're not. There's no doubt about that, and opinion has changed and focused positively, I would say, in that regard.

So, with that in mind, and I think we can all agree, because you're certainly nodding in agreement with it: how are we going to engage everybody? It doesn't really matter about the term, it's the understanding of the term, and 'biodiversity enrichment', I suppose, everybody understands, whoever you are. And we've got to be talking about land and sea, because I'd always do that, so how do you see us going forward as a collective? And when I say 'us', us as politicians as well as everybody who's engaged in the land, and moving forward, because we heard from the previous NGOs, the panel, that we really do need now to declare an environmental emergency.

15:50

Mi fyddwn i yn dweud yn y lle cyntaf bod yn rhaid inni beidio dibrisio’r ddealltwriaeth sydd eisoes yn bodoli gan y gymuned amaethyddol. Mae yna nifer o esiamplau, fel gwnes i gyffwrdd o'r blaen, o le mae'r gymuned amaethyddol wedi gweithio yn agos iawn, iawn, dwi'n gwybod, efo Parc Cenedlaethol Eryri, er enghraifft, ar bethau fel Tir Cymen, Tir Gofal, ac ati, sydd yn esiamplau o ymarfer da, ond sydd hefyd yn dangos beth sy'n bosibl. Dwi'n meddwl hefyd ei bod hi'n bwysig cofio pan fydd pobl yn sôn am reoli stocio ac angen newid o ran defnydd tir fod yna eisoes, dros y 10 a 15 mlynedd diwethaf, newid chwyldroadol wedi bod yn y defnydd tir. Mae lefelau stocio, er enghraifft, ar Bumlumon yn sylweddol yn llai na beth oedden nhw ddegawd yn ôl, ac felly mae angen cofio hynny. Mae hynny hefyd yn gallu cael sgil-effeithiau negyddol, achos mewn rhai llefydd, o ganlyniad, dydych chi ddim yn cael digon o stocio, a dim digon o bori, ac rydych chi'n gallu cael molinia ac yn y blaen yn cymryd drosodd. Felly, gwneud y mwyaf o'r sgiliau naturiol sydd eisoes yn bodoli ydy'r allwedd, a thrin pobl fel eu bod nhw'n gyfartal; yn lle ein bod ni'n cael sefyllfa lle mae arbenigwyr honedig yn dod mewn a dweud wrth bobl, deall bod yna gapasiti, gwybodaeth a sgiliau eisoes yn bodoli a gwneud y mwyaf ohonyn nhw.

I would say in the first place that we shouldn't undervalue the understanding that already exists in the agricultural community. I think there are a number of examples, as I touched upon previously, of where the agricultural community has worked very closely with the Snowdonia National Park, for example, on things like Tir Cymen, Tir Gofal, and so forth, which are examples of good practice, but also show what's possible. I also think it's important to remember, when people talk about managing stocking and the need to change land use, and so forth, that in the last 10 or 15 years there's been a revolutionary change in land use. The stocking levels, for example, on Plynlimon are significantly less than they were a decade ago, and so we need to remember that. That can also have negative implications, because in some places, as a result of that, you don't have enough stock, and not enough grazing, and you can have molinia and so forth taking over. So, making the most of the natural skills that already exist is key, and treating people as though they are equals; rather than having alleged experts coming in and telling people, understanding that there is capacity and information and skills that already exist and making the most of them.

