Personally I don't think you're ever gonna get rid of grey squirrels once they've become established
Re-establishing the natural balance - UK
- Thread starter Toddy
- Start date
Trees in urban areas over here are normally under preservation orders,depending on the type of tree, and yes it can be illegal to take them down without permission even if they are on your property, in fact trees that are removed for housing development normally have to be replaced and in some cases with mature trees,
Of course removing hedgerows whether they were planted by humans or not is detrimental to to the environment, this is why we are losing nesting sites for birds, and other animals, and in my opinion it is intensive farming that has not only ruined the landscape but heavily polluted the water table with the chemicals they use, over here where it is hilly a lot of the hedgerows were planted not only as boundaries, but also as a defence against wind, snow etc, in order to protect the crops that were growing, we unfortunately don't get the weather you get over in Florida., Forestation is a natural defence against the weather, although I must admit it can be a hazard if not managed properly, fires, etc.
Not off limits permanently, only when the flags are up and only in some select places.
Dog walking and jogging is common sight.
And besides, there are lots of byways Criss crossing throughout Salisbury plane... available at all times .
Some lovely quiet spots there , when the boys are not shelling
Hooper's Rule, see post No. 7 on this thread though.
https://bushcraftuk.com/community/index.php?threads/hedge-species.148372/
So planting the hedgerows in the first place is what actually disrupted the natural environment: Blocked wind and snow, etc, and provided nesting areas that would have otherwise not been available.
I'm not trying to be flippant; just pointing out that over the years the definition of "natural" has evolved. That difference in opinions over the definition will be one of the least surmountable obstacles to true conservation.
In urban areas over here you could be held liable for NOT cutting trees. My neighbor's tree fell over during a storm and he was liable for the damages it caused on my property. Likewise in urban or rural areas the homeowners insurance can (and often does) cancel coverage if trees too close to the home (your own home or a neighbor's home) aren't removed. "Too close" isn't especially well defined unfortunately.
The landowner still has a legal responsibility to maintain a safe environment including any trees within a conservation area or with a TPO. You will need to contact the council tree officer for advice and you may need planning consent to do any pruning on protected trees.
A proper survey would need to be done before permission is granted. Not liking pigeon dropping on your car is unlikely to gain permission to chop an ancient tree.
A proper survey would need to be done before permission is granted. Not liking pigeon dropping on your car is unlikely to gain permission to chop an ancient tree.
Same in Sweden. Trees close to houses and roads had to be pruned or removed so in case of storm they can not do any damage.
I had several 'protected' Oak trees, magnificent ones, close to my house in Five Ashes.
Being an ignorant soul, they got turned to excellent firewood. neighbor, Multitalented Nick, helped me and got half of the wood.
It is not only a matter of falling over trees or falling branches, but roots damaging the foundation.
England have some weird rules if you are a Scandihooligan!
In fact, I had a patient in Osby in Sweden that got severely brain damaged by a falling branch ( snow) from a tree on the street. a big branch fell on his car while he was driving, dented the roof. The local Council got whacked with a huge payout in damages.
I fixed his teeth as they were damaged too. After therapy, he still had to use two sticks and could not drive a car anymore.
I had several 'protected' Oak trees, magnificent ones, close to my house in Five Ashes.
Being an ignorant soul, they got turned to excellent firewood. neighbor, Multitalented Nick, helped me and got half of the wood.
It is not only a matter of falling over trees or falling branches, but roots damaging the foundation.
England have some weird rules if you are a Scandihooligan!
In fact, I had a patient in Osby in Sweden that got severely brain damaged by a falling branch ( snow) from a tree on the street. a big branch fell on his car while he was driving, dented the roof. The local Council got whacked with a huge payout in damages.
I fixed his teeth as they were damaged too. After therapy, he still had to use two sticks and could not drive a car anymore.
No, what originally disturbed the natural environment was forest clearing. The copses that were left often grew out along the boundary lines, roadsides, etc., and folks realised that if hedges were properly made and maintained that they were stock proof, and they were also sometimes used to border holloways (traditional droving routes where after centuries of use the constant movement along them compacted and depressed the ground) to stop incursions into fields lying alongside droving roads
Hedgelaying is a skilled art
http://www.hedgelaying.org.uk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedgelaying
Fair enough. So the hedges were the second generation of disturbance rather than the first. Manipulating the disturbance (or recovery)No, what originally disturbed the natural environment was forest clearing. The copses that were left often grew out along the boundary lines, roadsides, etc., and folks realised that if hedges were properly made and maintained that they were stock proof, and they were also sometimes used to border holloways (traditional droving routes where after centuries of use the constant movement along them compacted and depressed the ground) to stop incursions into fields lying alongside droving roads
Hedgelaying is a skilled art
http://www.hedgelaying.org.uk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedgelaying
I'm sure that all of the UK can be divided into different biogeoclimatic zones.
