Investigating novel approaches to tree planting

A future for trees outside woodlands...

Kent County Council Trees Outside Woodlands Project Officer, Louise Butfoy inspects the project’s urban tree establishment pilot plot in Kent

The Shared Outcomes Fund: Trees Outside Woodland scheme will continue for a further two years, until 2025. This project is in partnership with five local authorities, Natural England and Defra.

What did we do and what have we learned from phase one?

Starting in 2020, phase one focused on novel approaches to tree planting and establishment; seeking to identify potential costs savings by doing things a little differently. Our purposes were:

·        To identify innovative ways of establishing Trees Outside Woodland (TOW) cost effectively

·        To improve local supply of cost effective and biosecure planting stock

We mean planting and establishment here so we’ve been trying to untangle different factors which might affect the survival rates and cost of Trees Outside Woodland (TOW), in a variety of settings. This has meant monitoring the planted trees to see if they have survived and are still thriving. Our findings, to date are promising (see below), but it’s great news we’ll be able to track the growth and survival of the trees for a further two years to yield more information.

In relation to the local supply of biosecure stock we’ve been working with Community Tree Nurseries to investigate ways to facilitate increased production as well as biosecurity improvements. This has included investigating things like a group accreditation scheme for Plant Healthy, and biosecurity grants.

Findings so far

Pilot A - Urban Tree Establishment.

This pilot was in response to relatively high establishment costs and low survival rates associated with newly planted trees in urban settings.  

This top image illustrates one strand of this pilot. We’ve explored if the Miyawaki method (named after its creator, Japanese botanist Akira Miyawaki, it involves dense planting of native species mixes into enhanced soil to accelerate establishment) could be a viable option for establishing trees in urban settings, compared to more traditional tree planting. Across all the local authorities several variations of a Miyawaki style methodology were explored, for example just high-density planting, different soil preparations, biological enhancements and mulch materials. ‘Normal’ control plots were planted adjacent to the ‘experimental’ plots for the comparison with traditional planting techniques.

As the video above demonstrates, the Miyawaki approach appears to have been a huge success so far. We’re crunching the numbers, but survival rates seem to be very high in comparison to control plots, somewhere in the order of 95% compared to 75%, and clearly growth is much faster. It’s looking like the Miyawaki establishment costs (so, including all the materials, planting, watering, combined with tree survival rates) are about 30% lower than in the control plots, due partly to the higher survival rates. These figures will be updated as more data comes in with continued monitoring, but it’s looking really promising.

Pilot B - Subsidised Tree scheme

This pilot aimed to identify which 'tree give away' method was the most cost-effective way of establishing Trees Outside Woodland. It was hypothesised that asking members of the public to pay part of the cost would motivate recipients to look after the trees better, and therefore increase the survival rate of trees planted, and that this would therefore represent better value for money than giving them away for free or giving free advice on how to access other funding for tree planting.

Young trees awaiting their new homes. More than 135,000 were distributed across four local authority areas as part of the pilot. Image by Sophie Hamnett.

Three versions of 'tree give away' were trialled in four local authority areas:  

•        An advice only scheme where the local authority tree officer advised interested people (residents, amenity groups, landowners etc) about how to access existing funding for tree planting.  

•        A subsidised scheme where people had to pay 50% of the costs of the tree and its protection (guards and stakes etc)  

•        A free scheme where people were given trees and tree protection for free.  

Trees were provided in pre-defined bundles appropriate for different settings (e.g., coastal bundles). The image above shows a collection day and the kinds of bundles on offer.

Trees were monitored for survival and other data were collected, such as the applicant motivations for tree planting and the tree species planted, planting location and details of any maintenance activities undertaken by the recipients of the trees.  

There was a different level of administrative burden involved with each version of the scheme, but in summary this involved planning and preparation, tree procurement, promotion, application assessment, legal advice, payment processing and then tree distribution and follow-up/monitoring.  

While we await definitive cost analysis, we can say that schemes have generally been very successful and that over 135,000 trees have been distributed by the four local authorities involved. So far, anecdotally, people appeared to be more committed to tree planting in subsidised schemes, as evidenced by fewer dropouts before collection and better tree survival rates, compared to the free or advice only approaches.

This way of doing things seems to reach a lot of different people including farmers, landowners, community groups, businesses, schools, parish councils, residents and church groups etc. It might therefore be helpful to local authorities with little land of their own on which to plant and grow trees.

Pilot C - Agroforestry and Orchards

The agroforestry and orchards pilot tested how to encourage the uptake of tree planting schemes on farms and community owned land to improve biodiversity, soil health and pollination, and benefit farm businesses.  

This pilot set out to test the uptake levels and survival rates of trees in agroforestry and orchard systems under different funding approaches (such as different grant levels and different advice strategies). We wanted to understand the types and levels of incentives required to encourage an uptake of these farming practices and to gain an understanding of what barriers exist to prevent this uptake.

An agroforestry scheme in Shropshire. Image by Nick Rowles.

We’ve been surprised by the level of uptake during the pilot. And, of those taking part most farmers reported they would be more likely to recommend agroforestry to other landowners.  Flexibility in the pilot scheme enabled a diverse range of tree planting patterns and agroforestry systems to be established, which will hopefully go on to yield returns for the farmers involved. So far, it seems like landowners responded best to one-on-one advice coupled with grant funding.

As others will know, whilst there seems to be a lot of interest in agroforestry, it tends to be accompanied by a lack of practical knowledge about it. Schemes like this can help to bridge that gap.

Pilot D - Trees in a Farmed Landscape (TiFL)

This pilot is in part a response to the decline of veteran trees in the farmed landscape; to help establish the future veteran Trees Outside Woodland…and indeed, more hedges. It’s different from agroforestry because it’s not necessarily about the productive, revenue-generating business of a farm.

