What would the UK look like without all of the grazing sheep and crops?
- Thread starter Aristotle
- Start date
What Robin says is demonstrated in the pollen record too.
In England forests were left for hunting, but even those were heavily used. The rights to forest grazing, firewood collecting, mast fattening for pigs, and the like, were very heavily regulated.
In Scotland much of the uplands never had tree cover, and a lot more of what is now arable land was moss and bog.
Humans are the ultimate habitat creators, environment changers.
We were also the first Industrialised Nation, and natural resources like timber were heavily utilised.
The great wood of Caledon was I suppose the last great wood in the south of Scotland (north of England, maybe ? ) and we do have remnants of the Caledonian pine forests scattered about.
Rivers such as the Clyde which scours out a deep valley in it's upper reaches, has steep sided Gills running down into it that carry the feeder burns. These Gills are rich in the native tree species and the flora and insect life that accompanies that. They were too steep to be felled or grazed so were left alone. Now they are being encouraged to spread out, and they are getting a foothold along the river sides and pathways.
In my lifetime the growth of woodlands is really noticeable. I think this is due to several things. Firstly so few open fires that the pressure for collecting 'sticks' is tremendously reduced. Small scale grazing has been reduced and folks don't walk the same, so they're not collecting woods for fires either. We're all more aware of trees and there are huge efforts made to preserve and plant.
I'm not thinking of the blanket planting of Forestry Commission pine forests there, but the natural seeding and permitted growth of native trees like Birch, Oak, Rowan, Ash, etc.,
Some of the walkways, like the Clyde walkway, or the West Highland way, if joined together mean that you could probably manage to cross the country from one side to the other mostly in trees
Be fun to try ?
cheers,
M
In England forests were left for hunting, but even those were heavily used. The rights to forest grazing, firewood collecting, mast fattening for pigs, and the like, were very heavily regulated.
In Scotland much of the uplands never had tree cover, and a lot more of what is now arable land was moss and bog.
Humans are the ultimate habitat creators, environment changers.
We were also the first Industrialised Nation, and natural resources like timber were heavily utilised.
The great wood of Caledon was I suppose the last great wood in the south of Scotland (north of England, maybe ? ) and we do have remnants of the Caledonian pine forests scattered about.
Rivers such as the Clyde which scours out a deep valley in it's upper reaches, has steep sided Gills running down into it that carry the feeder burns. These Gills are rich in the native tree species and the flora and insect life that accompanies that. They were too steep to be felled or grazed so were left alone. Now they are being encouraged to spread out, and they are getting a foothold along the river sides and pathways.
In my lifetime the growth of woodlands is really noticeable. I think this is due to several things. Firstly so few open fires that the pressure for collecting 'sticks' is tremendously reduced. Small scale grazing has been reduced and folks don't walk the same, so they're not collecting woods for fires either. We're all more aware of trees and there are huge efforts made to preserve and plant.
I'm not thinking of the blanket planting of Forestry Commission pine forests there, but the natural seeding and permitted growth of native trees like Birch, Oak, Rowan, Ash, etc.,
Some of the walkways, like the Clyde walkway, or the West Highland way, if joined together mean that you could probably manage to cross the country from one side to the other mostly in trees
Be fun to try ?
cheers,
M
On a visit back home last year I was struck by the extent of forestry there is now in Central Scotland... not just the spruces etc but there's obviously been a lot of planting of native trees along the M8 etc
yep if you go back furhter there where no trees just a couple miles of Ice
then further back as Shallow coral sea and a dessert etc etc
and im sure it will be all these things again animals and eco systems will come and go evolve and disapear
mother nature realy dosnt care about us and our short term view infact if shes blinked she may have missed our entire existance
ATB
Duncan
then further back as Shallow coral sea and a dessert etc etc
and im sure it will be all these things again animals and eco systems will come and go evolve and disapear
mother nature realy dosnt care about us and our short term view infact if shes blinked she may have missed our entire existance
ATB
Duncan
Yup it' our collective self importance that makes us belive we are the most important beings on earth, when were all gone the birds will still sing and the deer will still roam, albeit with fifty eyes and a trunk for a bum.
Well, I don't know about you, but I'm certainly the most important being on Earth - to me.
Heck, in the grand scheme of things, these few hundred billion years in which the Universe is filled with light and matter are only a brief interlude before the inevitable triumph of infinite void and eternal darkness. Sure is pretty though...
As Douglas Adams put it: "If life is going to exist in a universe of this size, then the one thing it cannot afford to have is a sense of proportion."
robin wood
Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Whilst nature may not care about humankind it does not mean we are insignificant. We are in the process of one of the greatest extinctions of species the world has ever seen and we are the cause. Our world population has quadrupedaled in two generations and it ain't sustainable. The long term cycles Duncan mentions and the 4,000 years from woodland to mixed agricultural landscape in Britain are interesting but they were slow. The pace of change has speeded up and nature can not adapt that fast.
