Maybe the UK should plant more....

[Big J]

10 minutes ago, Rough Hewn said:

What’s wrong with planting native species?
It’s not all about the money!!!!!!!!
What about, what’s good for nature???
Get sick to the back teeth of new miracle fast growing hybrids planted in sterile monoculture.
It’s the short sighted money grabbing mentality which has been the downfall of British forestry, eco diversity and British manufacturing.
🤷🏽‍♂️

From the point of view of timber production, it's a total waste of time. 

 

Firstly, establishment of native broadleaf species in the UK is made extremely difficult with grey squirrels. Substanstial and sustained control measures, for a period of 40 years is required. 

 

Secondly, growth rates are glacial. A plantation of oak will do about 6 cubic metres per hectare per year in these parts, if that. Eucalyptus nitens will do over 50, and will achieve a standing density impossible for native broadleaves. 

 

Thirdly, it is all about the money. Growing timber as a crop is farming on an extended timescale. In order to do so, the financials need to make sense and there is no scenario in which planting NB is economically viable without extensive capital and ongoing grant funding. I'm restocking most of my clearfell sites with eucalyptus now because when I show the landowners (who are typically 50-65 years of age) the stand of nitens, they can see that not only will they have an established woodland back again in just 5 years, but that they'll see another income from it.

 

Fourthly, planting broadleaves is very expensive. £1.60 for the tube, £0.45 for the stake, £0.45 for the tree, £0.85 for planting. That's £3.35 per tree. The nitens costs £0.90. So NB is £6700/ha (at 2000 stems/ha), eucalyptus is £1800. I can plant 4 hectares of euc for the price of 1 hectare of NB.

 

Fifthly, whilst you may be involved (as I was) in the supply of high end timber for specialised uses, the vast bulk of the timber requirement in the UK is as fuel and low grade milling products. So wood chip, wood pellet, firewood, pallet timber, fencing, construction etc. Planting Oak plays no part in supplying these demands. Or do you prefer importing all your timber from Scandinavia and Germany? Or eucalyptus chip from New Zealand to power the Drax plant in Kent? 

 

Sixthly, if we're restocking a clearfell with eucalyptus, it's only replacing conifer. We wouldn't be allowed to clearfell broadleaves in anything other than exceptional circumstances (ash dieback as an example) and we'd be required to replant with broadleaves. In the case of new plantations, is a plantation of fast growing trees such as eucalyptus or spruce not better than an arable field?

 

Seventhly, the demise of UK industry has got nothing to do with the demise of UK forestry. The low point of forest cover in the UK was 1919 (at 5% coverage) and since then cover has increased by 2.5 times nationally by planting short rotation crops. 

 

There is little to no commercial demand in the UK for timber products from NB products. It's important to have native woodlands, and I support their planting on difficult to access/work sites, but commercially viable woodland sites ought to be the preserve of commercially viable timber crops. Native broadleaves are rarely that.

[Rough Hewn]

From the point of view of timber production, it's a total waste of time. 
 
Firstly, establishment of native broadleaf species in the UK is made extremely difficult with grey squirrels. Substanstial and sustained control measures, for a period of 40 years is required. 
 
Secondly, growth rates are glacial. A plantation of oak will do about 6 cubic metres per hectare per year in these parts, if that. Eucalyptus nitens will do over 50, and will achieve a standing density impossible for native broadleaves. 
 
Thirdly, it is all about the money. Growing timber as a crop is farming on an extended timescale. In order to do so, the financials need to make sense and there is no scenario in which planting NB is economically viable without extensive capital and ongoing grant funding. I'm restocking most of my clearfell sites with eucalyptus now because when I show the landowners (who are typically 50-65 years of age) the stand of nitens, they can see that not only will they have an established woodland back again in just 5 years, but that they'll see another income from it.
 
Fourthly, planting broadleaves is very expensive. £1.60 for the tube, £0.45 for the stake, £0.45 for the tree, £0.85 for planting. That's £3.35 per tree. The nitens costs £0.90. So NB is £6700/ha (at 2000 stems/ha), eucalyptus is £1800. I can plant 4 hectares of euc for the price of 1 hectare of NB.
 
Fifthly, whilst you may be involved (as I was) in the supply of high end timber for specialised uses, the vast bulk of the timber requirement in the UK is as fuel and low grade milling products. So wood chip, wood pellet, firewood, pallet timber, fencing, construction etc. Planting Oak plays no part in supplying these demands. Or do you prefer importing all your timber from Scandinavia and Germany? Or eucalyptus chip from New Zealand to power the Drax plant in Kent? 
 
Sixthly, if we're restocking a clearfell with eucalyptus, it's only replacing conifer. We wouldn't be allowed to clearfell broadleaves in anything other than exceptional circumstances (ash dieback as an example) and we'd be required to replant with broadleaves. In the case of new plantations, is a plantation of fast growing trees such as eucalyptus or spruce not better than an arable field?
 
Seventhly, the demise of UK industry has got nothing to do with the demise of UK forestry. The low point of forest cover in the UK was 1919 (at 5% coverage) and since then cover has increased by 2.5 times nationally by planting short rotation crops. 
 
