In a Forestry Commission case study updated on 4 September 2026, Burrator Forest is described as a 353-hectare woodland beside Burrator Reservoir on the edge of Dartmoor National Park. The site, owned by South West Water and managed by South West Lakes Trust, forms part of a network of more than 50 managed sites across south-west England, and the Forestry Commission lists water quality, timber production, nature conservation, recreational access and rural skills development among its objectives, with South West Water’s Water Industry National Environment Programme and Countryside Stewardship until 2023 among the funding routes. That mix makes the case study relevant to reservoir and estate managers as much as to foresters. (gov.uk)
The immediate pressure comes from the boundary between open moor and managed woodland. The Forestry Commission says local people hold common grazing rights on the moor, with no separating fence from the Trust’s land, and that stock enter the forest when gates are left open or fencing is damaged. In that setting, access infrastructure becomes a tree protection measure rather than a visitor amenity alone: Burrator lost about £5,500 of conifer stock to grazing over an 18-month period in 2024 and 2025. (gov.uk)
The Trust’s first response is conventional but significant. Existing gates are being fitted with self-closing mechanisms, volunteers are auditing fence lines, and the case study says fencing maintenance across the wider estate already costs hundreds of thousands of pounds each year. At Burrator, this shows that where public access and livestock movement meet, fence maintenance becomes a recurring revenue pressure rather than a one-off capital task. (gov.uk)
More significant from a regulatory standpoint is the WINEP-backed trial of Nofence collars. The case study says South West Water, working with tenant farmers, fitted 50 collars in 2024 and then bought another 50 the following year, with the data being analysed to map grazing behaviour and identify where smaller protective enclosures should go. Taken with the Environment Agency’s WINEP methodology, the collar trial sits within a programme shaped by legislative requirements, wider environmental outcomes and Ofwat’s price review process, rather than only a local estate trial. (gov.uk)
That does not remove welfare and land management constraints. Defra’s Animal Welfare Committee said in 2022 that virtual fencing sits within existing animal welfare law, including daily inspection requirements for husbandry systems and automated equipment, and that users should have alternative containment arrangements if the system fails. The Committee also warned that GPS accuracy may reduce in woodland and on slopes, and said visible signage should be used where the public are lawfully present. Separately, Defra’s response to the protected site management review on Dartmoor said the Farming in Protected Landscapes programme can support gates, cattle grids, handling facilities and NoFence virtual fencing, placing Burrator’s trial within a wider move towards more flexible stock control on protected sites. (gov.uk)
Alongside livestock controls, the Trust is using partnership-based wildlife management. Artemis Land Management Services is carrying out deer and grey squirrel survey work, on-the-ground deterrence, extra fencing and selective culling where required, while grey squirrel planning is being developed with British Red Squirrel and local conservation organisations. The case study also notes that heavier footfall in some areas appears to keep deer away, and that sheep grazing in nearby fields can reduce browsing pressure in adjacent woodland. For managers, the point is that browsing damage is being treated as a site management question involving people, neighbouring grazing and contractor capacity, not simply a pest-control issue. (gov.uk)
The planned use of sheep’s fleece mulch mats brings a separate compliance issue into view. The Forestry Commission case study notes that taking fleece or other animal by-products beyond the farm requires treatment and licensing; Defra and APHA guidance shows the route is, in practice, treatment plus site registration or approval depending on what is being done with the wool. Wool and hair are classed as category 3 animal by-products, treated material can be sold without restriction after approved treatment, and untreated wool used off-farm for handling, treatment or composting can fall inside the registration regime. For land managers, this is not a minor procurement detail but a legal condition on reuse. (gov.uk)
The Burrator model is also notable for treating some species as useful managers rather than uniform risks. At other South West Lakes Trust sites, the Forestry Commission says Eurasian beavers are reducing willow growth and limiting overgrowth along reservoir edges, cutting the need for thinning and improving angling access. The closing value of the case study lies there: reservoir woodland management works best when exclusion, grazing data, species control, public access measures and statutory compliance are adjusted to evidence from the ground rather than applied as a single fixed method. (gov.uk)