Its like a bomb has hit it

[JonnyP]

My nearest woods have been cut down, which is something I would normally be up in arms about, but what they are doing here I am in full favour of. The woods are predominantly pines, which have grown up and killed off the ground below by lack of light.
Before shot

Now that the trees have started comming down, it looks like a bomb site. All the wood is being chipped on site and is going to be used in a "green" power station (does anyone know about such things)

The wood was once heathland and only about one acre of this remains. The council who own the land decided to revert the whole area back to heathland. This I am in full favour of, even though it is going to take quite a few years. It will not take too long for the area to come alive again though. Most of the hardwood trees have been left standing, but they do look very spindley and there were not many of them. One thing I did find funny was that the lay of the land looks so different now, walking round the wood was a bit disorientating with land marks missing etc.
Saw a nice sunset on the way back, but the photo does not do it justice.........Jon

 

[Fallow Way]

Jon,



If only more of the local community were as informed as you. I am usually involved in this sort of work, in fact the woodland i have grown up in is having a recent drastically felling of hundreds of hectares of trees and either replanting native broadleaves or encouraging heathland to extend, reverting from the FC timber woodlands to what it was pre 1900`s.



It is excellent when those who manage them have the willpower to make huuuge decisions like this as there is always backlash from local communities as it is lessening their enjoyment for the next 50 years, rather than thinking of the long term importance it holds.

 

[JonnyP]

We are lucky to have some very knowledgeable countryside wardens round here who do a great job of management, even though their workload is huge. They are all into nature big time and I like to support them where I can...........Jon

 

[Adi]

Jon That is what the Forestry Commission do on there land, grow large pine stands then go in and cut it all down in one go after felling the land is left for a number of years before replanting with birch.

In your case it sound as if it is being done for a very worthy reason, the reintroduction of heath land.

I think there is a power station in Devon that is run on bio mulch, normally chipped willow or hazel grown for the purpose. This would have been and easy option for you local council that have some very strict rules that they have to follow, so it is easier to sell a contract on the land to have it cleared and restored in one go using environmental methods then to sort it out with multi contracts that could take years to complete and could prove problematic.

 

[JonnyP]

Jon That is what the Forestry Commission do on there land, grow large pine stands then go in and cut it all down in one go after felling the land is left for a number of years before replanting with birch.

In your case it sound as if it is being done for a very worthy reason, the reintroduction of heath land.

I think there is a power station in Devon that is run on bio mulch, normally chipped willow or hazel grown for the purpose. This would have been and easy option for you local council that have some very strict rules that they have to follow, so it is easier to sell a contract on the land to have it cleared and restored in one go using environmental methods then to sort it out with multi contracts that could take years to complete and could prove problematic.

Hi Adi..........Yes your right about the forestry commission, they have felled a lot of St Leonards forest near me, but I think they are going to replant with Firs again. This wood (Owlbeech woods) are not going to have any trees replanted. It is not owned by the commission. Once the trees have all gone they are going to "scrape the ground to expose the dormant seed stock". The land in future will be managed to keep the fast growing birches etc from smothering the place............Jon

 

[Spacemonkey]

I'm always a little dubious about this 'returning to natural heathland' that we keep being fed. Now there might have been lots of heathland in the past, but I'd hardly call it natural. After all, isn't it simply due to man's forest clearance? What I'd like to see is much more of the ancient British forest being allowed to return, natural and un managed. It'll take time, yes, but the result would be worth it feel. And another thing, when they mention about the wonderful return of the heathland wildlife, what happens to the old wildlife that lived in the pine forests?

 

[JonnyP]

I'm always a little dubious about this 'returning to natural heathland' that we keep being fed. Now there might have been lots of heathland in the past, but I'd hardly call it natural. After all, isn't it simply due to man's forest clearance? What I'd like to see is much more of the ancient British forest being allowed to return, natural and un managed. It'll take time, yes, but the result would be worth it feel. And another thing, when they mention about the wonderful return of the heathland wildlife, what happens to the old wildlife that lived in the pine forests?

I know exactly what you mean, I would love that too, but it just wouldn't work today. If you could of seen Owl Beech woods as it was you would agree, there was hardly any wildlife around because the trees killed off anything trying to grow below the canopy. The area will support far more wildlife as a heathland ( which the area once was anyway). The small area of heathland in the woods which survived had way more wildlife in it than the woodland inc adders. I welcome your comments as I too used to think that all woods should be left well alone so that they could run there natural course, but we have many invasive species like the rhododendron which if left unmanaged will kill a woodland. I do wish that they would not plant the trees all in neat rows as they do, just looks unnatural. I now do voluntary work managing woodland and feel very comfortable with what I am doing............Jon

 

[philaw]

I was about to tell you about a case study on that kind of power generation at a big country house, and now I can't remember whether it was for power generation or CHP (combined heat and power), which is when the waste heat from power generation is used for central heating. What they did was grow fast growing deciduous trees (willow?), chip them, and then burn them all on site.

