Guidance

When to convert woods and forests to open habitat: operations note 68

Updated 15 October 2024

Applies to England

• Publication for Northern Ireland
• Publication for Scotland
• Publication for Wales

Context

The government’s Open Habitats Policy (OHP) was introduced in 2010 and sets out the situations where:

• permanent loss of woodland is permitted
• compensatory planting is required to meet tree cover and biodiversity goals (through a conditional felling licence)
• compensatory planting is not required (where an unconditional licence is granted)

This is in addition to any decision under the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regime.

The OHP requires the Forestry Commission to consider how tree removal impacts the government’s afforestation policy, tree targets, presumption against deforestation, and on the Forestry Commission’s statutory purpose of maintaining adequate reserves of standing trees. There is a presumption against the permanent loss of woodland cover, particularly for ancient woodland.

Tree felling, necessary for deforestation, is regulated through the legal requirement for a felling licence. Most felling licences that we issue contain conditions that ensure felled trees will be replaced or allowed to regenerate.

The policy covers any proposal to permanently remove woods to restore or expand priority open habitats. The open habitats this covers are primarily:

• lowland meadow
• upland hay meadow
• lowland chalk grassland
• lowland dry-acid grassland
• purple moor-grass and rush pasture
• upland heathland
• blanket bog (moor)
• limestone pavement
• lowland raised bog
• fen
• reedbed
• lowland heathland

In 2022 and 2023, the government set a range of statutory targets including for tree cover and for biodiversity targets. This guidance aims to help minimise tree cover loss, while allowing sites contributing significantly to biodiversity targets to proceed.

Relationship with EIA regulations

Applying for a decision under the OHP is part of the EIAs for woodland application process. However, they require separate assessments and are normally implemented separately.

The OHP underpins the decision on whether to permit deforestation and if so, whether compensatory planting is required as a condition of that licence. It is typically implemented through the felling licence regime and any associated conditions.

The EIA regulations have additional considerations that require a separate determination and decision. For example, in relation to:

• local community views
• climate change
• the wider environment (such as water levels or increased fire risk)

In rare cases, for example where a felling licence is not required, the EIA decision can also be used to implement the OHP.

Government targets for tree cover and biodiversity

The Environment Act 2021 places a duty on the Secretary of State to set statutory targets for biodiversity, air and water, and other environmental outcomes. The targets were set in 2022 and 2023.

Relevant targets are:      

• ensure that at least 16.5% of all land is covered by woodland and trees outside woodland by 31 December 2050
• restore or create at least 500,000 hectares (ha) of wildlife-rich habitat, outside protected sites by 2042
• halt the decline in species abundance by 2030 and secure a 10% increase by 2042
• reduce the rate of species extinctions by 2042

The trees and wildlife-rich habitat targets overlap. The expectation is that 100,000ha of new woodland creation by 2042 will be native (wildlife-rich) habitat.

The OHP applies to:

Any proposal to permanently remove woods to restore or expand priority open habitats in support of the wildlife-rich habitat or species targets.

The OHP does not apply to:

• small-scale woodland removal as part of ‘restructuring,’ such as creating glades, rides, and open areas by watercourses
• sites where short rotation coppice (SRC) is being converted to open habitat

Ancient wood pasture and parkland, including infilled sites, are considered as ancient woodland categories (not as an open habitat). The Keepers of time policy explains how to make decisions to restore wood pasture and open woodland, including removing ‘infilled’ trees.

Step 1: establish the extent and type of woodland to be removed

The OHP has a balancing mechanism to ensure the rate of woodland removal does not affect the government’s goal (statutory tree target) to increase woodland cover. It also aims to secure no net loss in ‘productive woodland’.

It sets a movable ‘bar’, above which woodland can be removed without the need for compensatory planting in any one year. It is calculated annually based on:

• the scale of any tree cover gains and losses in the previous years
• what proportion of these gains or losses is ‘productive woodland’

The bar is explained in Step 2 (question 6) of the decision-making process. Sites above this bar are of exceptional value and can proceed in all cases without compensatory planting. Below this, compensatory planting is required where the woodland is productive.

Forestry Commission and Natural England will work out where the bar sits on at least an annual basis in an open and transparent way, considering deforestation and afforestation over a 5-year rolling period. This will average out any peaks and troughs that may arise (often the result of availability of grant aid) and may set different thresholds for productive and non-productive woodland.