The pilot tested ways to incentivise changes in management practices to see which, if any could result in more trees in the farmed landscape that could go on to become veterans, and then which were the most cost effective. It looked at the accumulation of multiple small-scale (we’re talking, for example, less 20m wide) infrastructure interventions, designed to establish more trees on farms.

An example of a field corner enclosure dedicated to tree establishment. Image by Sophie Hamnett.

This involved a realistic assessment of what desired small-scale interventions cost.  Examples are: 

•        In-field tree establishment - something akin to a parkland style planting e.g., a fenced tree in the middle of a field

•        Expanded hedgerows 

•        ‘Bay enclosures’ along hedgerows

•        ‘Field corner’ enclosure creation 

•        Planting of maiden trees within hedgerows and hedges 

•        Protection of existing trees within hedgerows 

At this stage we can say it does seem to be possible to incorporate more trees on farms without significantly impacting on farm business/operation but we’re still working on the analysis to find out which techniques were the most cost effective.

Pilot E – Boosting Community Tree Nurseries

This pilot was about increasing local tree production and biosecurity.

Community Tree Nurseries (CTNs) could help to meet the increased demand for trees, particularly as they tend to grow local provenance/regionally appropriate species. However, relatively little is known about CTNs across the country - how many there are, how many trees they provide, or how they grow them, for example.

A Community Tree Nursery operating out of a car park in Shrewsbury. Image by Jackie Shallcross.

What was done in the pilot to address this?  

•        Baseline research was undertaken, by Forest Research (see Community Tree Nurseries - Forest Research for the interim report), to understand the sector. Research also looked at their awareness of biosecurity issues and good practice. 

•        The research informed a set of interventions/support for CTNs which were evaluated for their effectiveness. This often took the form of small capital grants for equipment and infrastructure but also included financial support for peer-to-peer knowledge sharing in the CTN community (the Community Tree Nursery Collaborative, CTNC has a Facebook group and web page Community Tree Nursery Collaborative | Fellowship of the Trees). Grants and training to improve biosecurity were also offered to CTNs.

•        Similarly, an in-person demonstration hub was established in Norfolk (at the farm site at Gressenhall Museum) to provide inspiration and practical information, as well as to demonstrate best biosecurity practice. 

•        The feasibility of a group scheme for Plant Healthy certification was explored as a practical way of understanding how CTNs may be affected by this new requirement.  

There’s a lot to say here, and a full Forest Research report about the sector and the effectiveness of the interventions will be published soon, but in very short summary CTNs across the country have the potential to grow thousands of locally appropriate trees for local communities.

Many CTNs are less than five years old. Whilst they vary in size most are fairly small and produce around 500 trees per year. Whilst a seemingly small production this can, nonetheless, be considered an important contribution to tree production as trees are often given away or sold at cost, as well as being produced from local seed of sometimes rarer species. The diversity of CTNs is their strength, and they enrich local communities via social and health and wellbeing benefits in addition to supplying trees for planting. Many would like to increase their production of trees and biosecurity practices and need to be supported to do so via funding support and peer-to-peer networks.

A small scale Community Tree Nursery operating out of an allotment site in Norfolk. Image by Jackie Shallcross.

The two pictures above show the diversity of what a Community Tree Nursery can be, but there are many more variations. The soon to be updated Tree Growers Guide has case studies on several different models of operation and lots of helpful information about growing trees from seed, running CTNs, and how to improve biosecurity at your CTN.

The Tree Council is looking for partners to deliver Community Tree Nursery activity with 18 schools and community groups – for more information please contact Community and Engagement Officer, Will Fitzpatrick on will.fitzpatrick@treecouncil.org.uk.

What’s different about phase two?

The extension to the project allows for further monitoring of the planting carried out in phase one, to give us more data for the tree establishment cost analysis, but in addition we will be taking some of the work in new directions. The purposes of the phase two work are:

•        To reduce the cost of planting and maintaining TOWs and increase value for money of government funded tree planting schemes by reducing costs per tree successfully established.

•        To Improve the quality of TOW planting and associated benefits; create greater understanding of the drivers of establishment of TOWs, and enhance the supply chain of locally produced, biosecure planting stock

A set of pilots are being developed at the moment focussing on:

A.     Rapid urban Tree Establishment – building on the Miyawaki work so far to understand more about how the Miyawaki method works and if it could be applied in different contexts.

B.     Connecting Treescapes – building on the tree scheme and TiFL work so far to understand more about how to engage landowners in tree planting schemes.

C.      Trees on Farms – Building on the agroforestry and TiFL work to engage landowners by providing flexible advice and funding to support all kinds of trees on farms.

D.     Thriving Community Tree Nurseries – Building on the existing work to understand more about how to support CTNs to improve biosecurity, how to maintain their operations and thrive, and more about the additional benefits CTNs bring to our society.

Jackie Shallcross is The Tree Council's lead for the Shared Outcome Fund Trees Outside Woodlands project. If you’d like more information, please email jackie.shallcross@treecouncil.org.uk. Find out more about The Tree Council at treecouncil.org.uk

Further Information on the Shared Outcomes Fund: Trees Outside Woodland project

There have been five pilots, each lead by a Project Officer at a different local authority, although they all replicate the trials and support each other in a true partnership approach. There’s more information about their work on their websites too and our website will soon be updated with practical information about how each local authority undertook the work – so watch this space!

Trees - Kent County Council

Chichester District tree scheme - Chichester District Council

Trees Outside Woodlands Programme | Shropshire Council

1 Million Trees for Norfolk - Norfolk County Council

Trees - Cornwall Council

MORE Jackie Shallcross: Tree Guards Part 1: Plastic