Some people think it's odd to call that kind of project 'green power', but growing trees and burning them is a whole lot more sustainable than using fossil fuels. You're releasing CO2 when you burn the trees, but only the same amount you removed from the atmosphere when you grew them.

 

[pierre girard]

I'm always a little dubious about this 'returning to natural heathland' that we keep being fed. Now there might have been lots of heathland in the past, but I'd hardly call it natural. After all, isn't it simply due to man's forest clearance? What I'd like to see is much more of the ancient British forest being allowed to return, natural and un managed. It'll take time, yes, but the result would be worth it feel. And another thing, when they mention about the wonderful return of the heathland wildlife, what happens to the old wildlife that lived in the pine forests?

I'm with you. With England's climate, I'd bet it was originally much like the western part of the pacific northwest (Oregon, Washington, British Colombia) - which is big tree country.

Why not thin the trees rather than cut all of them. Locally we keep hearing of "sustainable forest." What they mean is the foresters want to plant everything on public land in aspen - which grows quickly, can be quickly logged off, and is chipped up for pulp and chips for chip board.

I'd much rather see the diversified forest we have now. The forestry is geared toward the loggers - rather than for the general public. I've read some of construction methods in europe (gypsum blocks for interior walls, etc.) and would like to see more of that over here rather than everything having to be stickbuilt.

I have 17 virgin white pine (about 450 years old) on some of my property - and every year I get calls from loggers wanting to "help me out." The stand where I have the pine was once 7 miles by 13 miles of nothing but virgin white pine. These few are all that is left.

PG

 

[Fallow Way]

Lowland Healthland is predominantly a `man-made" habitat to put it simply. However because the practice of felling trees and creating these open areas of poor soil and grazing of cattle and other activities started so many many years ago, it is a habitat which has developed into its own. It is distinct from other forms of habitat and internationally very rare, in fact you find most heathland with some sort of legal protection.



The importance of regenerating this type of habitat is the biodiversity that goes along with it (although there is obviously value in just itself as a landscape).



My site is currently being reverted back to the heathland as it was in the Bronze age (there are remains on site) for the very reason that most heathland regeneration takes place, it very quickly reverted back to pioneer woodland and was almost lost.

 

[redflex]

Just in defence of the poor conifer plantation, they have allow many fauna to survive and thrive eg.

Field vole ,Pine marten, Wildcat

Crossbill , Firecrest ,Goshawk, Mealy redpoll & Siskins

Pearl-bordered Fritillary & Small Pearl-bordered Fritillary

Just because we dont see them it does not mean there is nothing there, in the canopy in the UK planation there is between 1,200 - 1,400 species of invertabrates many endmic to UK plantations.

They will be needed in the future but with mix species planting and better structure the can increase biodiversity and still provide timber pulp etc

 

[Bushpig]

Indeed I'd love to see alot more native broadleaf area's and natural woodland return, as opposed to heathland. Heathland I believe does have more biodiversity than that of a pine plantation however we have loads of heathland, most of our natural parks are just that. I guess im just a tree hugger lol...but more natural forest for me all the way !

I was recently chatting to a lecturer in ecology, it was his opinion that there's a big lack of action based on proper evidence and research. There are so many variables that could influence what is best for the ecosystem its hard to know where to start


Boooshpig

 

[Fallow Way]

there is a good reason why our nature parks are predominatly heathland, its becuase it is such such such a rare habitat (globably) that the areas are either destignated as nature parks because of the heathland, or nature parks revert areas of scrub/woodland back to heathland.

Heathland does have this international rareity elemant that conifer plantations and other habitats do not but i agree 100% they are of equal value as they are so different. However heathland is also one of the ost endangered habitats. Combine all the land it comvers and you get something around the size of the Isle of White, which accounts for 20% of its coverage in the world. In the last two ceturies alone we have lost roughly four fifths of our heathland.




this is an interesting site about it
http://www.english-nature.org.uk/thh/

 

[JonnyP]

Just in defence of the poor conifer plantation, they have allow many fauna to survive and thrive eg.

Field vole ,Pine marten, Wildcat

Crossbill , Firecrest ,Goshawk, Mealy redpoll & Siskins

Pearl-bordered Fritillary & Small Pearl-bordered Fritillary

Just because we dont see them it does not mean there is nothing there, in the canopy in the UK planation there is between 1,200 - 1,400 species of invertabrates many endmic to UK plantations.

They will be needed in the future but with mix species planting and better structure the can increase biodiversity and still provide timber pulp etc

There was a lot of surveys done in the poor conifer plantation and as I said earlier, the place was found to be pretty much dead. Even the bat surveys had little results. Under the trees the ground was covered in pine needles and very little grew and so other life was not being supported. Yes the trees themselves supported life, but not much, I would hear goldcrests and tits up in the canopy and someone once reported sighting a crossbill, but this is minute compared with what the heathland will hold. I am also supported in what I am saying by the fact that there has been little or no opposition to the work being carried out, if you knew the woods I am sure you would agree. To sit in a heathland of an evening with bats flying all around you and a nightjar churring away in the background is a memorable evening................Jon

 

[redflex]

I dont know your plantation and dont doubt it was needing clearfelled good chance it was dead.