Definition of productive woodland

Productive woodland is defined in the OHP as areas with an average yield class of at least 10 for conifers and 6 for broadleaves. Forestry Commission advisers need to use their discretion and knowledge of the area, as information on yield classes may not be available where a site has changed hands or records have not been kept.

Evidence of productivity could include whether, in the last 15 years, a site has had:

• a woodland management plan
• felling licence approval
• silvicultural activities, for example, respacing, pruning or thinning

Additionally, ‘intent at the point of creation’ is an important consideration. A site with natural regeneration, for example, of Sitka spruce mixed with birch/oak on an open habitat that had been poorly managed, would not be considered productive. However, land planted with Corsican pine, to produce a crop of timber would be considered productive, even if ownership has changed, and the crop is no longer being managed.

We need to consider the likelihood or practicalities of ongoing productive management of the forest under consideration. No benefit will come from abandoning overstood conifer plantations.

Step 2: Identify the requirement for compensatory planting

This decision-making process explains the expectations in relation to the required compensatory tree planting. The insistence on such planting, however, must only be in line with this guidance. This ‘bar’ may change from year to year to reflect the balancing mechanism.

Before potential grant applicants are invited to consider open habitat restoration options under the current agri-environment grant scheme, Forestry Commission and Natural England should discuss and try to agree on whether:

• the proposal to remove woodland is likely to be supported by Forestry Commission under OHP
• compensatory planting is likely to be required

The decision-making process is a hierarchy of steps. You start at the top and answer yes or no to questions, working your way down until either you reach the bottom or reach a decision.

Annex 1 gives examples of evidence that may help to decide whether tree removal can proceed and if compensatory planting is required.

Decision-making process: open habitats compensatory planting

Question 1

Does the site contain ancient woodland (as defined in Keepers of time) or long-established native woodland?

Yes: Conversion to open habitat unlikely to be permitted. Keepers of time sets out how decisions to restore ancient wood pasture and parkland, including removing ‘infilled’ trees, should be made.

No: Continue to question 2.

Question 2

Is the woodland within a nationally or internationally designated site, such as National Nature Reserve (NNR), Special Protection Area (SPA), Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) or Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM), notified for open habitat, species, geological or archaeological features?

Yes: Removing other* woodland on designated sites is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting where evidence suggests trees are having a negative impact on the feature(s) of interest.

No: Continue to question 3.

Question 3

Will the proposed woodland removal extend, buffer or connect wildlife-rich habitat on a nationally or internationally designated adjacent site(s)?

Yes: Removing other* woodland is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting. However, evidence must show that the woodland is detrimentally impacting the protected site and/or lack of connectivity is detrimentally impacting species associated with that site.

No: Continue to question 4.

Question 4

Is the woodland on a non-designated peatland site with clear evidence of high restoration potential, and efforts being made to rewet the site and remove pressures associated with past afforestation. And/or is there evidence that the predicted yield class for the site is less than YC10 for Sitka spruce?

Yes: The removal of other* woodland on non-designated peatland sites is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting.

No: Continue to question 5.

Question 5

Is the removal of other* woodland on non-designated sites crucial to restore the biodiversity interest of a priority habitat**, or an associated species?

Yes: The removal of other* woodland on priority habitat is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting where evidence shows that fragmentation or lack of connectivity is detrimentally impacting species strongly associated with the priority habitat locally***.

No: Continue to question 6.

Question 6

Will the removal of other* woodland on a non-designated site extend, buffer or connect existing priority habitat?

Yes: The removal of other* woodland on non-designated sites may be permitted where evidence supports the conclusion as above. But it will require compensatory tree planting being agreed where productive woodland is removed.

No: All other sites will require compensatory tree planting.

*includes all woodland that is not ancient or long-established

** includes sites with clearly identifiable priority habitat persisting within new woodland. Or sites where former lowland heath, and associated wetland areas, have been present in the last 100 years

*** ‘species strongly associated with’ are likely to be notifiable features in local protected sites, priority species or species that are vulnerable or endangered

Explanation and examples for the decision-making process

The following information expands on the questions in the decision-making process.

1). Does the site contain ancient woodland (including PAWS) or support long-established native woodland?

