Management Impacts on Ecosystem Service Provision of

Landscape Elements: TWECOM Partner Perspectives

Sally Westaway
The Organic Research Centre

Management Impacts on Ecosystem Service Provision of Landscape

Elements: TWECOM Partner Perspectives
Landscape elements (LE) are individual components which make up the landscape including for
example, hills, trees and hedges. They have many functions and benefits including supporting
biodiversity, controlling erosion, buffering natural habitats from agricultural impacts and enhancing
aesthetic appeal. Both under and over-management pose a threat to LE and the delivery of their
environmental services. For LEs and their associated services to be maintained a certain level of
management is therefore required. As part of the Towards Eco-energetic Communities (TWECOM)
project partners were asked to feedback on the perceived impacts of LE management for biofuel on
different ecosystem services. For most TWECOM partners the main LE being considered are hedgerows
or lines of trees. Differences in the origins of these LEs and the management techniques used have
produced variation in the appearance and function of LEs between European countries and regions. Due
to this heterogeneous nature of LEs, before any consideration of impacts, it is important to identify
similarities and differences between the partner areas.

A Common History
In northern Europe woody landscape elements, such as hedgerows, share a common history.
Historically, hedgerows were primarily used as stock-proof features, marking boundaries between
properties, fields or agricultural units whilst also providing a source of food, fuel and shelter. Following
the First World War barbed wire was introduced to Europe from America and used as a fencing material,
replacing some European hedgerows as a boundary feature. Over a similar period traditional practices
such as coppicing and pollarding declined as oil and coal replaced wood as the primary source of energy
production in Western Europe. Rates of hedgerow removal were then further increased by agricultural
intensification during the late 1960s and early 1970s. Hedgerows were abandoned, removed or
neglected. With the exception of France, Britain and Ireland, many European countries were left with
few remaining hedgerow networks. In most TWECOM partner areas only fragmented hedgerow
networks remain with most in poor condition due to under or over management.

TWECOM Partners Overview

TWECOM is co-ordinated by RLLK, a regional landscape organisation in Belgium, and involves partners in
Belgium, Netherlands, Germany and the UK (Figure 1).

ORC
ZLTO
Inagro
PUM
RLLK/ BB
Projects

Figure 1. Location of partner areas in Belgium, Netherlands, Germany and the UK.

Inagro (Belgium): Inagro has more than 50 years work experience in the province of West-Flanders as
a centre for research and consultancy in agriculture. Inagro has been partner in several Interreg projects
and the latest is the Interreg IVb NWE project ARBOR, where pilots for multifunctional use of SRC were
installed. Based on the knowledge gathered in the ARBOR project farmers will be given advice on how to
implement these woody elements on their farm. Exchange of this knowledge will be also very useful in
other partner regions were similar goals are put forward. They are working with local farmers, land
owners and other stakeholders to build partnerships and develop the local biomass production chain
and improve the knowledge by demonstrations, advising and guiding. The development of a centre of
excellence for woody biomass at Inagro (where the whole chain is demonstrated from planting till
combustion) will be a very important tool in this. Also the pilots of SRC set up in ARBOR will be useful for
demonstration and further practical research.

BB Projects (Belgium): BB Projects is the organisation through which 'Boerenbond & Landelijke Gilden'
permanently delivers about 40 EU-funded projects. With a history of 150 years, Boerenbond is the
largest farmers organisation in Flanders. With its 17,000 agricultural and 70,000 rural residents as
members, it is continuously striving for economically, socially and ecologically sustainable agriculture in
Flanders and has broad community support. They have considerable experience in consultancy towards
farmers on the use of biomass heating systems and their network will be used to inform rural people of
the use of a local energy source.

RLLK (Belgium): RLLK is an organization preserving landscape quality and biodiversity outside nature
reserves in Limburg, Belgium. They support municipalities, landowners, farmers and industries in
realizing landscape projects. RLLK has experience with ecological, social and cultural aspects of
landscape elements. With experience in leading European projects and connections with many relevant
stakeholder groups, RLLK have taken the role as lead partners in the TWECOM project along with BB
Projects.

