Re-establishing the natural balance - UK

[Tony]

Tony, I think you have misread or at least misinterpreted my previous post which was certainly not intended as a dig at Chris C whose earlier intervention in splitting the thread was very welcome and helped restore the thread to its original and very interesting course.

The reason for including text from Chris C's earlier post in my reply to Santaman was simply as a subtle (perhaps too subtle!) reminder that this thread was intended to be limited to the UK experience and that a separate thread had been created for those keen to discuss shooting deer in Florida etc. and other issues not relevant to the UK.

Apologies for any confusion or upset caused, I'll wind my neck in!

My Apology, I should have thought more before pointing the finger...

 

[santaman2000]

.....The UK doesn’t have any Federal Lands, all our national parks are owned by a collection of private landowners of various sizes. Small holders through to the military and the National Trust.

Therefore you cannot just go cut trees down even on land you own.

https://www.forestry.gov.uk/england-fellinglicences

We have simiular arrangements with private land holders. They're called "conservation easements." You need to be pretty dedicated to the conservation ethos to enter into one though as it effectively makes your property unsellable due to a dearth of interested buyers. It's the sort of thing you'd do in your last will and testament.

I presume the restrictions on cutting (harvesting) your own trees precludes timber farming then?

 

[Toddy]

No, you can plant trees as as crop (there's one crop of oaks near here that's six hundred+ years old...it was on land leased until the trees were harvested, the Hamilton's are still hanging onto that land !) (https://www.scotsman.com/news/oaks-rooted-in-700-years-of-scots-history-1-917561) and harvest those. In our gardens here folks routinely cut down trees, from old apples to oaks and birch. But then I live in a woodland rich bit of the country and these trees are awfully close to houses. The basic premise is that you don't cut down trees unless you have a really good reason, or can find no alternative if the tree is somehow a special one.

 

[santaman2000]

Thanks Mary, but 600 years between harvests is a bit long. LOL. My own land has had the timber harvested at least 4 times in my lifetime (or an average of every 15 years) and I still have loads and loads (in the 3 digit numbers in quantity) of old growth longleaf yellow pine (the native pine with a several hundred year lifespan) as well as dozens of hardwood species (many of the oaks and hickories are equally old growth. That said, I've never actually planted the crop; it's all naturally occurring. Proper timber farms do the first harvest (a thinning) at the five year mark, the second (another thinning) at the 10 year mark, and the fiunal clear cut before replanting at about 20 to 25 years but they use hybrid species whereas I don't.

 

[Toddy]

Ah, but those were Oaks
That said, the Yews last as long, the one at Fortingall is thousands of years old. https://www.visitscotland.com/info/towns-villages/fortingall-yew-p249411

Oaks here were used as structural timbers. Not just for ships but for large buildings....and ours don't poison the ground beneath them. Yew's are the longbow timber, and beautiful furniture too.

Pine trees grown in plantations here seem to be felled in blocks or parcels of land, all at one fell swoop. Leaves huge great exposed areas on the hills.

Trees grown to be cut regularly are coppiced. From Hazel and Willow to Oak and Chestnut. Ash, Hawthorn and Alder are also used though, as is Lime. It's a very old technique, and is known from at least the Neolithic (it's suspected from the Mesolithic, wetland sites like Star Carr and the like, I don't know if anyone's nailed that down though, I'm out of touch, Tengu might know ? )

M

 

[Janne]

Santaman, we get most of our timber from Florida. Horrible stuff, the year rings are so wide, the wood is really, really weak.
The 25 year turnover explsins it to me. Fast grown.

When I buy timber, I am a pain customer as I select timber with narrow rings only. And it has to be straight too, the pieces. No propellors here!

Building now indoors!

Off topic, sorry

 

[santaman2000]

Santaman, we get most of our timber from Florida. Horrible stuff, the year rings are so wide, the wood is really, really weak.
The 25 year turnover explsins it to me. Fast grown.

When I buy timber, I am a pain customer as I select timber with narrow rings only. And it has to be straight too, the pieces. No propellors here!

Building now indoors!

Off topic, sorry

You get most of your timber from Florida? That's strange. Florida doesn't have much of a timber crop.

 

[Broch]

Getting back to the Re-establishing the Natural Balance in the UK ....

There is a policy now in forestry management in the UK to identify PAWS (Plantations on Ancient Woodland Sites) and attempting to recover them by identifying small 'islands' of deciduous growth (normally around stream beds etc.) and selective felling the plantation trees so as not to over-expose the ancient part. It's a long haul though but at least those sites still have some of the material to support the mycorrhizal relationships needed. Those same sites (PAWS) are also identified as key to deciduous woodland recovery as a whole because, despite being planted for of 50+ years, they are a better environment to support new deciduous growth than 'new' sites.

As far as cutting down trees goes, a small woodland owner or landowner with woodland in the UK is allowed to fell up to 5 cubic metres of timber in any 3 month period for personal use and 2 cubic metres for sale. Any more and they need a felling licence from the Forestry Commission. This presumes the trees in question do not have any protected status.

 

[Janne]

Just a thought:
Britain is covered by species that are not belonging there. Humans brought them over.
Fruit trees, wheat and other grains, most agricultural products. Pigs. Chicken. Turkeys.

But we need those. So we are deciding which plants and animals are invasive and ‘damaging’ the environment ( those we do not need) and which are not invasive and fine for the environment ( those we need).

So we decide in our stupidity what is good for nature and what is not.
Our track record is not the best considering these decisions.

Maybe we should do nothing, no culling, cutting, digging, chemical warfare, and let Nature sort things out itself?