On March 1st, 200 members of the Climate Choir Movement put on a stunning show in St Paul’s Cathedral, in support of the Rewild the Church campaign. The rousing choir called on the Church Commissioners to protect nature by rewilding 30% of their 105,000 acre investment estate by 2030. 

Amongst other media, the Church Times wrote about it, and included a comment from the Church Commissioners’ head of sustainability for real assets, Paul Jaffe. He said: 

“We are deeply committed to supporting nature through a range of initiatives. We focus on sustainable farming practices, collaborate with organisations like the RSPB and FWAG, and actively integrate biodiversity projects, such as woodland creation and wetland restoration, across our portfolio. Our approach ensures we balance food production with stewardship of the land, helping to safeguard nature for future generations, and thus large-scale rewilding is not appropriate for our highly productive farmland.”

We would love to be having this conversation directly with Paul Jaffe and the Commissioners, but in lieu of that opportunity, we wanted to respond to his points and concerns here, and ask again whether he and Church Commissioners would meet with us.

Our contact with Jaffe and the Commissioners to date

We have been in touch with Paul Jaffe over email for around 7 months now, and the Church Commissioner Bishop Graham Usher (Lead Bishop for Environment) via email since 2022. We first invited Bishop Graham Usher to collaborate on an event looking at what more the Church could do for nature on their vast estate. He declined due to a full diary.

We have now asked them to meet with us a total of 5 times. Most recently, Chris Packham wrote to them on our behalf last November to explain a bit more about the opportunity 30×30 presents for the Church: how it could shore up nature, boost tenant farmers’ income, maintain strong levels of food production, and help protect the value of the rest of their investment portfolio in the longer term. He asked if they would meet with him and Wild Card. 

We have also asked Paul Jaffe and Bishop Graham Usher whether they would be willing to receive the petition signed by 105,000 people who support the Rewild the Church campaign. They did not accept.

So, here is our take on Paul Jaffe’s comment, which is similar to many of the responses we have had from him and the Commissioners. We hope once and for all we can put some misunderstandings to bed, and move forward with a collaborative and productive approach to helping the Church help nature! 

First, we recognise the small nature-protection projects they own and have involvement in, and want to know more about those projects.

Paul Jaffe said:

“We are deeply committed to supporting nature through a range of initiatives. We focus on sustainable farming practices, collaborate with organisations like the RSPB and FWAG, and actively integrate biodiversity projects, such as woodland creation and wetland restoration, across our portfolio.

We know and appreciate that the Church Commissioners are doing conservation work on the Hoo Peninsula in Kent, and that they created a new nature reserve on the River Wye in 2023 – a great sign that they understand the importance of giving land over to nature. The issue is scale. The River Wye project is a 100 acre site – just 0.095% of their holdings. We are sure that that doesn’t come close to reflecting the care the Church and Church Commissioners have for nature, or how seriously they are taking the biodiversity and climate crises.

We understand they are looking into restoration work on their 5,000 acres of fenland peat, as recommended by Operation Noah. In its degraded condition, that estate may be emitting the equivalent of 78,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide (one of the main greenhouse gases) every year. That’s the same as a small coal-fired power plant! We appreciate the Church Commissioners’ efforts to significantly reduce these emissions.

We would love to know more about the land they are protecting for nature, and invite Jaffe and the Commissioners to tell us where this work is happening, and how much land they are protecting. Since comprehensive information and mapping of the Church Commissioners’ landholding is not publicly available, it is difficult for members of the public such as ourselves to get a clear picture and hold them to account. That is why we are asking that the Church Commissioners be transparent about their resources by releasing a map of all the land under their ownership.

Sustainable farming is better than unsustainable farming, but it is not the same as protecting nature.

The Commissioners say they focus on sustainable, or nature-friendly farming. That is fantastic news. We do need to produce food, and where we need to farm, we should absolutely be minimising our destruction of the land, and allowing nature space within those landscapes. 

However, sustainable farming is not a substitute for protecting nature. It will only serve to keep nature on life-support in those areas, instead of getting nature (or us!) out of trouble. Natural England, the government’s natural environment advisor, has stated that the UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world, and recommended the creation of “more, bigger and messier places for wildlife”. Not only this, with only 3% of England currently protected for nature, we are falling well below the UN’s Global Biodiversity Framework target of protecting 30% of land by 2030. Given that 67% of England is farmed, rewilding some of this farmland will play an important role in the solution to our country’s nature and biodiversity crises. 

That’s why, as a nation, we must both increase the adoption of nature-friendly farming AND increase the amount of land we protect for nature.

We are asking the Church Commissioners to rewild their less ‘productive’ land!

Finally, to address this statement:

“Our approach ensures we balance food production with stewardship of the land, helping to safeguard nature for future generations, and thus large-scale rewilding is not appropriate for our highly productive farmland.”

Jaffe and the Commissioners have responded to us a few times to tell us they cannot use their highly productive farmland to protect nature. We would like to explain to them again that nobody has suggested they rewild their highly productive (Grades 1 and 2) farmland! Not only have we not suggested they do that, there is absolutely no need for them to touch that land to achieve the 30×30 target.

Let us explain. According to a response to a parliamentary question in 2020, the Commissioners disclosed that 39% of their rural holdings were Grades 1 and 2 farmland, whilst 56% was categorised as Grade 3. As for the rest, around 5% of their rural land is Grade 4 (low productivity farmland), 3% is woodland, 2% are Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), based on analysis undertaken by Guy Shrubsole and Tim Harris. 

The 5,000 acres of degraded lowland peat, which, as mentioned above, is emitting enormous levels of greenhouse gas, is technically categorised as Grade 1 farmland. However, the Church Commissioners’ have already demonstrated that they are aware of the significant imperative to rewild this land, given the important ecosystem services offered by restored peatland in storing carbon. 

Combined, the area covered by woodland cover, SSSIs, Grade 4 farmland, and lowland peat already amounts to 15% of their land which would benefit most from being protected for nature, and which may already contribute a great deal towards the target! This may not even include the projects Jaffe has referred to in his Church Times comment. 

So, by working with their tenant farmers to protect just a quarter of their rewildable Grade 3 holdings for nature, the Church Commissioners would be reaching the 30% target, without going near any highly productive farmland!

Finally, it’s important to remember that protecting land for nature will boost food production and security in the long-term, as it creates the functioning ecosystems we need in order to keep producing food. 

So, what now?

We ask, again, that Paul Jaffe and the Church Commissioners meet with Wild Card. We represent over 100,000 people from the clergy, General Synod, churchgoers and general public that are urging them to act with the spiritual and moral leadership we should expect of them.

We will send this blog to the Church Commissioners and Paul Jaffe – to explain again why we think a meeting would be beneficial: to gain clarity on the extent and condition of the land in their ownership, learn more about the nature-protection projects they’re working on, and share how other large landowners like the Duchy of Cornwall and Crown Estate are implementing nature-protection projects at significant scale. 

We believe that the 30×30 target is totally achievable, and look forward to working with the Church Commissioners to explore how they, alongside their tenant farmers, could be part of the solution to the biodiversity and climate crisis through strategic rewilding. 

Finally, we ask them to reflect on whether, in addition to their duty as a moral and spiritual leader, they might also consider their responsibility as a large landowner. In a country where most of us own no land, and 50% of land is owned by 1%, we believe large landowners should be accountable to all of us for the way they manage the land. How they manage their land will impact whether we see insects in the air, birds in the sky, have food on our tables, whether our towns get flooded, and whether we’re emitting or sequestering carbon into a warming world.