Scottish Forestry information on Todrig woodland creation scheme: EIR release

Information requested

In respect of the Todrig Woodland creation scheme (25FGS84239), please could Scottish Forestry provide information in respect of the following:

1. A copy of the contract (or draft contract) for Todrig woodland creation scheme, even though this has not been signed.

2. How much is the total value of the grant that may be paid for the Todrig woodland creation scheme?

3. For Todrig, what date did Euroforest Silviculture / Pryor and Rickett Silviculture/Gresham House Forest Growth and Sustainability Fund LP make an application to Scottish Forestry for a screening decision?

4. Did Scottish Forestry extend the 28-day deadline for a screening decision, and if so, why, and how long for?

5. Did Scottish Forestry ask Euroforest Silviculture / Pryor and Rickett Silviculture/Gresham House Forest Growth and Sustainability Fund LP for any further information to inform the screening decision?

6. If further information was provided to inform the screening decision, could you please provide a copy of all this information?

7. Please provide the FGS score sheet in full for Todrig, showing the application submission date, assessment date, the date submitted to the National Office, the FGS opinions, the costs of these opinions, the scores awarded, and the Woodland Officer comments.

8. Has the Todrig FGS been submitted to the clearing round for funding approval? If so, what date was this, and what was the outcome and date of this outcome?

Response

As the information you have requested is ‘environmental information’ for the purposes of the Environmental Information (Scotland) Regulations 2004 (EIRs), we are required to deal with your request under those Regulations. We are applying the exemption at section 39(2) of the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), so that we do not also have to deal with your request under FOISA.

This exemption is subject to the ‘public interest test’. Therefore, taking into account all the circumstances of this case, we have considered whether the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exemption. We have found that, on balance, the public interest lies in favour of upholding the exemption, because there is no public interest in dealing with the same request under two different regimes. This is essentially a technical point and has no material effect on the outcome of your request.

Ad. 1) A copy of the contract (or draft contract) for Todrig woodland creation scheme, even though this has not been signed.

While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance, we are unable to provide some of the information you have requested because of an exception under Regulation 10(4)(d) of the EIRs (material in the course of completion, unfinished documents, and incomplete data) as it related to information that is actively being worked or incomplete data and is subject to modifications. This exception is subject to the ‘public interest test’, and we have a statutory obligation to apply it. Therefore, considering all the circumstances of this case and any adverse effects of disclosing incomplete data or data still being collected, we have assessed whether the public interest in releasing the information outweighs the public interest in maintaining the exception. We have concluded that, overall, the public interest favours upholding the exception. While we recognise there may be a public interest in releasing all the information, the incomplete and partial internal data, along with ongoing data collection, could cause confusion or even mislead.

The project has been reviewed by Scottish Forestry and listed on the public register; however, it has not yet progressed to the final contract stage. The project is subject to judicial review, and the applicant ceased working on it when the judicial review was initiated. Although there was a draft application for Forestry Grant Scheme funding, it has not moved to the review or awarding stage. Therefore, there is no contract or provisional contract in place to provide the information you requested.

The Scottish Forestry publishes the locations of all woodland creation grant approvals on its publicly accessible Map Browser: https://www.forestry.gov.scot/support-regulations/scottish-forestry-map-viewer

You will be able to navigate the map to see FGS applications by clicking on the layers tab of the new version of the map, which is located in the top-left corner, to the left of the legend tab: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/f7af4d60802d4539b59f12f2ba995d64/page/Page?views=Layer-Group

More detailed information on projects is regularly shared through the Register of Forestry Grant Scheme Woodland Creation and Tree Felling Permissions , which can be found here : https://www.forestry.gov.scot/support-regulations/public-registers/register-of-felling-permissions-andforestry-grant-scheme-applications

You can find the information you requested by narrowing your search in the case book through various categories, such as the case type (Felling Permission Applications; Forestry Grant Scheme; Woodland Creation pre-applications; LTFP), case status (open for comment; under consideration; approved; not approved; expired), location (conservancy; local authority; property name), and case reference number: https://casebook.forestry.scot/w/webpage/prhome

Ad. 2) How much is the total value of the grant that may be paid for the Todrig woodland creation scheme?

I determined that the value of the woodland creation grant depends on the terms and conditions outlined in the contract signed by both parties and concluded that the total value of the grant is not a separate and independent piece of work in its own right. Since this application has not yet advanced to the contract stage and is subject to judicial review, the scheme submission remains incomplete by the applicant, and no such contract currently exists. Therefore, it is not possible to estimate or determine the total value of the grant at this time. I am sorry that I am unable to be more helpful on this occasion.

You might be interested in the Forestry Grant Scheme for Woodland Creation, which provides information on the amounts of woodland grant funding available for the various options and items Scottish Forestry would contribute to, available at: https://www.ruralpayments.org/topics/allschemes/forestry-grant-scheme/woodland-creation/

Ad. 3 ) For Todrig, what date did Euroforest Silviculture / Pryor and Rickett Silviculture/Gresham House Forest Growth and Sustainability Fund LP make an application to Scottish Forestry for a screening decision?

I can confirm that Scottish Forestry received the initial screening opinion request form on 30 September 2024.

Ad. 4) Did Scottish Forestry extend the 28-day deadline for a screening decision, and if so, why, and how long for?

I can confirm that Scottish Forestry has reset the clock on this application, as detailed below.

