Why we should welcome Ed Sheeran’s ‘rewilding’ ambitions
Should we be sceptical of multimillionaires with eco-ambitions? Roger Smith, for one, welcomes the latest unexpected environmental benefactor
HOW QUICKLY COP26 has faded from the memory. As I write this it is less than two months from the conclusion of the green jamboree in Glasgow, yet it almost feels as if it never happened.
The conference followed a familiar course, culminating in a closing statement which looks great at first reading but actually contains so many ifs and buts as to make it barely worthwhile producing – and includes the now traditional last-minute climbdown to keep the big hitters on board (in this case it was concessions over the phasing out of coal production). This has been the pattern since the ground-breaking Rio Declaration of 1992, which at least had the effect of firing the environment up the political agenda from the basement, where it had lain neglected for many years, to the top table where it belongs.
One running theme at the COP meetings – and other environmental gatherings – is that of forestry. There is a general acceptance that we need more woodland cover – ours is pretty pathetic. Trees are natural carbon sinks; they provide homes for hundreds of species of small mammals, birds and invertebrates; and they are beautiful to look at and to walk among. Walking through a stand of mature trees is like walking in a natural cathedral. Trees provide fuel for wood-burning stoves and raw material for everything from fenceposts to fine furniture. So why are we not planting many more?
Many governments, including our own, set hugely ambitious planting targets that are impossible to attain. In 2019 planting in England only reached a measly 25% of the fairly modest target of 5,000 hectares. Targets do at least act as a spur, and a welcome boost in this area came recently with the news that the singer and songwriter Ed Sheeran wants to plant a significant number of trees to enhance the British countryside.
He has already planted nearly 15,000 trees on his Suffolk estate, but that is just the beginning. Sheeran aims to buy up areas of land all over Britain and get trees in the ground. But the announcement met with a rather po-faced response from some environmental campaigners. The Common Wealth think tank are reported as saying that: “the nature crisis is linked to inequality and alleviating it doesn’t require UK Rich List members becoming ‘green lairds’.”
I feel they would be better off welcoming Sheeran with open arms and guiding him in the direction where his investment will do most good. There are currently around 2000 community environment schemes in the UK, and I am sure any of them would be delighted to work with an international pop star with extensive resources at their disposal.
David Lintern’s column in the last issue of TGO was also cautious about the rise of the ‘green lairds’. As much as I respect David’s view, what’s wrong with being a ‘green laird’? It seems to me an admirable soubriquet, continuing a tradition started in the 17th Century when the ‘planting dukes’ enhanced their estates by mass afforestation. Aristocrats 300 years ago; pop stars today. I see no problem with that, if it brings an environmental benefit. Given the scale of the ecological crisis, I don’t think we can afford to be picky.
Ed Sheeran could remind himself that another singer-songwriter, Robert Burns, sent the following to the Duke of Atholl, after being dismayed with the bare hillsides around the magnificent Falls of Bruar on the Duke’s Atholl estate.
Would then my noble master please To grace my highest wishes He’ll shade my banks wi’ towering trees And bonnie spreading bushes Hardly Burns’ finest piece of verse, but it did the trick. After Burns died, the Duke fired cannons packed with Scots pine and larch seed around the waterfall, and the resulting woodland remains today.
If Sheeran can be persuaded to work with the likes of the Woodland Trust, Trees for Life and the Forestry Commission, the results could be truly spectacular. I feel it is initiatives like these that are most likely to bring lasting environmental benefits, not the centralised schemes promoted by government, which tend to be overly bureaucratic (ask any farmer who has applied for an agro-forestry grant) and ponderous to establish and maintain. The same would, I’m sure, apply to any schemes seeking to use European funding.
Ed Sheeran is said to have a personal fortune of £300 million. That would get you a lot of trees. I greatly welcome his offer, which could provide something of genuine and lasting benefit. Go for it, Ed!