Does anyone have an idea what the climax seral stage was for each of those?
Would you ever be comfortable to see those again, if you could?
In the Grassland Biome of North America, even the simple(?) process of animal grazing changed the landscape forever.
European cows do not graze as the bison do.
That biome was sustained by grassland firestorms, largely prevented now by cultivation.
Does anyone have an idea what the climax seral stage was for each of those?
Would you ever be comfortable to see those again, if you could?
In the Grassland Biome of North America, even the simple(?) process of animal grazing changed the landscape forever.
European cows do not graze as the bison do.
That biome was sustained by grassland firestorms, largely prevented now by cultivation.
Only if we wanted to live on the sea meadows and foreshores.
Where trees grew, they did. Where they couldn't then machair, chalk or heather moorland, alpine scree and river floodplains were normal. We're told that the ultimate is peat bog, everywhere, even in Africa. Peat bog will subsume the world....if humans don't keep using it and draining it.
Depends on the geography and geology really.
The ice retreated, and the land started to rebound. Pioneer species of trees, like birch, really come into their own then. Alder, oak, etc., get a hold (alder and willow in wet lands, pine in the colder areas, oak, etc., take time and slowly colonise large areas. Meanwhile humanity is hunting/gathering, mesolithic, and probably slowly shifting plants they use to easy access areas. Farming finally makes a showing and we're in the Neolithic, and the best lands are those loess soils along the riversides (still true in this area today, think of the Nile, the Fayum, the Euphrates, etc., as classic examples)...thing is though, the population expands with all that mostly reliable farmed food, and those river lands aren't enough, so down come the nearest trees, and it goes on and on and on and by the time we hit the industrial revolution (and the UK was right there in the vanguard) and the woods that have already been shredded by farming and ship building needs, are now needed for the fuel to power steam, etc., so more and more come down. We have a lot of coal in the UK but digging it out is harder work than taking down a tree, until there aren't really suitable trees enough near suitable industrial areas.
Meanwhile, through all this, people have always used trees selectively. For water environments, for construction, for stock barriers, for firewood, and forests kept for shelter or hunting. We are a very urbanised society, but the UK has a lot of forest coverage. (image copied from the BBC) and it's growing. Hedges are multipurpose. They not only provide boundaries, but act as wildlife corridors and habitats. Those corridors join up smaller wild areas to each other, and do allow species diversity as well as refuges. The farmland % in this photo is a little inaccurate because technically farmland also includes the copses and hedges belonging to the farms.
There are still some of the white cattle around. There's a herd at Cadzow not three miles away from where I live. Not as large as the original I believe, but very hardy. Not ideal for milk but superb meat animals apparently.
Where trees grew, they did. Where they couldn't then machair, chalk or heather moorland, alpine scree and river floodplains were normal. We're told that the ultimate is peat bog, everywhere, even in Africa. Peat bog will subsume the world....if humans don't keep using it and draining it.
Depends on the geography and geology really.
The ice retreated, and the land started to rebound. Pioneer species of trees, like birch, really come into their own then. Alder, oak, etc., get a hold (alder and willow in wet lands, pine in the colder areas, oak, etc., take time and slowly colonise large areas. Meanwhile humanity is hunting/gathering, mesolithic, and probably slowly shifting plants they use to easy access areas. Farming finally makes a showing and we're in the Neolithic, and the best lands are those loess soils along the riversides (still true in this area today, think of the Nile, the Fayum, the Euphrates, etc., as classic examples)...thing is though, the population expands with all that mostly reliable farmed food, and those river lands aren't enough, so down come the nearest trees, and it goes on and on and on and by the time we hit the industrial revolution (and the UK was right there in the vanguard) and the woods that have already been shredded by farming and ship building needs, are now needed for the fuel to power steam, etc., so more and more come down. We have a lot of coal in the UK but digging it out is harder work than taking down a tree, until there aren't really suitable trees enough near suitable industrial areas.