On 7 October 2024, after reviewing the information provided, Scottish Forestry requested further clarification from the applicant on a number of areas, specifically:

• Ecologist comments – clarification requested to produce a document containing comments from their ecologist specifically addressing the design in relation to sensitive habitats and those designated as ‘intermediate’. This should particularly focus on the suitability of species in certain areas and buffer zones.
• In addition to the operational plan, ensure the core path remains unobstructed and that the council is notified if a diversion becomes necessary.
• Further clarification on buffer zones related to machinery operation during the salmon spawning period.
• Provide evidence of discussions with residents of properties supplied by PWS and record it in the Issues Log.
• Add the method of ground cultivation for NBL planting into the operations plan.
• Provide a breakdown of the species table.
• Add more detail to the screening opinion request form (section advises see Issues Log).

It was also communicated to the applicant at that time that we had asked our colleague to share relevant survey information regarding Whitslaid.

On 12 November 2024, the applicant responded to the woodland officers' information request. The applicant provided the following details:

• Comments from the ecologist.
• Updated core path map.
• Updated operational plan.
• Added a method of ground cultivation for NBL planting to the operations plan.
• Provided the species breakdown table.
• Provided correspondence with the property owner regarding the protection of the Private Water Supply.
• The applicant also responded to the discussion on cumulative impact, noting that it is not required and that they had previously discussed this with the Scottish Forestry Senior Operations Manager. The applicant also noted that there is no guidance stating that they need to assess an external scheme cumulatively, and that this responsibility should be for Scottish Forestry to decide. In addition, Whitslaid surveys were not yet complete, so the applicant noted that they could not fully assess them in any case.

On 19 November 2024, the woodland officer confirmed that the timer for the EIA should start but stopped it again on 22 November 2024 when requesting an agreement in principle regarding timber transport. On the same day, the applicant provided evidence along with an indicative map.

The EIA clock was restarted, and a screening decision was issued on 23 December 2024.

Ad. 5) Did Scottish Forestry ask Euroforest Silviculture / Pryor and Rickett Silviculture/Gresham House Forest Growth and Sustainability Fund LP for any further information to inform the screening decision?

The answer to this question was provided in my response to your previous question, question number four above.

Ad. 6) If further information was provided to inform the screening decision, could you please provide a copy of all this information?

I have attached the documents provided to further inform the screening decision, including the latest issues log, woodland creation operational plan, CAT and core path maps.

While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance, we are unable to provide some of the information you requested because an exception under Regulation 11 (2) of the EIRs (personal data relating to a third party) applies. This is an absolute exception and is not subject to the public interest test. You will be able to identify where the personal data has been redacted in the documents released.

Some of the information you requested was withheld under Regulation 10 (5) (e), which allows public authorities to withhold information when disclosure would, or would likely to, substantially prejudice the confidentiality of commercial and industrial information where such confidentiality is provided for by law to protect a legitimate economic interest. This exception is subject to a public interest test.

Please refer to Annex A below for the reasons these exceptions apply.

Ad. 7) Please provide the FGS score sheet in full for Todrig, showing the application submission date, assessment date, the date submitted to the National Office, the FGS opinions, the costs of these opinions, the scores awarded, and the Woodland Officer comments.

As previously noted under Ad.1), in this case, the exception under Regulation 10(4)(d) of the EIRs (material in the course of completion, unfinished documents, and incomplete data) applies. The project is subject to judicial review. The applicant ceased work on this development, and neither a contract nor a draft contract is currently in place; therefore, the contract has not yet been scored.

Ad. 8) Has the Todrig FGS been submitted to the clearing round for funding approval? If so, what date was this, and what was the outcome and date of this outcome?

I can confirm that the project has not progressed to clearing, so the answer to your last question is no.

ANNEX A

REASONS FOR NOT PROVIDING INFORMATION

Personal data relating to a third party

An exception under regulation 11(2) of the EIRs (personal information) applies to some of the information requested because it is personal data of a third party and disclosing it would contravene the data protection principles in Article 5(1) of the General Data Protection Regulation and in section 34(1) of the Data Protection Act 2018. This is an absolute exception that is not subject to the ‘public interest test’, so we are not required to consider whether the public interest in disclosing the information outweighs the public interest in applying the exception.

Confidentiality of commercial information in relation to private water supplies (PWS)

An exception under Regulation 10(5)(e) of the EIRs (commercial confidentiality) applies to some of the requested information because it relates to information supplied by the applicant regarding to the exact location of private water supplies (PWS), which are vulnerable to disruption or pollution. The information was supplied to the Scottish Forestry as a regulator. This exception is subject to the public interest test, and we have a statutory obligation to apply it. Under Regulation 10 (5) (e), I assumed disclosure when applying the exception and weighed the public interest in either maintaining or disclosing the information. Although we recognise there may be public interest in releasing all the information, I have concluded that, on balance, the public interest supports upholding the exception, as disclosing this specific type of information would have an adverse effect not only on the economic interests of the applicant but also on others, since households and businesses depend on these supplies. Therefore, it is crucial to protect them from the impacts of land use changes and forestry operations.

Material still in the course of completion, unfinished documents or incomplete data

An exception 10(4)(d) of the EIRs (material in the course of completion, unfinished documents, and incomplete data), which covers unfinished documents and incomplete data. It is important to remember that this is a qualified exception, meaning that while the information might fall under the exception, it can be disclosed if the public interest in disclosure outweighs the public interest in maintaining the exception. While acknowledging some public interest in releasing information as part of open, transparent, and accountable government, and to inform public debate, I have evaluated whether the public interest in disclosing incomplete data or data still in the collection process outweighs the public interest in applying the exception. I have determined that, on balance, the public interest supports upholding the exception. This is because premature disclosure of incomplete data, data still in the process of completion, or incomplete data could adversely affect the impartiality of operational and application processes and could also mislead public debate.

About FOI

The Scottish Government is committed to publishing all information released in response to Freedom of Information requests. View all FOI responses at https://www.gov.scot/foi-responses.