ORC (UK): The Organic Research Centre is a registered charity whose business is to develop and
support sustainable land-use, agriculture and food systems, primarily within local economies. The
organisation is based on Elm Farm, a 85 hectare organic farm in Berkshire, and works through a
participatory network of established organic farms and other businesses. Having expertise in evaluating
both national and European policy frameworks and the impacts of land management on ecosystem
services, the ORCs role in TWECOM is focused on assessing, monitoring and evaluating the impacts of
the energetic use of landscape elements. Working with farmers, landowners and the local community,
the ORC is also developing a pilot energy co-operative at Elm Farm which uses woody biomass from local
landscape elements such as hedgerows.

PUM (Germany): The Department of Geography of the Philipps-Universitt Marburg focuses on

environmental, social & economic issues to understand & solve problems from a spatial perspective. The
Working Group Regional Studies and Policy has a special focus on rural development, including the role
of renewable energy. In the field of bioenergy the Working Group is involved the implementation
process of bioenergy villages within the County of Marburg-Biedenkopf, Germany. Based on socialscience research methods the Working Group analysed different actions and actors involved in the
implementation process. PUM will bring in the named knowledge and expertise from the bioenergy
villages projects and academic skills in socio-economic research methods. Together with ORC, PUM will
focus on the assessment, monitoring and evaluation of the project.

ZLTO (Netherlands): ZLTO accomplish projects concerning different themes and sectors, related to
agriculture focusing on energy, agrarian management of nature and agro-biodiversity. In TWECOM,
ZLTO contribute to the screening of existing biomass organizational structures and business models and
analyse possible transformations into more efficient and successful structures and models, adapted to
the needs of the pilot regions. They contribute to the investigation of other possibilities for biomass use
(e.g. bio filtration, pyrolyse), the integration of woody biomass in existing production chains, the logistics
of the supply chain (sustainable production, transport, processing of woody biomass) and the
evaluation of existing technologies for harvest, storage and drying.

Partner Landscape Elements

Inagro (Belgium): In West Flanders remnants of original woody landscape elements are scarce and
scattered throughout the landscape. The main LEs suitable for wood production are hedgerows (defined
as margins of at least one row of trees, with a maximum width of 10m), rows of trees along small
watercourses from land consolidation plans and newly planted short rotation coppice (SRC) systems.
The LEs being considered for mechanical harvesting are hedgerows, optimized for biodiversity as well as
producing wood. They contain mostly hazel (Corylus avellana), ash (Fraxnus excelsior), willow (Salix
caprea, Salix alba, Salix viminalis) and black alder (Alnus glutinosa). Older hedgerows have not been well
managed and are now in poor condition. Similarly, newly planted hedgerows are in need of
management to prevent natural degradation. Optimally hedgerows are coppiced on an 8 to 12 year
rotation. However, management is often seen as a cost by public authorities and farmers who are
unaware of the potential to harvest wood from the hedgerows. A distinction is made between a hedge
and a hedgerow; a hedge is defined as a single or double row of shrubs or trees cut annually or every 5
years. There is a government administered compensation scheme for the planting and management of
new hedges and hedgerows, with planting and management specifications associated with the contracts
and higher payments awarded for the planting of native species.

Figure 2. Mixed hedgerows: typical Landscape elements in West Flanders

Figure 3. Aerial photo of an

area representative of West
Flanders dominated by
scattered small landscape
elements

RLLK/BB Projects (Belgium): The area of focus for RLLK and BB Projects is the municipality of Bocholt
in the north of the province of Limburg. Although historically hedgerows (typically one row of
trees/shrubs on a bank with a ditch on both sides) were widespread in northern Limburg, most of
todays hedgerows have been established relatively recently (since 1850 or later) having developed
spontaneously along road sides. Due to neglect, older remaining hedgerows consist mainly of large trees
with large diameters as a result of a lack of management for 50 years or more. Most of the 75 km of
hedgerows present in Bocholt are owned by the municipality and predominantly consist of oak (Quercus
robur) with hazel, black alder, ash, hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna), blackthorn (Prunus spinosa),
common rowan (Sorbus aucuparia) and alder buckthorn (Rhamnus frangula).
Figure 4. An aerial view
of a section of the
municipality of Bocholt
showing the LE network