Of course there is lots of bad plantations, it depends on location and what was there before

I have done a few surveys with forestry research, sad thing is lots of the results are just filed away as not the resources to process them.

Working in the forest plantations with horses for long hours in all weathers you get to see things.

I admit at times when sitting under trees it can long time before you see anything if you see anything at all.

Everything in balance , planatations heathland etc, after all thats what ecosystems are about

 

[Spacemonkey]

Is it possible to thin out the FC regimental pine forests to make them more natural? Would this create an environment for the current population, yet allow light into the forest floor to allow new life to appear of a different variety? I have nothing against pine forests, it's the regimental rows that the FC insisted on planting them in in the old days. I hope they have learned lessons and are a bit more random in their new plantings? Is it possible for deciduous trees to grow within a thinned out FC grid forest?

 

[JonnyP]

I dont know your plantation and dont doubt it was needing clearfelled good chance it was dead.

Of course there is lots of bad plantations, it depends on location and what was there before

I have done a few surveys with forestry research, sad thing is lots of the results are just filed away as not the resources to process them.

Working in the forest plantations with horses for long hours in all weathers you get to see things.

I admit at times when sitting under trees it can long time before you see anything if you see anything at all.

Everything in balance , planatations heathland etc, after all thats what ecosystems are about

I fully agree............20% of the pines are being left on site and the area is surrounded by mixed woodland. We are lucky here to have some good Wardens who know their stuff.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is it possible to thin out the FC regimental pine forests to make them more natural? Would this create an environment for the current population, yet allow light into the forest floor to allow new life to appear of a different variety? I have nothing against pine forests, it's the regimental rows that the FC insisted on planting them in in the old days. I hope they have learned lessons and are a bit more random in their new plantings? Is it possible for deciduous trees to grow within a thinned out FC grid forest?


This is true........I hate the rows too. I do voluntary work on FC land, doing brashing, which involves cutting off the lower branches of the pines around the edges of the woods to allow more light in, we only do one sunday morning once a month, but it is amazing what gets done and the FC allow this to be done...........Jon

 

[redflex]

There is lot of well practiced silvicultural systems used thoughtout the world including the UK such as group selection, shelter belt systems and so on.

The main problem is the cost of felling and extraction, the extraction takes longer and can cause more damage to the ground.

Felling in these systems require more time though selecting etc,

the benefits are very well know, they improve natural regeneration, protect sapplings from frost and create un-even aged stands.

Mix planting is better but management is more complex a good example is the Bradford-Hutt method which gives best of both worlds

Thinning out of trees reduces the speed which they produce height but does increase the increment growth, the result is changing the taper of the tree therefore reducing yeild class, which means poorer cheaper timber.

 

[pierre girard]

I fully agree............20% of the pines are being left on site and the area is surrounded by mixed woodland. We are lucky here to have some good Wardens who know their stuff.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is it possible to thin out the FC regimental pine forests to make them more natural? Would this create an environment for the current population, yet allow light into the forest floor to allow new life to appear of a different variety? I have nothing against pine forests, it's the regimental rows that the FC insisted on planting them in in the old days. I hope they have learned lessons and are a bit more random in their new plantings? Is it possible for deciduous trees to grow within a thinned out FC grid forest?


This is true........I hate the rows too. I do voluntary work on FC land, doing brashing, which involves cutting off the lower branches of the pines around the edges of the woods to allow more light in, we only do one sunday morning once a month, but it is amazing what gets done and the FC allow this to be done...........Jon

Depends on your definition of natural. When my grandfather was young, none of the forests around the homestead had been cut. Everything was "natural." Trees of one type grew in one area, trees of another type grew in another area.

Our family sugar bush (which has never been cut) is about a section of maple trees - nothing else, several hundred years old. The ridges around Silver Isle (site of one of my family's trapping shacks), was nothing but huge birch.

The site of the homestead was in the middle of an area of huge white pine, nothing else, 13 miles by seven miles. Very few of these forest giants remain. There was no brush. My grandfather said you could ride a bicycle through that section of forest - if the ground were flat enough.

You are right about it being "dead." There was no game and no new species of trees introduced into these old forest areas. The forest was managed by nature. Forest fires would clear out areas and these were the areas where diverse flora would be introduced and animals would gather.

I agree on the rows, but in our area - as the forest is managed for the loggers - the rows make for easier cutting and locally, we are unlikely to see a change. In our local forests there is a lot of diversity, and very little open country - like heathlands. There is a lot of swamp, Not far from here we have the "100 mile Swamp." But I suspect that is nothing like heathlands, and it is mostly forested by black spruce and tamarack. The swamps are great habitat for moose, beaver, wolves, fisher, Finns, etc.

PG