Meanwhile, through all this, people have always used trees selectively. For water environments, for construction, for stock barriers, for firewood, and forests kept for shelter or hunting. We are a very urbanised society, but the UK has a lot of forest coverage. (image copied from the BBC) and it's growing. Hedges are multipurpose. They not only provide boundaries, but act as wildlife corridors and habitats. Those corridors join up smaller wild areas to each other, and do allow species diversity as well as refuges. The farmland % in this photo is a little inaccurate because technically farmland also includes the copses and hedges belonging to the farms.
There are still some of the white cattle around. There's a herd at Cadzow not three miles away from where I live. Not as large as the original I believe, but very hardy. Not ideal for milk but superb meat animals apparently.
The only tree species which appear to last forever are those of the Climax seral stage.
It will take centuries (fact) to recover the mycorhizal community that supports that.
You can't fake it. Clear off a square mile of level ground.
Wait and watch:
I'm positive that you can predict the order of occurrence of plant communities as seral stages in succession.
With those come specific communities of animals.
Once again = they come and they go as their niche opportunities open and they will close for certain.
While the species differ, these processes are global.
Drive 40 km up the Holmes River logging road in summer and you can see every seral stage right beside you.
Some began as wild fires, some began as logging (Oh, I'm so sorry. We "harvest" a pulp fiber crop.) 3-5' stumps in there.
There is, I think just one square mile which has been untouched since the glaciers retreated in Western Canada.
Named Kernan's Prairie, it's a little relic that never saw a cow or a plow. Freddie Kernan made sure of that.
Locally, we have piece of climax forest near here. Measured ages of some cedars - 4,000 years +.
You are not allowed to walk on the ground (soil compression) but there are elevated board walks some km in length.
"Ancient Forest." I can't remember the correct First Nations name for the place.
It will take centuries (fact) to recover the mycorhizal community that supports that.
You can't fake it. Clear off a square mile of level ground.
Wait and watch:
I'm positive that you can predict the order of occurrence of plant communities as seral stages in succession.
With those come specific communities of animals.
Once again = they come and they go as their niche opportunities open and they will close for certain.
While the species differ, these processes are global.
Drive 40 km up the Holmes River logging road in summer and you can see every seral stage right beside you.
Some began as wild fires, some began as logging (Oh, I'm so sorry. We "harvest" a pulp fiber crop.) 3-5' stumps in there.
There is, I think just one square mile which has been untouched since the glaciers retreated in Western Canada.
Named Kernan's Prairie, it's a little relic that never saw a cow or a plow. Freddie Kernan made sure of that.
Locally, we have piece of climax forest near here. Measured ages of some cedars - 4,000 years +.
You are not allowed to walk on the ground (soil compression) but there are elevated board walks some km in length.
"Ancient Forest." I can't remember the correct First Nations name for the place.
The wooded areas are increasing all over Europe, but not with a more natural, mixed forest, but with a pine mono culture.
In many areas they plant fast growing spruce varieties coming from other geographical areas.
The huge Oak trees we see around Europe are that size only because they were solitary trees, surrounded by pasture, so human interaction created them.
Seafaring countries planted huge plantations of Oaks, to use in ship building. About 20 years ago, the last oak plantation matured ( on the island of Visingso in lake Vattern.
The land owner notified the Swedish Navy that their oaks were ready for harvesting ( as a joke). The Vasa museum used some of these oaks to restore the ship Vasa.
So, what is a 'natural environment'?
The beautiful, wooded Bavaria? Spruce tree plantations since late middle ages.
Have any of you been to southern Bohemia (Czech Rep) ?
Beautiful. Forests, glades, lakes, fields. Streams and rivers. Wildlife is plentiful.
Except: All forests are cultivated since Centuries. Lakes man made. Glades and fields created by intensive reclamation and drainage of marshes and wetlands in late middle ages. All rivers are created, straightened, shores created for efficient water flow. Majority of streams are 100% man made.
If this was a Dutch site, and the question was 'Re-establishing the natural balance Netherlands' then my answer would be - dynamite all dykes.
I do not think we should strive to try to recreate something that only existed for a very short time post glacially.
(Thinking of it, Humans colonized Europe before the end of the ice age, and did change Nature, by hunting, foraging.
So, the European ( and British of course) nature was created WITH human interaction.)
We should strive for keeping what we have toxin and rubbish free, and accessible to responsible citizens.
Introducing animals ? Yes, if they can survive without human interaction and meddling.
In many areas they plant fast growing spruce varieties coming from other geographical areas.
The huge Oak trees we see around Europe are that size only because they were solitary trees, surrounded by pasture, so human interaction created them.