If the site is identified as an Ancient Semi-Natural Woodland (ASNW) or a Plantation on an Ancient Woodland Site (PAWS) on Natural England’s ancient woodland inventory (AWI), it is highly unlikely the Forestry Commission would agree to that woodland converting to open habitat.

Restoring ancient woodlands that are ecologically degraded is a high priority for the government. This includes restoring plantations on ancient woodland sites by gradually transforming stands from non-native planted species to native species.

Long-established woodland, whilst not ancient, is still very important. It has had many decades to develop rich biodiversity, contains important old growth features, and delivers a range of ecosystem services. Natural England’s AWI currently identifies woodlands that are 2ha or more. As such, it is likely that some woodlands may not be recorded as ‘ancient’ because they are either less than 2ha, or mapping records were inconclusive when drafting the inventory.

Note: the inventory is currently being updated and will capture:

• smaller sites (woodlands 0.25ha or more)
• better representation of wood pasture and parkland
• clearer information on nature of any planting or infilling

The Forestry Commission will decide whether an individual woodland falls into this category. In all cases there should be clear evidence, by way of ground flora or other indications (such as old hedge banks), that the native woodland is likely to have been there since at least 1893 (as opposed to the actual trees standing on the site at present). There must be sufficient evidence to support this. The Forestry Commission’s National Forest Inventory (NFI) can assist in this decision-making process.

Example 1:

Wet alder/willow carr woodland. The woodland is 1.5ha and appears to have been coppiced 30 years ago. The coppice stools suggest that the trees have been coppiced several times due to the width of the stools. Further investigation clearly identifies several indicator species among the ground flora to support the fact that the site had supported woodland species for a considerable time.

This would clearly be regarded as long-established native woodland, probably on an ancient site. It is highly unlikely we would agree to the conversion of that woodland to open habitat.

Example 2:

Wet alder/willow woodland. The woodland is 1.5ha and there is no evidence of the trees having been coppiced. Age of the trees is estimated at 30 years old. There is some ground vegetation, but this is more indicative of a lowland fen type site. Indications are that the woodland is secondary in nature which has colonised the site following reduction of grazing pressure or similar.

The site is clearly not long-established native woodland. It may be suitable to convert to open habitat but must fall into one of the subsequent site types in the decision-making process. It may or may not require compensatory tree planting as directed by this guidance. If cleared, the site would require a felling licence and an EIA opinion/determination as appropriate.

2). Is the woodland within a nationally or internationally designated site (NNR, SPA, SAC, SSSI or SAM), notified for open habitat, species, geological or archaeological features?

These will be sites statutorily designated as priority open habitat, either nationally or internationally. They have become colonised with trees over time for several reasons since 1893. If the woodland is native in origin (as opposed to coniferous) and evidence suggests that it was present before 1893, then woodland removal must be considered.

The trees may occur as individuals, groups or as woodland (as identified in Definition of woodland and trees). To create open habitat, you must consider the following:

1. It is extremely likely that the trees to be removed will require a felling licence.
2. If a felling licence is not required, woodland will need an ‘opinion’ under the EIA (Forestry) Regulations if:
   • it is comprised of young trees (they are undersize)
   • trees could form 20% or more canopy cover
   • trees are capable of reaching at least 5m in height

If the work is identified as a ‘relevant project’ under the legislation, Forestry Commission will decide whether it will have a significant impact and a full EIA statement will be required. The fact that the site is designated does not exempt it from this process.

The one exception is where there is very young successional growth of either trees or shrubs, where the trees can be controlled purely by non-mechanical means. In other words, the young trees are of such a size that they can be controlled by either grazing (domestic or non-domesticated) or by hand pulling.

Example 3:

A 10ha heathland site designated as SSSI supports a 2ha plantation of Scots pine planted approximately 55 years ago. There is ongoing seeding, and a variety of age classes present. Colonisation by seeding has established over a further 3ha of the site, all adjacent to the plantation. The majority of this is at ‘thicket stage’, mostly 2m to 3m in height. Canopy cover for the plantation is 90% and for the self-seeded area, 35%. The proposal is to remove the plantation to stop further seeding, as well as the younger successional growth.

Conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting provided the conversion is supported by Natural England. In cases where agreement cannot be reached locally, it will be escalated via the process outlined in the Natural England/Forestry Commission delivery practice guidance and to the relevant specialists. Removing the plantation will require a felling licence. Removing the plantation and adjacent self-seeded area will still likely require an EIA opinion/determination.

Example 4:

A 10ha heathland site supports a 2ha plantation of Scots pine planted approximately 25 years ago. The trees have just started casting seed and natural regeneration is taking place on the adjacent 2ha of the site. The proposal is to remove the plantation to stop further seeding and to control the successional seeding by introducing limited grazing to the site.

Conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting provided the conversion is supported by Natural England. In cases where agreement cannot be reached locally, it will be escalated via the process outlined in the Natural England/Forestry Commission delivery practice guidance and to relevant specialists. Removing the plantation will require a felling licence and an EIA opinion/determination as appropriate. The successional seeding will not be included within the EIA process as it is to be controlled by grazing (so not considered a relevant project).

a). Is the proposal within a nationally or internationally designated site (NNR, SPA, SAC or SSSI) notified for an individual open habitat species or group of species?

These may be linear sites, such as rivers or surrounding other water features (for example, estuaries), which support a mosaic of specific habitat types within the notified area. Groups of species may, for instance, be an assemblage of wader species on a Special Protection Area (SPA). Examples of an individual species are marsh fritillary butterfly, white clawed crayfish, or Desmoulin’s whorl snail. The designation will often include areas of woodland either native or plantation in origin.

If the woodland fits with the descriptions in either question 1 or 2 of the decision-making process, the presumption is that removing the woodland will not be permitted. If it does not fall into either, then removing the woodland may be permitted provided it meets the qualifying criteria. The same process outlined in example 3 will apply.

Example 5:

A linear Special Area of Conservation (SAC) on a chalk river system. The river supports a nationally important population of Desmoulin’s whorl snail in the adjacent meadow land. Within this area is a poplar plantation which is proposed to be felled. If there is no supporting evidence suggesting the trees are having any adverse impact on the individual species, other than it is non-native and there is limited support from Natural England, Forestry Commission may agree removing the poplar is reasonable.

Forestry Commission would not support its removal without compensatory tree planting being agreed either on or near to the site in question. However, if the species is declining on the network or local protected sites, and the site is impacting on the snail population on adjacent protected sites and other local sites, it may be removed (if supported by Natural England).

b). Is the proposal within a nationally or internationally designated site, notified for its geological interest?

Occasionally, sites designated for their geological interest may also come forward for consideration. Natural degradation is a serious problem on many geological sites. Uncontrolled vegetation encroachment and slumping of faces are the commonest problems, resulting in geological features becoming obscured. This is particularly so on man-made inland sites, such as disused quarries and cuttings, where erosion rates are too low to maintain clear exposures. Positive management is required for effective conservation of these sites.

Applications must provide detail describing both:

• the importance of the specific interest

• evidence that the woodland to be removed is having a detrimental effect on the specific interest

Conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting, provided it can be reasonably demonstrated that the woodland adversely impacts on its notified features. The conversion must be supported by Natural England (in consultation with the relevant national specialist, when necessary).

Example 6:

Tideswell Dale is a disused quarry within the Wye Valley Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). It was selected as part of a network of sites in the Midlands to demonstrate the volcanic history of the region during the early Carboniferous period (about 340 million years ago). At that time, there were several volcanic centres in Derbyshire and other parts of the country. The volcanoes intermittently erupted basaltic lava and ash into the tropical sea that covered much of the country at the time.

The Tideswell Dale site contains lava flows and a thick sill (lava which solidified underground before reaching the surface). The sill overlies a fine-grained, clay-rich rock with a very unusual columnar jointed structure. This material was covered by rubble and had not been seen by geologists for many years. The main face of the quarry was becoming overgrown in places by scrub and sycamore trees. The scrub and trees need to be removed from the main quarry face.

Conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting, provided it can be demonstrated that the woodland adversely impacts the site’s notified features. Removing trees would require a felling licence. Removing trees and scrub would need an EIA opinion/determination as appropriate.

3). Will the proposed woodland removal extend, buffer or connect wildlife rich habitat on a nationally or internationally designated adjacent site(s)?

Forestry Commission will consider the conversion of sites which are neither formally designated nor classed as ‘local sites.’ These must be adjacent to sites that are designated.