ORC (UK): The main LEs being considered at ORC are hedgerows and related structures such as rows of
trees and small in-field copses. A hedgerow is defined by the UK biodiversity Action Plan as any
boundary of trees or shrubs over 20m long and less than 5m wide between major woody stems at the
base. UK hedgerows were largely established between the 13th and 19th centuries and are the most
widespread semi-natural habitat in England. The dominant hedgerow species within the Hamstead
Marshall pilot project on Elm Farm is Blackthorn with other commonly recorded species being
hawthorn, hazel, pussy willow (Salix caprea/cinerea) and oak. The UK pilot is based on Elm Farm where
the main function of the hedgerows is to mark field and property boundaries. The farm is an organic
livestock farm and all hedges are supplemented with fencing in order to be stock proof. Throughout the
UK there has been a decline in traditional management practices. Many hedgerows are in poor
condition, being either neglected or heavily flailed to prevent encroachment into productive land. Most
of the hedgerows on Elm Farm have not been managed for many years, asides from occasional side
flailing to maintain field sizes. The total length of hedgerows on Elm Farm is approximately 9.5km, over
an 85 ha area. Hedgerow management activities and hedge planting are supported in the UK under
various government administered agri-environment schemes (AES). The primary focus of these schemes
is currently landscape and biodiversity, and hedgerow options under AES have resulted in considerable

behavioural change amongst farmers, with half of applicants making positive changes to their
management.
Figure 5. Aerial photograph of ORC pilot project area
showing network of hedgerows and woodland.

Figure 6: Elm Farm hedges in summer and winter

PUM (Germany): The LEs in the County of Marburg-Biedenkopf consist of hedgerows: linear structural
elements of anthropogenic origin which are predominantly covered with wood, rows of trees: linearly
arranged, non-agricultural trees and copses, and areas of coppice not used for agricultural production.
The most common shrub species are blackthorn, hazel and elder and the most common tree species are
oak, common aspen, willow, black alder and common hornbeam. Most structures are not managed,
with a few hedges, including roadside hedges, pruned laterally. Geographically the hedges are widely
distributed without a dense network of hedges. A hedgerow with a length of 300m is considered
relatively long. Over the past 70 years these LEs have served no purpose other than as nesting sites and
animal shelter. Material from hedges were considered as waste and burned without any use. Today
nesting and shelter (e.g. animal crossing) are still important functions, but the landscape value is also
recognised (nice to view, shadow for walking tours). Some hedges are also cross compliance relevant
and provide income for framers.

Figure 7: Mixed farm hedge in MarburgBiedenkopf

Figure 8: Aerial Photograph showing the typical LE network in the Province of Marburg- Biedenkopf

ZLTO (Netherlands): The provinces of Noord Brabant and Zeeland are characterized by a wide range of
LEs caused by variations in soil type. The western part has clay soils where the main LEs are rows of
trees, mainly willows (Salix) with hawthorn, poplar (Populus) and elder (Sambucus nigra), and shrubs
planted on dikes with few hedgerows or woodlands. In the east there are mainly sandy soils with a
diversification of woods, streams and valleys. LEs here consist of rows of trees, hedges and shrubs,
found around agricultural land and nature conservation areas. Types of woody species found on the
sandy soils are oak, poplar, alder, birch (Betula), hazel, beech (Fagus sylvatica), elm (Ulmus) and field
Maple (Acer campestre). Previously managed for fuel and building materials, management efforts now
focus on restoring the ecological values of LEs and more functions are added such as local energy
production. Plantation (reintroduction of landscape elements) is also carried out to compensate for the
agricultural intensification and the removal of natural habitats in the past. Planting of new LEs has
become a necessity in order to receive spatial and environmental permits for up scaling farms, especially
livestock farms. In most municipalities farmers can receive subsidies for the planting, restoration and/or

management of LEs on land they own. Farmers can sign management and performance contracts for a
maximum period of 6 years.
Figure 9. Landscape
elements in the sand
landscape (mostly parts of
Noord-Brabant)

Figure 10: Aerial photograph showing the typical LE network on sandy soil near Nuenen

Figure 12: Aerial photograph showing the typical LE network on clay soil near Nieuwdorp

Proposed Common Definition of a Hedgerow:

As demonstrated in the descriptions and photographs above within the five different partner areas
there is a reasonably wide definition of what a landscape element and specifically what a hedgerow is.
From these descriptions we have tried to pull together a common definition of a hedgerow that can
broadly be applied across all partner areas, this is:
Any boundary feature consisting predominantly of native trees or shrubs with a width of at least 1
row of trees/shrubs but not more than 5-10m; generally of anthropogenic origin and dependant on
management for long term maintenance.