I ateb y cwestiwn yn uniongyrchol, dwi'n credu yn gyntaf oll, os ŷn ni'n mynd i gymryd unrhyw gam tuag at ddatgan bod yna argyfwng bioamrywiaeth neu natur, mae'n rhaid i ni ddeall lle ŷn ni ar hyn o bryd. Mae'n rhaid i ni sylweddoli bod lot o'r data rŷn ni'n defnyddio ar gyfer creu'r datganiad yna yn seiliedig ar astudiaethau sydd, erbyn hyn, yn rhyw 20 i 30 mlwydd oed. Os ŷch chi'n edrych ar yr adroddiad 'Cyflwr Natur', un o'r datganiadau yn yr adroddiad yna yw 'one of the habitats we know least about is the uplands,' oherwydd does yna ddim digon o ddata craidd yn dangos gwir gyflwr y cynefinoedd sydd gennym ni heddiw. Ac fel dywedodd y Cynghorydd Vaughan, rŷn ni wedi gweld newid chwyldroadol yn stocio'r ucheldir dros 30 mlynedd, mewn gwirionedd, ers i ni ddatgyplysu cynhyrchiant a thaliadau ffermydd, ac iddyn nhw newid i daliadau sy'n seiliedig ar ardal. Yn enwedig i ffermwyr yr ucheldir—ac mae hyn yn rhywbeth sy'n cael ei golli yn gyfan gwbl yn adroddiad Chris Clark, 'Less is more', y gwnaeth Arfon Williams gyfeirio ato—os ŷch chi'n edrych ar diroedd wir ucheldirol ein ffermydd ni, maen nhw bron a bod yn gwbl ddi-stoc, ac mae ardaloedd mawr iawn felly am gyfnod hir iawn o'r flwyddyn. Mae hynny wedi creu dwysedd ychwanegol yn rhai o'r caeau ac ar beth o'r tir lawr, ond mae'n rhaid i chi'n wirioneddol fynd i'r afael â'r data ar lefel fferm, ac ar lefel leol, er mwyn deall lle ŷn ni nawr. Dwi ddim yn credu ein bod ni'n unman yn agos at hynny, a dwi'n credu bod hynny wrth wraidd rhai o'r problemau efo canfyddiadau Rewilding Britain a Summit to Sea: dyw'r lefel o ddeallusrwydd yna yn y data ddim yn bodoli ar hyn o bryd, ac mae angen i ni fod yn llawer mwy craff yn y modd rŷn ni'n casglu data, a sut rŷn ni wedyn yn ei ddefnyddio fe.

To answer the question directly, I think first of all, if we're going to take any steps towards declaring that there is a biodiversity or nature emergency, we have to understand where we are at the moment. We have to realise that a lot of the data that we are using to create that statement is based on studies that are, by now, 20 or 30 years old. If you look at the 'State of Nature' report, one of the statements in that report is that, 'one of the habitats we know least about is the uplands,' because there's not enough core data to show the true state of the habitats that we have today. As Councillor Vaughan said, we've seen revolutionary change in the stocking of the uplands over a period of 30 years, since we decoupled productivity and farm payments, with the change to area payments. Particularly for upland farmers—and this is something that's been missed completely in the report by Chris Clark, 'Less is more', which Arfon Williams referred to—if you look at the genuinely upland areas of our farms, they have almost no stock, and there are very large areas like that for a significant portion of the year. That has created additional density in some of the fields and some of the lowland areas, but we have to properly tackle data at a farm level, and at a local level, in order to understand where we are now. I don't think that we're anywhere close to that, and I think that that's at the heart of some of the problems with Rewilding Britain and Summit to Sea's perceptions: the level of understanding of the data doesn't exist at present, and we have to be much more careful in the way that we gather data, and how we then use it.

Thank you. I'm finding your evidence really interesting. I'm nodding all the time.

Right. The impact of rewilding on rural and coastal communities. Your group has been quoted as saying that the Welsh landscape is

'an active example of a "cultural landscape", the product of the coevolution between human activity and the forces of nature',

but you've raised concerns about placing landscapes on a rewilding continuum that you think would reduce activity in the long term, thereby risking jobs and the rural economy. So could you explain what assessment your group has been able to make of the potential impacts of the current projects being considered on the rural economy? Your evidence paper, BR 01, also raises concerns about project transparency, so do you think enough is being done to convey project aims to our local stakeholders and rural communities given such a stark warning from you?

Dafydd, wyt ti eisiau—?

No recording is available of the interpretation. Therefore, a translation has been provided.

Dafydd, do you want to—?

Ie. I ddweud y gwir, 'na'. Gyda'r projects hyn, na, doedd dim ymdrech o gwbl—

No recording is available of the interpretation. Therefore, a translation has been provided.

Yes. To be honest, 'no'. With these projects, no, there was no effort at all—

15:55

I'll answer in English; it's not a problem. With this particular project, there was no attempt whatsoever to convey any of that—and I think we need to be very clear about that—when it was originally launched, and I think that's partially because of the nature of the funding and the nature of wanting a flagship project. But, no, there was no attempt to communicate that. In terms of your wider question about the effects on the economy, we need to recognise that, in this part of Wales, some 27 per cent of direct employment is agricultural—

When you add that to the multiplier effect in the rural economy—your agricultural supply chains, also the service sector that provides agriculture with services, everyone from accountants, solicitors, vets, feed suppliers, lorry drivers, feed merchants, fodder providers, seed merchants, agronomists—you've got a very, very wide sector here in Wales. I would conservatively suggest that just about under half of every household in this area is financially dependent on the agricultural sector. And placing us on that rewilding trajectory, which, if you remember the graph that I included in my evidence, it shows management intensity on the y axis and it then shows area on the x axis, with rewilding being the bottom right-hand corner, an area of least management intensity over the largest possible area, that, to me, suggests no activity, and when you get to that point of no activity, you're basically paying landowners to own land. And I don't think we should be looking at that at all. I think that active and productive land management is something that has multiple benefits for rural areas. I think that placing it on a rewilding spectrum basically sets us on a trajectory for our removal from the landscape, where we become entirely dependent on the tourism sector with marginal benefits in a relatively low-wage sector, which is particularly seasonal and variable.

