The following concerns have been raised with the local Forestry and Land Scotland team,
overseeing the planned changes to the wood.

It is our understanding that FLS would like to seek an amendment to clear and replant in 2025 all of the remaining land scheduled for clear-felling, including areas not scheduled for felling until the late 2030s. This is basically the whole forest, except the small area of broadleaf wood to the NE on the other side of the road from the Curling Ponds, around and beyond the picnic area and bridge.
FLS’s ambition is to replant with native broadleaved species this year and be off site by January 2026.

The main concerns raised with FLS by the Initiating Group are listed below:

The replies we have received from FLS are shown in red italic:

1. We understand that many of FLS’s plans were derailed by Storm Éowyn damage. So appreciate that FLS have quickly attended to the core paths and damaged/windfall issues around the ponds. It is also noted that FLS have been attentive to the concerns raised by the community on some aspects of forestry operations in the recent clear fells, and the excessive amount of fallen timber in the burns.

2. We accept in principle the need to address the windfall and other issues in the remaining woodland near the top car park and ponds. However, we would welcome the retention of any robust wind firm trees, even though these might be Sitka or other exotic species, and retaining non-native softwoods is not part of the current plan. We do understand that retaining some Sitka or other trees is subject not only to forestry considerations but also to their visual appeal and other things we can discuss. We recognise that this may entail more time and other costs for FLS in what is currently planned as clear-fell – it is easier to just clear, maybe leaving a few standing stems for habitat (e.g. woodpeckers). We also recognise that isolated trees or small clumps are more vulnerable to wind, and that leaving edges or isolated trees may mean further expense if FLS have to return to deal with fallen timber in the future. All this can be discussed.
   
   The woodland near the top carpark and ponds where there has been significant windblow we would only be looking to remove the windblow.
   We would look to retain as much standing timber as is possible in this area. Only removing standing timber to a green edge or an edge that is wind firm.

   
   

3. The same general thoughts apply to the area at the back of the village which on current plans are scheduled for felling in late 2030s but FLS are asking to clear fell now. Several reasons were given. Existing tracks built for their recent operations not only give FLS easier and cheaper access now but would have to be re-established in the 2030s across areas that had been replanted, meaning some destruction of plantings. Mostly though, it seemed to be related to wind throw, unstable standing trees, a greater number of edges and some need to remove timber that had fallen or been made insecure by the storm.
   This all made sense to us, although as FLS indicated, it will be a very great sadness to lose the beautiful backdrop to our village.
   The advantage would be that FLS would not need to return after early 2026 (an advantage to FLS as well as any community projects we get up and running). We’d be starting our new community venture with “a clean slate”. It is a tough call for us.
   
   All of the broadleaves will be retained in all of the clear fell areas, this includes the area that we would like to bring forward. The aerial photograph shows quite a lot of broadleaves within the area near Larg cottage, all of these will be kept.
   
   

4. We have asked to see a draft of the Amendment before it is sent for approval – and be granted 3 weeks for community consultation and feedback?
   
   We would assume that if the community supports bringing the felling forward then the amendment would reflect this so not sure what other community consultation and feedback would deliver as this is the reason for speaking to you on the 13th April.
   It is important to stress that the amendment is for bringing the felling forward, this was approved by Scottish Forestry through the land management process which FLS consulted on. We are only looking to bring this forward from 2037 to the present.
   Saying that, we would be happy to give the community a draft of this beforehand so any comment can be made and discussed so that all parties understand and are supportive of this going forward. The amendment will be placed on the public register for comment so the community would have a further opportunity to make comment.
   
   

5. We hope it will be possible to retain some trees (not larch of course) – whether exotic or not. Many of the village were deeply upset by the removal of the Douglas Fir by Cardoon Bridge – a very special place for some of our residents, who thought it was only larch being cleared.
   Perhaps the best approach would be for FLS to tag any trees or clusters of trees that could be saved and then we could do a walk through with some community reps and discuss/agree the final felling regime. We would not want to obstruct operational decisions that relate to safety, protection, riparian or core-path protection, creating a problem for the future etc. But we do feel sure that some might be saved and would welcome the chance to discuss that – flight lines for birds, habitat for small mammals and some bird species, islands from which restoration could take place, retaining some uneven age structure. Without this, we would have even-aged stands following replanting – not a good scenario visually but especially for habitat where a more diverse woodland architecture is ideal.
   Leaving any broadleaves in place, even if (slightly) etiolated because of shading, might also be considered. We are not thinking here of wispy unhealthy saplings, but of the smaller sized broadleaves that would be released once light was available, if felling around them was done with care. We would also like FLS to leave some standing dead wood as habitat.
   
   We could look into maybe retaining some mature conifer if this is possible and practical. We would look at this in more detail when planning the work.
   We will retain all broadleaves within the clear fell area including small saplings that could thrive once the light is let in.
   
   

6. The 1950s aerial photos indicate broadleaf trees in clumps and behind the church. We would like to ensure that any mature broadleaves are retained.
   
   All broadleaved trees will be retained in all of the clear fell areas. The aerial photography shows a substantial amount of broadleaves at the top end of the forest near Larg cottage, all will be retained where possible.
   
   

7. We asked whether FLS had an Action Plan in place in the amendment for Red Squirrels, maybe Black Grouse or other species mentioned in the existing LMP. Could the Red Squirrel group be involved here?
   
   Before any felling takes place our environment team will check the area and put in any mitigation required for any species that is found within the block. There would be no need to involve the red squirrel group as our environment Forester and Ranger have the qualifications required for this and are in contact with the various wildlife bodies within D & G.
   
   

8. We have asked that FLS confirm what is meant by “core path”. Our community regards the upper and lower paths both as core, even if not legally so ( both paths are shown on OS maps). We would like to work together on retaining / clearing both from fallen/felled trees either now or at some early stage.
   
   “Core paths are routes designated by local authorities under terms of the land reform (Scotland) Act 2003 with the purpose of providing a reasonable access network. Every local authority is required to draw up a plan for a system of paths (corepaths) sufficient for the purpose, this is to meet the requirement of the Land Reform Act Scotland 2003.”
   The designated core path in the Balloch wood is the middle path. Core paths should be free of obstruction where possible. Our operations team aim to remove trees from the core path when notified.
   The bottom path is not a core path, I have flagged up the need to remove the trees that are blocking this path and this will be undertaken when the last coupe is removed. If this doesn’t happen until 10 years’ time then it will all be removed this year at the same time that the footpath is repaired.

We would like to link with / get information and support from the experiences at Taliesin (e.g. photos from the last 20 years) and are already in touch with Kilsture. It’s been a while since Mabie, Dalbeattie and other communities worked with the then Forestry Commission on community involvement in production /amenity forest.
There could be lessons there that could be shared with us, even though the plan now is to end production forestry after this year, and Balloch would be entirely amenity woodland