Management Impacts on Ecosystem services

TWECOM partners were asked to feedback on the perceived impacts of LEs on ecosystem service
provision (or the ways in which hedges benefit people) and the impact of the introduction of
management activities for biofuel production on this provision. The management technique considered
was coppicing. Coppicing involves cutting and removing all woody material at ground level on a 10-20
year rotation. A questionnaire was sent round to project partners and a transnational masterclass and
workshop was held at the Partner meeting in Marburg in September 2013.

Regulatory services
Hedgerows provide an important regulatory function within the landscape, including improving water
quality by buffering waterways from agricultural pollutants, controlling soil erosion from fields and
providing shelter for crops and livestock.
At the workshop the large amount of conflicting evidence and views on the regulatory function of
hedgerows was discussed. Do they improve soil moisture or cause drying? Do the positive effects on
agricultural production compensate for the negative? Such topics are often confusing and a need for
more conclusive evidence and clearer information for farmers, stakeholders and policy makers was
acknowledged.
Of the different regulatory services all partners recognized the function of hedgerows in controlling soil
erosion. The Flemish partners Inagro, RLLK and BB Projects mentioned that the Flemish government
provides compensation through agri-environmental schemes for farmers who take measures to prevent
soil erosion. However, RLLK and BB Projects also mentioned some farmers have little time to manage
hedgerows even when agri-environment payments are available. Provision of shade was also highlighted
as an important function.

Inagro: Hedgerows have been recently planted by the province of West Flanders and the Flemish Land
Agency to restore and improve the landscape through preventing erosion and improving soil and water
quality. Erosion is mostly an issue in the South-west of West Flanders where hedgerows are seen to
have the potential to help prevent soil erosion. Concerns regarding the introduction of new

management of LEs for fuel included that coppicing may have a negative impact on both the wind break
function and erosion control. Also in order to harvest woody biomass in a profitable way it is necessary
to harvest a certain minimum volume. LEs are not very abundant or widely dispersed in West Flanders
so from economical point of view it is logical to harvest as much biomass from an area as possible in one
go. This could have a detrimental impact on the regulatory functions of hedgerow, the landscape and
biodiversity.

RLLK/BB Projects: Hedgerows can have an important function in preventing soil erosion in regions
with cropland on slopes such as Southern Limburg. Increased hedge height is thought to have a negative
impact on agriculture due to increased shade. Hedgerows in Belgium are often over 15 metres in height;
it is often cited within literature that regulatory functions (such as shade and shelter) improve with
hedgerow height. However, most studies only consider hedges up to 8 metres. Increase in height
beyond a certain threshold may even have diminishing returns or negative effects on some ecosystem
services. Reduced hedge height through management might therefore improve regulatory functions,
although more research is required. It was also noted that hedgerow roots at the border of fields may
take up and trap nutrients, benefiting agricultural production. However, hedgerows may also harbour
pests such as oak processionary moth (Thaumetopoea processione), a moth caterpillar that produces a
human irritant and lives on oak trees. In carbon storage studies in Limburg, landscape elements such as
hedgerows are recognized as being marginal compared to the forest areas.

ORC: UK hedgerows have mainly been considered for their function in regulating runoff, reducing soil
erosion and maintaining water quality. With hedgerow location, orientation and network density cited
as important factors in the regulation of water quality, microclimate, erosion and hydrology, regulatory
functions could be enhanced through improved hedge network design. Hedgerow management is likely
to affect functions such as microclimate regulation where characteristics, such as height, influence wind
velocity, rates of evapotranspiration and shading. Management to support one ecosystem service can
either lead to co-benefits to other services or result in trade-offs. For instance, redesign and replanting
of hedgerow networks to promote regulatory functions may require the removal of historical or
culturally important hedgerows.

PUM: An important regulatory function of LE in the County of Marburg-Biedenkopf identified in the

initial questionnaire is protection against erosion. During several field visits and meetings PUM have also
consulted a working group on the impacts of managing LEs in Marburg-Biedenkopf for woodfuel. The
group consists of: a local environmental group Momberg, a farmers spokesman, special service for
renewable energy (department for rural areas) of Marburg-Biedenkopf, lower nature conservation
authority, Universities Marburg and Gieen, local NABU group, IFLS institute of rural structure science
and municipality of Neustadt. The group were concerned that increases in tree height may result in
shading of crops, especially in the context of a meadow with scattered fruit trees, no concerns about the
impact of changes in management on shelter, erosion control or buffering of agricultural impacts were
mentioned.