Thank you, diolch. Given that a long-term grazing experiment in the Scottish highlands found that graze diversification had a positive impact on some species' diversity, and that in Japan, where 2,700 km of rice fields have been abandoned, ecologists have witnessed a steady decline of insects and, indeed, an increase of invasive vines, can you outline to our committee your concerns about the recent contraction in certain agricultural activities? And what assessment, again, has your group been able to make of what impact this contraction, especially on our uplands, could have on the local biodiversity?

I'll come back on that straightaway. To us, locally, if you look at any picture taken of the Cambrian plateau, for example, from Drygarn Fawr looking northwards towards Pumlumon—it takes the vast area of that plateau—it looks disturbingly beige. And the reason for that, realistically, is the growth in rank grass, in molinia, over areas that have been substantially destocked, beginning from the Birmingham Water Authority's taking of the Elan Valley in order to provide water, and the reduction in hill flocks there. We need to recognise that sheep grazing with hill sheep reduces that rank grass, if done in a way that is in line with, not just conservation grazing, but with traditional grazing patterns, with hefted flocks, with active shepherding and with appropriate stocking numbers. Otherwise, what you get is a pattern, and we recognise this on members' farms, my own included, where stock avoid the coarse grasses, because there isn't enough stocking density and stock competition to make them graze them, and they over graze the margins, the track sides, the wall sides, quarry edges, places that they can get to easily without having to walk through foliage that's taller than a sheep's leg. To some extent, diversified grazing helps with that, because if you get cattle in, they've got longer legs, they can get to the coarser grass, and they'll also eat it because of the nature of their palate, at a point that is beyond where sheep will be capable of grazing it, so they'll be able to do it later in the season. But all of that means that, in reality, the massive reductions in grazing we've seen on the plateau and the grazing increases we've seen down country, which is the subsequent result of that, have definitely created what is, in essence, a molinia monoculture in many areas.

This has to be your last question, Janet, because I have to go on to Jenny. 

Your evidence paper uses the term 'barrier', when you discuss the Glastir woodland grant, and points towards unrealised potential. In terms of land management, could you provide the committee with your thoughts on how the Welsh Government should better encourage growth in tree-covered land services? And with regard to mid Wales, are you able to point towards examples where such tree coverings have added to the turnover and, indeed, some economic contribution of the land?

16:00

Diolch. Ydych chi'n gallu fy nghlywed i nawr yn y Saesneg? Yw'r cyfieithiad yn gweithio, neu ydych chi'n dal i fy nghlywed i yn Gymraeg?

Thank you. Can you hear me now? Is the interpretation working? You should be able to hear the interpretation.

Yes. For some reason now this is clicking off, but I've clicked it back on again.

Ardderchog. Dwi'n credu, wrth siarad gyda Coed Cymru—ac mi fyddai'r rheini yn rhoi tystiolaeth ardderchog ar eich cyfer chi petasech chi eisiau gofyn i rywun arall am dystiolaeth—mae yna, ar hyn o bryd, mwy o goetiroedd posib ar eu llyfrau nhw na maen nhw'n medru ymdopi gyda nhw. Un o'r rhwystrau i'r rheini yw'r ffaith bod y woodland opportunities mapping sydd ar gael yn rhwystro plannu coed ar gynefinoedd sydd mewn gwirionedd yn gynefinoedd gymharol ddiwerth a chymharol ddi-nod—cyrion asidig o gaeau a fu unwaith yn rhan o Tir Gofal neu Tir Cynnal, pethau sydd heb fawr o werth bioamrywiaeth. Beth fyddai'n helpu gyda hynny yw petasem ni'n medru cael asesiadau bioamrywiaeth ar y ddaear, go iawn, i asesu cyflwr y cynefinoedd yma fel ein bod ni wedyn yn medru uwchraddio eu cyflwr nhw wrth blannu coed yna.

