Ingleborough NNR Shows How Rewilding Restores Woodland

If you want to understand what rewilding actually looks like on the ground, Ingleborough National Nature Reserve is a useful place to start. The reserve covers 1,186 hectares in the Yorkshire Dales National Park, rises to 650 metres, and is protected both as a Site of Special Scientific Interest and a Special Area of Conservation. Managed by Natural England and Yorkshire Wildlife Trust, it brings together ancient ash woodland, limestone pasture, limestone pavement and blanket bog in one upland reserve. In its GOV.UK case study, Natural England presents Ingleborough as a living lesson in restoration. This is not a story about leaving a place to fend for itself. It is a story about changing pressures, measuring results and learning as you go. **What this means:** rewilding is not about doing nothing; it is about creating the right conditions for nature to recover.

For years, sheep grazing was part of how the reserve was run, through long-standing agreements with graziers. But regular sheep pressure also held woodland back. When seedlings are repeatedly eaten or trampled in the same way, trees struggle to get beyond their earliest stage, even in places where woodland would once have spread more freely. That is why the shift towards cattle matters. Ingleborough now uses a mixed-age herd of Red Poll cattle at very low density, roughly one cow per five hectares, with internal gates left open so the animals can move across large compartments. According to Natural England, cattle do browse young growth, but they also disturb the ground and create small seed niches. In trial plots, staff found more young trees establishing on the cattle-grazed side than on the ungrazed side. **What this means:** grazing pressure is not only about numbers. It is also about which animal is grazing, how it moves and what it leaves behind.

Sheep were only part of the picture. Deer were also browsing young trees heavily, especially more palatable species such as downy birch and rowan. At the start of this work, deer density on the reserve was about 3.7 animals per square kilometre, high enough to put serious pressure on regeneration. A culling programme reduced that figure to about 1.4 deer per square kilometre, and more young trees then had the chance to survive. Natural England notes that rabbits and grey squirrels are present too, but they are not currently seen as a major problem on this site. **What this means:** good conservation is often quite specific. Rather than blaming every species at once, managers ask which pressure is doing the most harm and act there first.

Even after grazing pressure falls, trees do not return evenly across a reserve. Close to existing woodland, natural regeneration can do a great deal of the work because seeds are already nearby. Further away, especially on an exposed upland site where growth is slow, you sometimes need to give that process a helping hand. That is what the Wild Ingleborough project set out to do. Launched in 2021 by Natural England, Yorkshire Wildlife Trust, WWF UK, the University of Leeds, United Bank of Carbon and the Woodland Trust, the partnership planted around 150,000 trees between 2021 and 2025. The aim was not to replace natural regeneration, but to help it spread into places where seed sources were too distant. If you are learning about restoration, this is a useful distinction: planting and natural recovery are not opposites. Often, they work best together.

That left another question: how do you protect young trees in a harsh, windy upland site? Over four years, the reserve tested several options, including 1.2-metre Tubex guards, 60-centimetre spiral guards, 15-centimetre vole guards and some unprotected planting. Researchers from the University of Leeds tagged some of the trees so survival could be tracked properly over time. The early findings are a good example of why evidence matters. Tree guards did help at first by reducing browsing, but they also appeared to make trees more vulnerable to wind snap, either at the height of the guard or after it had been removed. According to the case study, overall survival after three to five years was lower for guarded trees than for those planted bare. **What this means:** a method that looks protective at first can still fail in the long run if it does not suit the place.

Because of that, Ingleborough shifted to bare planting only, with no tubes or guards, but at double the desired stocking density. In simple terms, managers planted more trees and accepted that some losses were part of the plan. Natural England reports that this approach delivered survival of more than 50 per cent, beating the formerly guarded trees and coping better with the occasional stray sheep from neighbouring land than spiral guards did. There was also a practical gain for people passing through the reserve. Part of the Yorkshire Three Peaks route crosses planting areas, and keeping guards tidy in such a busy spot took time and money. Bare planting produces a gentler change in what walkers see. Staff and volunteers have now collected nearly 80 per cent of the guards used earlier and passed them on to other nearby schemes, though the case study is clear that collecting old guards is slow work and should be counted as part of the real cost.

Put all of that together and a clearer picture appears. Ingleborough’s woodland recovery has not depended on one dramatic fix. It has come from reducing sheep pressure, cutting deer numbers, using cattle in a lighter way, and choosing planting methods that fit a windy upland site rather than forcing a standard model onto it. For us, that is the strongest lesson in the whole piece. Biodiversity recovery works best when you test ideas against real conditions and change course when the evidence tells you to. Ingleborough NNR shows rewilding as careful, patient and practical work - the kind that gives young trees a real chance to take root.