ZLTO: Landscape elements in the provinces of Noord Brabant and Zeeland are important in providing
shade which prevents overheating of barns and buildings and reducing nutrient leaching. Cutting of

certain hedgerows might therefore negatively affect these functions. Any increases in tree height as a
result of changes in management will be an issue to farmers if this results in production losses, however
there are not many existing LEs around arable fields so the impact should be minimal tree height and
the potential for crop shading should be considered with any new planting. Erosion is not such an issue
in this part of the Netherlands, the land is flat and dikes have generally been planted with trees so
reducing the impacts of wind erosion. An additional function of trees and hedges near motorways is to
reduce fine particulates out of the air. Coppicing could have a negative impact on the air quality around
motorways.

Provisioning and Cultural services

Historically European hedgerows were an important source of food, fuel and fibre for rural
communities. Today, the economic values of such products are often small, difficult to quantify and
culturally determined with many traditional usages now in decline. Changes in the functions of
hedgerows and related cultural practices have contributed to their decline.
Initial discussions in the group were around the need for a common understanding of what defines a
cultural value. BB Projects suggested that something has a cultural value if it is made by human hands
and PUM that a landscape element has a cultural value if rooted in human activities (e.g. hunting). There
was general agreement across all partners that managing hedges for wood fuel would have a positive
effect of the provisioning services of the hedgerows by providing a source of fuel. However,
management may also have a negative impact in particular where hedgerows currently have a screening
function (e.g. near motorways). As part of any management plan it is therefore necessary to look at the
benefits of changing management or not managing hedges at the same time as considering the
economics of any management prescriptions.

Inagro: With increasing fuel prices, the use of LEs a renewable fuel source is gaining interest. There is
currently no organized or professional wood harvesting, with only small amounts of fuel wood harvested
from LE by volunteers. Once there is renewed interest in wood as an energy source, farmers and local
authorities may rethink the management of such resources and encourage planting.
Although few historical LEs are still in place, remaining/ existing hedgerows and woody elements are
recognized as important and are protected by the Nature decree. Traditional management practices
such as coppicing are no longer common and mostly seen as a cost and not a benefit. There is also
maybe a threat that valuable trees (monumental) would be cut for biomass or would be harvested more
often than desired which could have a negative impact on the longevity.

RLLK/BB: Today the provisioning functions of LEs are very limited and probably one of the main reasons
for their neglect and removal. Some wood is used for heating (firewood), but this is not organized.
Coppicing is a historical method of hedge management. In Belgium 90% of fuel from hedgerows
(managed by coppicing) was traditionally used in ovens for baking bread. However coppicing is no longer
seen as an acceptable land management technique due to lack of awareness, concern about hedgerows

being removed and coppicing being seen as destruction. Education is therefore needed for the public
to once again accept coppicing as a management technique
Hedgerows have become an important part of cultural heritage with ancient hedgerows containing
coppice stools or ancient pollards recognized as valuable. This asks the question whether it is culturally
acceptable to cut these stools to renovate hedgerows. The Flemish government foresees a budget to
restore valuable ancient elements, although this budget is limited. Tourism organizations have started to
promote some regions through promoting LEs as an attractive character of a region.

ORC: There is a strong connection between British hedgerows and national identity. Farmers,
professionals and the public consider hedgerows to be a unique and important part of their national
heritage, hedgerow flora is often used in traditional British food and drink and often appears within
English folklore. Hedgerows contribute aesthetically to the character of a region and provide value for
rural activities such as game shooting. Isolated hedgerow trees have potential to produce timber
supplying farmers with low-cost materials and additional income through timber sales. Hedgerows can
also provide a source of livestock fodder and craft materials, such as willow for basketry. Food products
derived from hedgerows are predominantly sourced from fruiting trees such as blackthorn and shrubs
such as bramble (Rubus fruticosus).
Traditional hedgerow management techniques, such as hedge-laying and coppicing, produce regionally
distinct hedgerows. Pollarded willows, for example, are a hedgerow feature typical to Somerset in
South-West England. Re-introduction of traditional techniques in the restoration of hedgerows would
not only help preserve historical practices but re-establish the economic value of hedgerows by
increasing their productivity. The Pontbren Project in Wales for example coppiced gapped up and
restored old hedgerows as stock-proof boundaries on a number of livestock farms. However,
management such as coppicing may be perceived negatively by the public.