I heard that squirrel story too but it was Northern England and in a book IIRC. We had a passage read to us in one of of our "general studies" classes at school. The guy went on to give us a list of books we should be reading to develop us and it was one of them. I've got the funny thing that the part read was from the squirrel's viewpoint but that sounds like it would be a wierd book if that was true.
As far as coniferous woods go I was on the hills at the weekend looking down Ennerdale and thought it was starting to look better these days.
I always thought it was bronze age or earlier when the woods started to disappear when the people became more agricultural and settled. All down to farming. In fact a lot of woods were planted during the Elizabethan or Napoleonic wars time with a view to the long term supply of oak for ships. Remember something about that.
In geological time we are totally negligible. Things come and go in that timescale and it is reather hard to actually understand that scale too. We are not negligible when it comes to our effect on what is around us. IMHO it is only possible to have truly natural and wild land in the larger countries. The Belorussian forests for example cover a large area so there will probably always be space for man to modify and nature to secure the pimeval forest. Britain is just too small. However what we have got is something special too IMHO and the effect of man is not all bad. I am probably one of a few who actually enjoy the effect of mining for example in the Lakes. It is one of my fantasy things to actually see Coniston coppermines re-opened with all the different ages of mining opened up for visitors in the style they would have been open in the time they were operated. Similarly in the Borrowdale / Newlands areas too. It is all part of our history and even if you disagree it has its importance too.
As far as coniferous woods go I was on the hills at the weekend looking down Ennerdale and thought it was starting to look better these days.
I always thought it was bronze age or earlier when the woods started to disappear when the people became more agricultural and settled. All down to farming. In fact a lot of woods were planted during the Elizabethan or Napoleonic wars time with a view to the long term supply of oak for ships. Remember something about that.
In geological time we are totally negligible. Things come and go in that timescale and it is reather hard to actually understand that scale too. We are not negligible when it comes to our effect on what is around us. IMHO it is only possible to have truly natural and wild land in the larger countries. The Belorussian forests for example cover a large area so there will probably always be space for man to modify and nature to secure the pimeval forest. Britain is just too small. However what we have got is something special too IMHO and the effect of man is not all bad. I am probably one of a few who actually enjoy the effect of mining for example in the Lakes. It is one of my fantasy things to actually see Coniston coppermines re-opened with all the different ages of mining opened up for visitors in the style they would have been open in the time they were operated. Similarly in the Borrowdale / Newlands areas too. It is all part of our history and even if you disagree it has its importance too.
yes it can but it dosnt have to work in Human time scale it will just mull it over for a few thousand or even million years and Nature will as its always done carry on
Dont be fooled we arnt trying to Save the planet we are trying to save Us the planet will endure and the Tectonic plate convayer system will wipe any trace of us away over time
we only exist really cause of a Mass extinction that happened very very quickly killing of the rulling class allowing a small mammel rat to take over
now the decendant of that ruling class (T Rex) is deep fryed and served in buckets by the colonel
Nature already has the next level in the wings if we turn the planet into a toxic wastland that are living on the Pacific and mid atlantic Ridge Hydrothermal Vents in total darkness under tonnes of pressure in massive temps and in highly toxic water which they use to produce the energy we get from sunlight etc
ATB
Duncan
Its called re-wilding. I think it was something from parts of Scotland but Ennerdale was one good example of what positive actions forestry commission (or whatever it is called these days) can do if willing. I mean vast swathes of regimented conifers aren't natural and probably aren't that productive. A lot of forests IIRC were put up as a tax dodge at one time. I guess back then it was one con now it is that carbon offsetting that is the latest con for the planting of trees. Biggest example is the banana plantation put up to offset a big band's world tour (Coldplay IIRC). They were likely to be put up anyway as bananas are a commercial crop. The only problem a lot of them got wiped out in a tropical storm resulting in nowhere as near carbon being offset but the company the band management gave money to didn't refund or replace AFAIK. No doubt the land was cleared giving more carbon. Off topic a bit but an aside anyway.
The local managed forests here have a lot of clearings planted with birch and others, to break up the plantations.
If any of you have been to New England in the US, you'll know that there are a lot of broad-leaved trees.
I was told that in New Hampshire, much of the trees were second growth after the settlers cleared much if the area in the past.
They have beaver there and you can see quite a few trees that have been felled by them.
You can drive for hours and see landscapes like this in Vermont.
I suspect that the Lake District may look like this after a few decades if the sheep were removed. It would be greener, but less 'picturesque' for the tourists who look at the fells from the car parks.
I was told that in New Hampshire, much of the trees were second growth after the settlers cleared much if the area in the past.
They have beaver there and you can see quite a few trees that have been felled by them.
You can drive for hours and see landscapes like this in Vermont.
I suspect that the Lake District may look like this after a few decades if the sheep were removed. It would be greener, but less 'picturesque' for the tourists who look at the fells from the car parks.
Similar threads
