Re: [Adastra] Tree planting

[James, Trevor John J]

Dear Patrick,

As a 'sleeping observer' of this discussion group, I thought your bringing of 
this to everyone's attention was a very useful contribuition, along with the 
discussion.  Thanks.

Wearing a botanist's hat, as well as former county ecologist hat, I can see to 
some extent where the FC is coming from.   It is very true that our native 
plant communities are already beginning to shift from their 'natural' 
characteristics, especially in southern England.  In Hertfordshire (home of the 
blessed Heartwood Forest you mention), we are steadily seeing the demise of 
beech on the drier chalk hills and gravels.  Oak is suffering from increasing 
stag-headedness and dieback on damper clays (which dry out in drought years), 
although their deeper roots allow them to survive somewehat better on gravels 
(ironically).  We are also now seeing the take-off of naturally regenerating 
walnut in a big way on calcareous soils (to the detriment of chalk grassland).  
 So, whether we like it or not, our so-called natural woodlands are going to 
change before our eyes, and I have to say, we are likely to lose a lot of our 
native biodiversity with the change, especially highly specialised species 
attached to ancient woodland habitat.

The FC is obviously in this for economic as well as environmental benefit, and 
that may be no bad thing in the right areas.   The question is: will new 
plantings, especially on open country, be a real problem or not, and will we 
make proper long-term use of the end product?   Also, what impact, if any, will 
this planting really have on (protected) ancient semi-natural woodland?

I would suggest that implementation of carefully thought-out planting of new 
woodlands, with species that will not cause us ecological damage in the longer 
term, will be of some benefit, especially if it enables a forestry 
infrastructure to be maintained.  Alongside this, I think there needs to be a 
re-appraisal of the way that semi-natural woodldands are managed, with a view 
to ensuring that any change that may happen through climate change is not 
exacerbated by damaging management activities, such as excessive opening up of 
canopies by indiscrimnate coppicing or, especially, unnecessary replanting.  At 
the same time, there may need to be careful selective management of natural 
regeneration to mitigate any problems of 'new' species coming in as a result of 
management.   Having good foresters in charge of woods, rather than the current 
wholesale neglect of so many good woods, would be a good thing, on balance.

Like all things, it depends how things are implemented.

Kind regards,

Trevor James (wearing a Hertfordshire naturalist's hats today)
________________________________________
From: adastra-boun...@lists.sxbrc.org.uk [adastra-boun...@lists.sxbrc.org.uk] 
On Behalf Of Patrick Roper [patr...@prassociates.co.uk]
Sent: 26 November 2009 11:50
To: 'Adastra discussion group'
Subject: Re: [Adastra] Tree planting

I think there are now many signs that the biodiversity era (i.e. the last 30 
years or so) may be fading and being replaced by strategies (that often seem to 
give a low profile to wildlife) for carbon capture and for dealing with 
problems that may arise from climate change.

The Forestry Commission has, as already discussed, become excited about 
planting trees everywhere including many exotics.  It resembles the frame of 
mind they were in after World War II when they planted all those conifers, 
often replacing ancient woodland.  It is, perhaps, their job to see trees as a 
crop with a large national organisation looking after them and telling us all 
what to do.  The Woodland Trust too, backed by the Forestry Commission, is 
buying up agricultural land (for example in Hertfordshire for its Heartwood 
Forest project) where it intends to plant a million trees, though wildlife 
conservation still seems to be fairly high on their agenda.  Where are all 
those million trees coming from I wonder?  I can almost hear the Government pat 
on the back.

I expect too that large private landowners will also benefit from the emerging 
strategy with grants available for planting Forestry Commission recommended 
trees, often non-native.

Planting trees, of course, means raising trees in tree nurseries which 
provides, not unworthily, rural employment.  This simply does not happen if 
fields are allowed to turn into woods (as they do quite quickly) through 
natural regeneration.  I remember being told at the Liverpool Garden Festival 
many years ago that the huge number of tree whips planted on site had been a 
major boost to the nursery trade which, at that time, had its own minister.  
Tree planting on a large scale is, I believe, an economic and political 
activity and not much to do with conservation.

When the Forestry Commission really got its teeth into tree planting in the 
mid-20th C, too few people saw the dangers to wildlife until it was too late.  
I feel the wheel may have come full circle with biodiversity out and plantation 
psychology “for the common good” in and I am just wondering what, if anything, 
we should all be doing about it.

Patrick Roper

-- 
This message (and any attachments) is for the recipient only. NERC
is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the contents
of this email and any reply you make may be disclosed by NERC unless
it is exempt from release under the Act. Any material supplied to
NERC may be stored in an electronic records management system.