Note: in very rare cases, it is possible that a non-adjacent woodland site would impact negatively on a protected site, for example by modifying hydrology. No sites have come forward to date. However, if there is clear evidence of impact, before considering their determination Forestry Commission would ensure there has been no substantial increase in removal above the threshold.

There must be evidence that the fragmentation of the designated sites or lack of connectivity is detrimentally impacting the wildlife interest within these sites or is preventing colonisation of the important ground flora. Conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting provided the conversion is supported by Natural England.

Removing trees would require a felling licence. Removing trees and scrub would require an EIA opinion/determination as appropriate.

Example 7:

A poplar plantation was established on a 35ha site about 15 years ago. The site was not designated at the time of planting. The trees are struggling through annual attacks of rust and are not thriving. There is a linear SSSI running through part of the site, which is associated with an old, disused private canal. This has been notified mainly for its lowland fen residual interest. There is a further SSSI to the side of the site notified as lowland bog. The creation of lowland fen is a priority target habitat for this area. The planted area has been drained in the past. The proposal is to:

• remove the poplar plantation
• rewet the site to permit the spread of lowland fen flora – from the canal SSSI as a source to the lowland bog area
• better protect the historic interest of the site

The work has been fully supported by Natural England citing the tree canopy as being crucial in preventing the spread of the lowland fen flora across the site.

Conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted without compensatory tree planting because the site displays significant biodiversity potential. Plus, it can be demonstrated that retaining the woodland would adversely impact the relevant open habitat characteristics, individual or group of open habitat species. The conversion has been supported by Natural England (in consultation with the relevant specialist) and is likely to have an Natural England-endorsed management plan. The tree removal will probably require a felling licence (depending on size) and an EIA opinion/determination (as appropriate).

4).Is the woodland on a non-designated peatland site with clear evidence of high restoration potential, and efforts being made to rewet the site and remove pressures associated with past afforestation. And/or is there evidence that the predicted yield class for the site is less than YC10 for Sitka spruce?

An assessment of restoration potential should be made using the Decision support framework for peatland protection and re-establishment of existing woodland on peatland with input from Forestry Commission and Natural England.

A site would be expected to have high restoration potential if any of the following apply:

• it is close to and/or hydrologically connected to an area of unplanted deep peat
• is a rare peatland type, for example, raised bog, intermediate bog, calcareous fen, valley mire, transitional mire or Molinia meadow
• the site is in a wet state as evidenced by water standing in drains and plough furrows for most of the year
• species assemblage’s characteristic of peatland priority habitats occurs beneath the tree canopy

Where woodland areas are identified as having high restoration potential and considered priority areas for peatland restoration, Forestry Commission will not enforce replanting under a felling licence or forest plan. The location of the site in a specifically targeted area for peatland restoration in a Local Nature Recovery Strategy (LNRS) is also important. This could indicate potential funding to support nature recovery and the future success of the site as priority open habitat.

5). Is the removal of other woodland on non-designated sites crucial to restore a priority habitat and associated species?

These will be sites where either:

• the vegetation beneath the canopy is clearly identifiable as a priority open habitat with typical species associated with that habitat
• there is evidence that restoration of the habitat is feasible, and the habitat was present in the last 100 years – for former lowland heathland sites (wet and dry heath and associated mires)

Note: former lowland heathland sites are considered of exceptional value. This is because there are very limited opportunities to restore this habitat, except under planted woodland (as they are restricted to poor, acid soils, which retain their low fertility status under the trees). In very rare cases, this may be the case for other lowland habitats, such as calcareous grassland. However, such sites should only be considered by exception where there are similar restrictions on alternative restorable land. Forestry Commission area teams should consult national leads if they believe an unconditional licence is justified to ensure there has been no substantial increase in removal above the threshold.

They may be identified as a local wildlife site. There must be evidence that the trees are having a demonstrable negative impact on the feature(s) of interest on a protected site, including through impacts on hydrology. Or that fragmentation or lack of connectivity is having a detrimental impact on species strongly associated with the priority habitat locally.

Conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting, provided the conversion is supported by Natural England. In cases where agreement cannot be reached locally, it will be escalated via the process outlined in the Natural England/Forestry Commission delivery practice guidance and to the relevant specialists. Removing trees will require a felling licence. Removing trees and scrub will require an EIA opinion/determination as appropriate.