PUM: The provision of an additional source of income for farmers from managing LEs for fuel was
considered potentially important, if the logistics of harvesting in a dispersed network can be overcome.
LE management also has the potential to provide a new source of biomass for bioenergy villages.
Concerns were raised in the group about potential negative impact of coppicing on the screening
function of hedgerows especially along railways. The group also mentioned that shade for walkers is
currently an important function of some LEs which coppicing may negatively impact upon.

ZLTO: Landscape elements are important in the maintenance of landscape values and improve visual
heritage structures. Historically the woody LEs in the provinces of Noord Brabant and Zeeland have
provided a source of fuel, shelter, building materials and wooden shoes (poplar trees). Landscape
elements do not have a direct economic function anymore, but are important for cultural purposes such
as leisure and tourism. They are also are important in preventing visual pollution this function would be
affected by coppice management. Harvesting LE for biomass has the potential to create a circular
economy and increase the economic benefits of landscape elements. Coppicing LEs used to concern
nature conservation agencies, nowadays their attitude is changing as the value of LEs for the production

of green energy is realised. ZLTO also noted that in the Netherlands there not much concern about LEs
being managed or coppiced; there are a lot more concerns when LEs are not being managed.

Biodiversity services
Hedgerows and other LEs are often the only semi-natural habitat to be found in many agricultural
landscapes and are universally recognised as being of great importance for biodiversity.
There was a general consensus amongst partners on the value of hedgerows to biodiversity and
recognition of the functional diversity (for example, in terms of pollinators and pest predators)
associated with hedgerows. Common concerns included a loss of connectivity following coppicing.
Inagro made the point that the woody species composition of some thorn dominated hedges may need
adjusting in order to get a good fuel crop and this would have knock on effects on species associated
with these hedgerows. There is also concern in the UK that realising the financial value of hedges could
change the hedge habitat dramatically favouring taller less bushy single species hedgerows with
negative implications for biodiversity.

Inagro: Conflicts in management interests may occur between biomass production and biodiversity. For
example, to receive agri-environment payments farmers are unable to harvest a large proportion of
their LEs. In areas where LEs are scarce, farmers may choose to not take agri-environment payments so
they can harvest all the LEs in their area for firewood. This may then result in unfavourable LE
management for wildlife.
Rows of trees or mixed hedgerows are important for farmland birds e.g. Yellowhammer (Emberiza
citronella), for providing shelter, nesting sites and food sources. Flowering shrubs (such as Frangula
alnus, Cornus sanguinea, Prunus spinosa, Ligustrum vulgare, Crataegus monogyna and Viburnum opulus)
are important sources of pollen and nectar for pollinators and natural predators of pest species. New
LEs of indigenous species planted in a SRC system are often less diverse and have a lower conservation
value than mixed hedgerows. However, it is proven that they can strengthen biodiversity in agricultural
areas as they also provide food and shelter for insects and birds.
The value of current LEs depends on their connectivity to existing semi-natural habitats (e.g. they are of
less value if isolated in a field). Following coppicing, it is expected that there would be a change in
species composition (e.g. currently roe deer are found in these LE, and would probably be lost if proper
hedgerow management was implemented). Elsewhere in Belgium, current thorn dominated hedges may
need to be modified with species more suitable for woodfuel planted, this will also change the
associated species. There is also concern that removing wood from hedgerows for fuel will reduce soil
organic matter and degrade soil structure especially in sandy soils.

ZLTO: Hedgerows are believed to harbour beneficial organisms for pest control. Landscape elements,
although no longer having a direct economic function, are important for ecological reasons. Loss of
habitat connectivity is less of an issue in the Netherlands as nature areas and habitats are already
fragmented. Policies have now been set up to establish new connections between nature areas and
efforts are made to restore the ecological value of LEs. Reintroduction of LEs is also carried out to

compensate the up scaling effects by agriculture and the removal of natural habitats in the past. LEs can
also act as ecological corridors, improving migration of birds, insects and mammals between nature
conservation areas. ZLTO also consider biodiversity is higher in hedges that are managed, with some
species negatively affected and others positively affected by coppicing. So to obtain the highest
biodiversity, management needs to be rotational in order to establish different habitats at different
phases in the rotation.