Ar hyn o bryd, rŷn ni bron a bod yn tybio bod unrhyw beth sy'n cael ei gymryd yn gynefin yn gynefin sy'n werth ei gadw, ac felly dylai fe ddim gael ei uwchraddio na'i blannu arno. Dyw hynny, yn sicr, ddim yn wir, ac mae yna ddigon o le ar gyfer lleiniau ochr afon ac ar gyfer ehangu ffiniau ffermydd. Er enghraifft, dyw Glastir, ar hyn o bryd, ddim yn darparu unrhyw waith ar ffin fferm. Felly, mae e'n darparu ar gyfer ffiniau oddi mewn i fferm—ffiniau caeau—ond dyw e ddim yn darparu ar gyfer y ffin rhwng y fferm hon a'r fferm nesaf. Mae hynny yn fwlch enfawr. Felly byddai jest y ddau beth yna—. A mynd i'r afael efo'r ffaith bod y Ddeddf coetiroedd yn golygu, unwaith bod tir dan goetir, bod gyda chi byth yr hawl i'w droi e nôl yn dir pori eto. Mae hynny'n rhwystr enfawr, yn enwedig pan mae mapiau cyfle coetir yn amlinellu, ar gyfer nifer o ffermydd, mai plannu ar eu tir gorau nhw sydd angen iddyn nhw ei wneud. Dŷn nhw ddim yn mynd i'w golli fe am byth, ond efallai ar gyfer un cylched byddai fe'n werth ei wneud. Byddai tynnu'r argymhelliad yna allan o'r Ddeddf coetiroedd yn gwneud lot o wahaniaeth.

Excellent. I do believe, in speaking to Coed Cymru—they would give excellent evidence to you if you want to ask them for that evidence—that at the moment, there are more potential woodlands on their books than they can currently cope with. One of the barriers for that is that the opportunities mapping that is available prevents us from planting trees on habitats that are relatively worthless habitats—acidic borderlines of fields that were once part of Tir Gofal and that don't have a great deal of value in biodiversity terms. What would help is if we were to have assessments on the ground of biodiversity to assess the state of these habitats so that we can uprate their value by planting trees on then.

At the moment, we assume that anything that is taken as being a habitat is a habitat that should be kept and that it shouldn't be planted on. That certainly isn't true. There is plenty of space for riverside plots and for expanding farmland. For example, Glastir, at the moment, doesn't provide any work on the outskirts of a farm. So, it provides for borders within farms—field borders and so on—but not the border between one farm and another. So, that is a huge issue to cover. And getting to grips with those—. And the fact that the woodland legislation means that once land is under cover you can't turn it back into grazing land. That's a huge barrier, especially then in terms of the opportunities for woodlands. So, if they plant land, then farms should know they won't lose that land forever from grazing; it would only be for one cycle. Removing that recommendation from the woodland legislation would make a big difference. 

Thank you very much. In the context of this country leaving the single market within the next few months, I just wondered if you could tell us how you think having more nature-focused farming is going to impact on both food and forestry production in mid Wales. Do you think these are risks or opportunities?

Well, there are always risks and huge unknows, as we're all well aware at the moment, so we've got to take that. And that's not a political point—that's a fact. In terms of food production, we have to focus more, obviously, on local supply chains and on adding value locally. There's one clear example in mid Wales, for instance, now. Even with beef production, as we are, there is no slaughterhouse in mid Wales to add value. You have to go to ABP in Shrewsbury or down to St Merryn in Merthyr. That is one clear, simple example, even as things stand at the moment.

Obviously, if we're talking about nature-based farming then—however you define that, and that's another conversation, I think—obviously, adding value to whatever the product is is key. And there's nothing new about that—that's what was happening 50 or 60 years ago in many of these communities anyway. But, over the years, what has happened is the processing plants, the adding-value plants—the slaughterhouses et cetera—have all moved further and further away, and what is key is that we get more of those resources locally if we can.

I'd add to that that it's not just food processing. If you look, for example, at the transportation of wool as one of the primary crops from uplands in the UK, the fact we don't have a wool washery in Wales and it all gets washed in Dewsbury and then gets transported back again, when wool is three times its weight and volume unwashed as it is after it's been washed, is quite ridiculous. And Newtown lends itself brilliantly for that, because we store most of our wool there anyway. So, looking at local supply chains is essential.

Considering the uptake of agri-environment schemes in upland Wales, which is, obviously, where we're talking about, I'd question just how far from a nature-based agriculture we are at the moment, because I would suggest that, as a fag-packet calculation, in the farms in the Cambrian mountains area, you're talking about upwards of 65 per cent already committed to substantial agri-environment schemes, with up to 90 per cent undertaking one agri-environment prescription. And in that sense, I don't think you're talking transformative change; you're talking about building on good practice that's already happening.