Example 8:

An area of wet woodland has established on a culm grassland site. The woodland is clearly recent (approximately 30 years old), with no history of previous cutting. The proposal is to remove the woodland to re-create the open grassland, which is also critical for encouraging re-colonisation of the marsh fritillary butterfly to this and neighbouring sites. The wet grassland site is a priority habitat that also supports a section 41 species. It was surveyed 3 years ago and identified several key species expected to be present in culm grassland. There are other culm grassland sites in the area, but these are too far away from existing colonies of marsh fritillary to permit colonisation to take place. This site is crucial to ensure this process takes place.

Conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted and may require compensatory tree planting depending on where the balancing mechanism sits. This is provided the site displays significant biodiversity interest and it can be demonstrated that the woodland adversely impacts on the relevant open habitat characteristics, individual or group of open habitat species. Conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting provided the conversion is supported by Natural England. In cases where agreement cannot be reached locally, it will be escalated via the process outlined in the Natural England/Forestry Commission delivery practice guidance and to the relevant specialists. Removing trees will probably require a felling licence (depending on size). Removing trees and scrubs will require an EIA opinion/determination as appropriate. The open habitat policy provides further guidance on prioritisation where a site displays both habitat and species interest.

Example 9:

A small area of Corsican pine was planted in the 1950s on a former heathland site in Dorset. The site is bounded by semi-improved grassland but is within 1km of a heathland and wetland SSSI. The owner wants to bring the land into an agri-environment scheme and restore it to heathland. They plan to manage the site for threatened species of reptiles and plants which have declined due to lack of habitat locally.

In this case compensation is not required, provided Natural England confirm:

• the site is restorable (the soils are suitable)
• management proposals are appropriate
• there are very likely to be benefits for locally declining specialist species

However, minimising impacts and offsetting carbon through extending tree cover, perhaps into the semi-improved grassland, should be encouraged.

6). Will the removal of other woodland on a non-designated site extend, buffer or connect existing priority habitat?

Forestry Commission will consider the conversion of other sites which are neither formally designated nor classed as ‘local wildlife sites’ and do not meet any of the above criteria. There must be clear evidence that the fragmentation of the adjoining sites or lack of connectivity is either:

• having a detrimental impact on the wildlife interest within these sites
• preventing colonisation of the important ground flora

There must be supporting evidence that clearly identifies the value and importance of the high-quality habitat that is adjacent and explains why the extension, buffering or connectivity needs to take place. This information should identify what is expected to be achieved on the site to be converted. These sites will require compensatory tree planting being agreed where productive woodland is removed.

For non-productive woodland sites, conversion to open habitat is likely to be permitted without the need for compensatory tree planting provided the conversion is supported by Natural England. In cases where agreement cannot be reached locally, it will be escalated via the process outlined in the Natural England/Forestry Commission delivery practice guidance and to the relevant specialists. Removing trees will require a felling licence. Removing trees and scrub will require an EIA opinion/determination as appropriate. Conversion to open habitat should be permitted but compensatory tree planting may be required where productive woodland is removed, depending on where the balancing mechanism sits.

7). All other sites will require compensatory tree planting. This will be reviewed on an annual basis and will depend on the balancing mechanism associated with the current levels of woodland creation and open habitat restoration.

If, following the decision-making process, the site does not fall into any of the mentioned categories, then it falls below the threshold for conversion to open habitat. Generally, Forestry Commission will not permit removing woodland from these sites, unless there is very strong evidence to suggest that it would be beneficial to do so. The conversion must be supported by Natural England in consultation with the relevant national specialist as necessary. In this event, compensatory tree planting must be agreed before approval can be given.

Note: where SRC and other non-permanent tree crops is being converted to open habitat, the policy does not apply.

Provision of compensatory planting (where required)

Compensatory planting should provide a similar function and benefit to that which is removed. In other words, productive woodland should be replaced by productive woodlands. However, they do not need to be identical. Advisers should ensure new plantings:

• are UKFS-compliant
• are informed by Ecological Site Classification (ESC) for appropriate tree selection to match site and future climatic conditions (ESC is a web-based decision support system to help forest managers and planners select tree species that are ecologically suited to particular sites, instead of selecting a species and trying to modify the site to suit)
• broadly match the yields of the woodland that has been lost (though larger areas of slightly lower yielding individual trees is acceptable)

Payment for compensatory planting, through re-stocking grants or other public funds is acceptable, provided the removed trees are at, or close to, economic maturity.