Seafaring countries planted huge plantations of Oaks, to use in ship building. About 20 years ago, the last oak plantation matured ( on the island of Visingso in lake Vattern.
The land owner notified the Swedish Navy that their oaks were ready for harvesting ( as a joke). The Vasa museum used some of these oaks to restore the ship Vasa.
So, what is a 'natural environment'?
The beautiful, wooded Bavaria? Spruce tree plantations since late middle ages.
Have any of you been to southern Bohemia (Czech Rep) ?
Beautiful. Forests, glades, lakes, fields. Streams and rivers. Wildlife is plentiful.
Except: All forests are cultivated since Centuries. Lakes man made. Glades and fields created by intensive reclamation and drainage of marshes and wetlands in late middle ages. All rivers are created, straightened, shores created for efficient water flow. Majority of streams are 100% man made.
If this was a Dutch site, and the question was 'Re-establishing the natural balance Netherlands' then my answer would be - dynamite all dykes.
I do not think we should strive to try to recreate something that only existed for a very short time post glacially.
(Thinking of it, Humans colonized Europe before the end of the ice age, and did change Nature, by hunting, foraging.
So, the European ( and British of course) nature was created WITH human interaction.)
We should strive for keeping what we have toxin and rubbish free, and accessible to responsible citizens.
Introducing animals ? Yes, if they can survive without human interaction and meddling.
Last edited:
"I do not think we should strive to try to recreate something that only existed for a very short time post glacially.
Thinking of it, Humans colonized Europe before the end of the ice age, and did change Nature, by hunting, foraging.
So, the European ( and British of course) nature was created WITH human interaction.
We should strive for keeping what we have toxin and rubbish free, and accessible to citizens." Janne.
I think that is probably the best that we'll manage. Maybe with less of the total monobloc plantations though. That's changing here already (surely in Europe too ? ) with native trees planted around the blocks, and within in areas not so suitable for the pines and larches. Like soggy bits where alder and willow thrive instead, and native understorey trees are encouraged, such as rowan, holly, hawthorn, etc.,
Nature hates a monoculture and attacks it with everything she can. We're realising that diversity is actually an awfully good thing
M
Thinking of it, Humans colonized Europe before the end of the ice age, and did change Nature, by hunting, foraging.
So, the European ( and British of course) nature was created WITH human interaction.
We should strive for keeping what we have toxin and rubbish free, and accessible to citizens." Janne.
I think that is probably the best that we'll manage. Maybe with less of the total monobloc plantations though. That's changing here already (surely in Europe too ? ) with native trees planted around the blocks, and within in areas not so suitable for the pines and larches. Like soggy bits where alder and willow thrive instead, and native understorey trees are encouraged, such as rowan, holly, hawthorn, etc.,
Nature hates a monoculture and attacks it with everything she can. We're realising that diversity is actually an awfully good thing
M
I love gardening. I have always planted 'local' plants, bushes and trees. Plus Fruit trees (technically not local)
The benefit as I see it planting 'local' is that the wildlife, from underground bugs to over ground larger animals, recognize what it is, and can interact with it.
Local plants are disease resistant. Local plants are temperature resistant.
I have been 'bushcrafting' for over 50 years. I refuse to do anything in a spruce 'forest'.
A good friend of mine, a milk cow and tree farmer, got a good deal of spruce seedlings of a variety from south east Europe ( Romania).
Quick growth, estimated turn over 35 years, as opposed to 45 for Swedish spruce.
5 years after planting a couple of hundred acres he discovered that the majority of the small trees developed a double top.
2 Choices: get a bunch of foreign cheap labour people and prune one of the tops and hope the tree survives and later does not do the same.
Or: Let it grow, and harvest it for pulp and hopefully break even.
The benefit as I see it planting 'local' is that the wildlife, from underground bugs to over ground larger animals, recognize what it is, and can interact with it.
Local plants are disease resistant. Local plants are temperature resistant.
I have been 'bushcrafting' for over 50 years. I refuse to do anything in a spruce 'forest'.
A good friend of mine, a milk cow and tree farmer, got a good deal of spruce seedlings of a variety from south east Europe ( Romania).
Quick growth, estimated turn over 35 years, as opposed to 45 for Swedish spruce.
5 years after planting a couple of hundred acres he discovered that the majority of the small trees developed a double top.
2 Choices: get a bunch of foreign cheap labour people and prune one of the tops and hope the tree survives and later does not do the same.