16:05

Quite a lot of upland farmers are managing to earn a living with the subsidies provided by the CAP, but it really is only managing to earn a living, and sometimes working very, very long hours, and a lot of the younger generation don't particularly want to do those hours. So, I think it's about finding a way of enhancing value for, if you like, marginal farms, I think they're often called, without undermining the environment. Do you see that a lot of what some of these voluntary organisations are suggesting are potential ways of increasing value?

Can I just say—? Putting my Powys councillor hat on, and as one who sits on planning, there are two things happening in Powys: obviously, the famous chicken sheds is one angle that's happening—we won't go after that one—but the other one is there's a huge amount of farms going into chalets, pods, whatever type of accommodation you want to call it. Those are two aspects you've seen as a response to the challenges people face in looking for new income streams, basically, at the moment. Obviously, some of them, especially accommodation-wise, will see a benefit using the landscape and nature as a selling point, so there's that aspect, which is key, but that's the reality on the ground at the moment, I would say.

I would also challenge the idea that young people don't want to put in the hours and aren't interested in that type of farming. I came into farming having been to university and been offered a decent job in a city, and I came home, because I enjoy the long hours and the work that we do, and there are many of my generation that do. I would suggest that it's more about access to affordable housing, access to the ability to run two jobs at once, because diversified income streams have been part of upland agriculture since we were basically run as extensions of the monasteries. Working in the lead mines was a good pastime in mid Wales for most of the winter months for most farmers' sons up until they closed in 1926. So, I think that perception that younger people aren't entering the industry is a stereotype that isn't necessarily borne out. I think there are other barriers to young people inhabiting our rural areas.

Okay. That's a conversation we'll probably need to have another day. I completely hear what you're saying. But I think, because we haven't got very long—I wonder if you could just tell us if you think these nature-based solutions to improving nature in Wales could be implemented through the Welsh Government's future land management proposals, and if so, how you'd like to see that happen. 

I think in reality, any landscape solution, be it nature based or be it productivity based, needs to be linked to the active involvement of people in landscapes, and I think this is where we need to differentiate between landowners and farmers and land users. My concern with rewilding as a topic is that it prioritises landowners for inactive land use. So, I think that we need to be looking for active solutions that provide people with real agency and with a real income that's derived from that agency in the land. I think it needs to have a productive base, because otherwise, you're entirely dependent on public funds, or private funds, to pay you to do good things, but for which there is no multiplier. And that's then what allows it to cascade into the wider economy. Having that productive economy as the foundation of your future policy is what allows for the multiplier to exist. It's recognising agriculture as a primary sector and the way in which subsidies in primary sectors operate as economic multipliers that's important there, providing a foundation for everything that's built on it. Does that make sense?

That makes absolute sense. Thank you very much for that point. Councillor Vaughan, is there anything you want to add to that?

The only thing I would say is that, in looking forward, we accept that farmers and farming are still key and the cornerstone of our rural communities. I think once we accept that, and accept that they have an integral and important role to play in enhancing the biodiversity of the landscape, that's a good starting point and principle.

16:10

And this is a good finishing point. Can I just thank you, both, for coming along? I keep on saying 'coming along' as if we're meeting in Cardiff, but obviously we're not. We've saved you a journey down from Pumlumon to Caerdydd. So, that's probably been advantageous, but thank you very much for coming along. I've certainly found your evidence very helpful; I'm sure my colleagues have. So, thank you very much.

5. Papurau i'w nodi
5. Paper(s) to note

Can I now move to the committee that we accept and note the biodiversity and rewilding evidence paper from the Farmers Union of Wales?

6. Cynnig o dan Reol Sefydlog 17.42 (vi) a (ix) i benderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y cyfarfod
6. Motion under Standing Order 17.42 (vi) and (ix) to resolve to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting

Cynnig:

bod y pwyllgor yn penderfynu gwahardd y cyhoedd o weddill y cyfarfod yn unol â Rheol Sefydlog 17.42(vi) ac (ix).

Motion:

that the committee resolves to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 17.42(vi) and (ix).

Cynigiwyd y cynnig.

Motion moved.

And then can I move the motion under Standing Order 17.42(vi) and (ix) to resolve to exclude the public from the remainder of the meeting?

Derbyniwyd y cynnig.

Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 16:10.

Motion agreed.

The public part of the meeting ended at 16:10.