Requirements for public engagement

The Forestry Commission will follow its procedures as set out in the consultation policies.

Supporting information required from applicants

To assist us in the assessment process, applications must be supported by a completed felling licence application. The felling licence application should be supported by an EIA deforestation application form. All applications, whether they need a felling licence or not, should be supported by this document.

The deforestation application guidance should be used when filling out this form. This provides guidance on how to complete each individual question.

This form consists of 17 sections for applicants to complete:

• applicant details
• agent or woodland manager’s details
• property details
• proposals on sensitive areas
• proposal size
• proposal overview
• adjacent projects
• information about trees to be felled
• creating open habitat
• open habitat policy criteria
• proposed implementation and management
• environment checks
• compensatory tree planting
• stakeholders and evidence log
• project maps
• declarations
• applying for EIA consent (optional)

Creating open habitat with no EIA requirement

If you’re applying for a felling licence for deforestation, but the project is low risk and does not need an EIA application (see EIA threshold table), you should submit sections 9, 10 and 11 (only) of the EIA deforestation application form. You should submit this with your felling licence application to show that the project aligns with the government’s policy on when to convert woods and forests to open habitat.

Completed forms should be submitted to the local Forestry Commission administrative hub.

Proposals on sites of exceptional value (where no compensatory tree planting is required) must be supported by Natural England, who will set out:

1). The importance of the site (currently or once trees removed): Its function or potential in supporting the features of the co-located or adjacent protect site, or of the threatened species that are intended to benefit from the extension of the open habitat network.

2). The strategic significance of the site: How important is the site locally? Is it considered in local plans and strategies (National Park Plans, Local Nature Recovery Strategies)? How will it support the government’s species targets?

3). Likelihood of success: Have soil studies or seed bank studies been undertaken? Are management plans in place? Has the risk of fire been considered?

Escalation in the event of dispute

For grant scheme decisions, any dispute must be referred to the relevant team leader (Natural England) or field manager (Forestry Commission). They will agree an acceptable solution.

Where an EIA decision is being challenged, there are different avenues to follow depending on whether the appellant is the owner of the woodland, a member of the public or an ‘aggrieved person.’ For further information, contact the National Grants and Regulations team in the Forestry Commission National Office.

Further advice

This operations note should be read alongside the following:

• Open Habitats Policy
• Definition of woodland and trees
• Keepers of time: ancient and native woodland and trees policy in England
• Decision support framework for peatland protection and re-establishment of existing woodland on peatland in England

Annex 1: Forms of evidence that may be used to inform decision-making steps 2 to 7

Evidence which may inform the likelihood of success for open habitat restoration and contribution to meeting government nature recovery targets can be based on:

• expert opinion*
• sound ecological judgement*
• bespoke site-based survey

*this should be contextualised for the specific site (for example, Natural England’s opinion/judgement on the likelihood of habitat restoration success or impact on species recovery)

The conclusions of such evidence should be informed by:

• sources based on peer reviewed literature
• previous survey work (for example, from other sites)
• recognised sources of information on the ecology of species and habitats (such as species life cycle, habitat preferences, dispersal ability)

The following sources of evidence are helpful in determining whether work can proceed and should be used as a guide by Forestry Commission and Natural England. They are not all required in all circumstances:

1. Evidence of impact on or likely benefits for threatened or protected species:

For example: Local records of species trends, including for features of interest on relevant protected sites. Assessment of likelihood of benefits (based on expert opinion, ecological studies, or similar case studies).

1. Strategic importance of the site/position in the landscape:

For example: Whether the site is designated and/or how it is ecologically and functionally connected to the protected sites network. Priority afforded in a Local Nature Recovery Strategy. Status within Natural England habitat network maps. Scientific data on dispersal distances of target species.

1. Likelihood of success (feasibility of habitat restoration):

For example: Soil suitability. Likely or known presence of viable seed bank or availability of seed for site restoration (for example, a suitable donor site). Management Plan prepared or in preparation. Management agreement in place or in preparation. Plans for establishment and management supported by Natural England, including for the management of pressures from increased fire risk.