ORC: Introduction of coppice management cycles will make hedgerow systems more dynamic and will
increase the heterogeneity of habitats within a landscape. This should increase overall biodiversity
within an area, with different species and communities associated with different ages of re-growth. The
trade-off may be reduced connectivity between patches of semi-natural habitats for species that use the
hedgerows as corridors, and also a reduction in species associated with old growth/dead wood,
although management plans could ensure some dead wood is left. There is also a concern in the UK that
management focused on maximizing biomass production may result in biological simplification.

RLLK/BB Projects: Landscape elements such as hedgerows are recognized to have an important
ecological function. Hedgerows provide habitats for target bird species such as the Yellowhammer, Redbacked shrike (Lanius collurio) and Common nightingale (Luscinia megarhynchos). Hedgerows act as
important corridors for wildlife. Hedgerows with indigenous species are recognized as having a positive
effect on pest control, although it isnt yet established among most of the farmers. Some species in
hedgerows can have important value for pollinators. Mainly Alder Buckthorn is mentioned in this
context, not only by nature conservation organizations, but also by bee keepers. On one hand, coppicing
may lead to issues of habitat fragmentation. Maintaining habitat connectivity and a closed network of
hedgerows is therefore important. However, on the other hand a lack of management can cause
hedgerows to evolve into completely different structures compared to an originally coppiced hedgerow.

PUM: Hedges are important part of habitat connectivity and are a refuge for local wildlife both
functions that may be negatively impacted by coppice management. The working group also identified
concerns that increased economic value may result in unfavourable management for wildlife and that
some species (especially birds) may be negatively affected by management for woodfuel.

Key conclusions and recommendations

A common concern amongst partners in areas where the LE network is scarce and dispersed is the
feasibility of management for woodfuel and the impact that coppice management of such a dispersed
network would have on the wildlife and other values of the hedges. A related concern is the potential
impact on biodiversity of the temporary loss of habitat connectivity associated with coppicing.

Encourage cooperation between farmers and landowners in woodfuel planning and

management activities and in execution of the harvest chain, especially where the LE network is
dispersed.
Manage only a proportion of hedges in an area for fuel to ensure that some of the existing
hedgerows/ LEs are maintained and hence the species associated with them. As a guideline
coppice no more than 5% of the hedges in any one year and keep 25 - 50% out of the coppice
rotation, managed (or not) in the traditional way.
When designing management plans for woodfuel where possible maintain habitat connectivity
for example, by only coppicing one side of a hedge or by only coppicing hedges where an existing
link can be maintained.
New planting should focus on increasing landscape connectivity and filling in gaps

All partners identified the importance of LEs as providing shelter and shade for livestock, barns/
buildings and walkers as well as fulfilling and important screening function reducing the impact of
agricultural, visual and air pollutants. There was concern that changes in management may impact on
these functions and on LEs important function in erosion control.

The management plan for LEs needs to take in to careful consideration existing functions of the
LEs and chose hedges for management with least impact on these functions. Or manage the LEs
to minimise impacts (e.g. coppicing only one side of the hedge or leaving hedges trees in place to
provide shade).
New planting should focus on reducing soil erosion (with hedges planted in line with contours on
slopes and alongside waterways). Consideration should be taken of the shade, shelter and
screening functions that LEs can provide when planting new hedges.

There is a concern in some partner areas that farmers will lose their AES payments if they manage their
hedges for fuel, management for woodfuel is also prohibited in some protected areas. In most partner
areas there also exists a public opposition to coppicing hedgerows and concerns around the protection of
ancient and monumental trees in hedges.

The availability of more detailed facts and figures along with case studies outlining the costs of
managing hedges for fuel along with the potential energy savings would help in making the case
to farmers and landowners.
Coppice management of hedges and other LEs needs to be recognised in country specific AE
Schemes with appropriate prescriptions that recognise the values associated of active
management and restrict insensitive management.
A public education programme re. coppice management of LEs and consultation prior to any
large scale changes in management would help to get public support.