Or: Let it grow, and harvest it for pulp and hopefully break even.
It is hard to define when a hedgerow was planted and yes they would have interfered with what could be called a natural environment, but we have to remember that at one time the whole of the UK was forest, and de forestation was carried out both for agricultural reasons as well as housing development, if we look around we can see that the moorland areas, which are sparsely populated, are because the land is no good for agriculture, even though it is suitable for animal husbandry for example sheep and cattle, we could also say that any housing development is a major cause of the loss of the natural environment, as this would interfere with the natural elements of the weather, snow, rain, wind etc, but we do have to live somewhere, and luckily for us, whatever we do, the bugs and insects will find a way to accommodate themselves into the new environment., the only animals that are having trouble to adapt are us.
i would also like to add that this discussion , I find absolutely fascinating
If you are genuinely interested in the history and ecology of UK hedgerows, I can highly recommend A Natural History of the Hedgerow by John Wright;
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Natural-Hi...preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch
Many of the hedges and other field boundaries in the UK that create a habitat for of birds and other wildlife predate Columbus’s voyage by centuries if not millennia - they ARE the natural environment albeit not the same one that existed the last time the ice receded.
The mass grubbing out of hedges encouraged by the Ministry of Agriculture after WW2 did immense damage to the countryside ecology but fortunately we now live in more enlightened times and the benefits of a decent hedgerow over a bare stockfence are now recognised and there are Government grants available for landlowners wanting to plant hedges as part of countryside stewardship schemes. Cutting of agricultural hedges during the spring and summer when birds are nesting requires a permit.
Proper hedgelaying (as opposed to just cutting with a tractor mounted flail) by hand is an art form with styles both of hedge and the tools used to make them varying around the UK and is a competitive sport in rural communities.
People from the former colonies in particular, seem to struggle with the concept that in the UK, the rural landscape IS the natural environment. UK National Parks are not wilderness areas from which the indigenous population have been driven (although some in Scotland would probably take issue with this), and which visitors are allowed to access subject to getting permits and/or abiding by strict rules but rural areas containing farms, villages, towns etc. which may have been inhabited for centuries or millennia and the environment shaped by evolving agricultural practices dating back to prehistoric times.
http://www.nationalparks.gov.uk/caring-for/habitats
Within the Parks there may well be wilderness areas, typically upland areas not suitable for agriculture other than perhaps summer grazing for sheep but the land is not preserved in aspic and are instead managed through planning controls, subsidies and active intervention by the Park authorities and other agencies to strike a balance between conservation and economic use - which in many cases involves tourism as much as agriculture.
The idea that intensive farming somehow frees up land currently used for agriculture that will somehow magically revert to a “natural” state again misses the point - low intensity, sustainable agriculture over centuries is what created the natural environment and it has been the intensification of agriculture since the middle of the last century that has thrown things out of kilter.
As an example, Nomad Acres includes some unimproved upland grassland which is a haven for wildflowers and the species they attract and which is a habitat which has declined by 97% since WW2. That decline is not due to intensive farming as most people would think of it but the limited use of fertilisers (usually just farmyard manure) to improve yields, more intensive grazing by sheep and harvesting for hay.
Even a modest use of fertiliser promotes the increased growth of grass which outcompetes the wildflowers which have evolved to thrive on poorer soils. Increased grazing and cropping means that those wildflowers that do grow are eaten or harvested before they get a chance to seed. The result is a few extra sheep in a nice green field which from a distance looks prettier than the scruffy brown wildflower meadow but which is effectively a mono-crop and although yields increase, nutritionally the hay produced is inferior to that made from a variety of wildflower species.
http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/wildlife/habitats/grassland
I’ve been liasing with local Wildlife Trusts to create a plan for grazing and harvesting (which still needs to be done to prevent fields being overrun with bracken, gorse and brambles) to preserve a pocket of wildflower rich but nutrient poor land which would be as most of my neighbours’ land would have been in their grandfathers’ day before the decline in biodiversity that accompanied the greater use of mechanisation and agrochemicals in farming.
Having seen the devastating effects of deforestation in Western Australia, Malawi and elsewhere in Africa first hand, and the casual destruction of important centuries old indigenous trees in this country, I have no problem with controls on the felling of some types of trees in some locations - at least in the UK we are free to plant a few carrots in our front gardens without the risk of being locked up!
https://www.usatoday24x7.com/florid...d-to-grow-vegetables-in-their-own-front-yard/