There is little to no commercial demand in the UK for timber products from NB products. It's important to have native woodlands, and I support their planting on difficult to access/work sites, but commercially viable woodland sites ought to be the preserve of commercially viable timber crops. Native broadleaves are rarely that.

So,
We should just **** the whole lot off.
Plant euc and concrete the rest?
J I’m so disappointed you see it this way.
Or are you messing with me?
Commercial forestry in the uk is a massive problem.
Short sightedness is not the way forward.
What do actually think should be done?

[Big J]

8 minutes ago, Rough Hewn said:

So,
We should just **** the whole lot off.
Plant euc and concrete the rest?
J I’m so disappointed you see it this way.
Or are you messing with me?
Commercial forestry in the uk is a massive problem.
Short sightedness is not the way forward.
What do actually think should be done?

That is not what I am suggesting. 

 

Unfortunately, with the nature of your work, you only see the broadleaf side of the sawmilling market. Please recognise that it's a tiny, tiny part of the UK timber industry. I supply Pontralis Sawmills pretty regularly with softwood. They use 1200 tonnes of softwood a day, and even with that level of production, the UK imports 80% of it's timber products. 

 

Commercial forestry in the UK is still nowhere near the level required to fulfill our domestic needs. We need much more of the useless and barren uplands planted with conifer to provide high quality timber for construction and we need to plant some of our arable lowlands with rapidly growing species such as eucalyptus to provide a source of woodfuel and cellulose. 

 

I am not proposing to reduce the amount of native broadleaf woodland. I would actually propose increasing it, but on commercially unviable ground. This can be grant funded as required, but without the expectation of obtaining a crop out of it. I've seen a lot of plantations since coming down here, planted 20 odd years ago , where the softwood element beautiful and already profitable for it's first thin but the broadleaf aspect is completely useless. It'll never make a crop of any description, having been ravaged by squirrels, ash dieback, poor seed provenance (ie, poor form) or deer damage.

 

What exactly do you regard as being the problem with commercial UK forestry?

[Rough Hewn]

That’s a very long answer.
In brief, it’s greed.
But I appreciate the effort and thought in your previous posts,
So let me get back to you this evening.[emoji106]
(Got some high end broadleaf to move today)[emoji6][emoji108]

[Stere]

I reckon  euc may make a a good  nurse crop and for shelter belts for broadleaf plantings, as often broadleafs seem to suffer on exposed sites you end up loads of stunted  "bonsai" like trees etc.

 

 

 

[Khriss]

When you see the fvvk up of conifer planting in UK,  Jons method is unanswereable. Norway spruce just don't turn out as well as it does in Scandinavian plantings. Am very eco motivated in my end of this profession, but the cash has to be in the trees to make people bother. 

 

I would reforest most of UK if only to piss off developers  😈 K

[Silverhooker]

Round our way there are a few willow plantations on wet crap ground, they get harvested every 3 years or so by a specialist machine that spits out giant hay bale like blocks of willow that goes as a fuel. It seems to grow like weeds and they don't have to replant as the root stool is left behind. Was alway lead to believe that coppice was good for nature, is this mechanised coppicing good too ???

[Big J]

1 minute ago, Khriss said:

When you see the fvvk up of conifer planting in UK,  Jons method is unanswereable. Norway spruce just don't turn out as well as it does in Scandinavian plantings. Am very eco motivated in my end of this profession, but the cash has to be in the trees to make people bother. 

 

I would reforest most of UK if only to piss off developers  😈 K

 

The UK really needs to get to 30-35% forest cover and quickly in order to cover UK demand for timber. Almost all the other European countries manage to exceed that level.

 

If I was in charge of these things (God help us all) then I'd consign 50% of all upland in England to commercial forestry. All the flat bits - everywhere that can be mechanically harvested. This would provide the UK with most of it's construction and higher grade commercial timber. Mix it up so that you have a spread of species for different applications - sitka, norway (which I agree, doesn't always grow well here), WRC, Japanese red cedar, douglas fir, western hemlock etc. 

 

Then consign the remaining 50% to biodiversity and rewilding. Whether that's natural moorland restoration, broadleaf forest restoration or what, it'd be an improvement on the shooting drives that are there now. The loss of income from the (largely unprofitable) shoots would be offset by timber income. 

 

And make the whole lot open access so people can enjoy it.

 

And then look at farms at lower altitudes. So many of them exist only because of subsidies. They would be more profitable as eucalyptus, willow or poplar plantations. It'd give us a rapidly grown, sustainable biofuel that could be used in small scale district heating systems to heat houses, commercial properties and public spaces. Given that installation of gas boilers in new properties is illegal after 2025, biofuel district heating ought to be considered. 

 

It's unsustainable for the UK to continue importing 80% of it's timber. Reforestation is a complicated and multifaceted strategy that needs to take into account the complex nature of UK timber need. That being said, fast grown species will always form the backbone of it as the UK does not grow quality timber due to the climate. What we do do is grow timber very quickly.

 

 

[Khriss]

@Big J  you forgot abt flooding being eradicated 😊 too. K

[Big J]

2 minutes ago, Khriss said:

@Big J  you forgot abt flooding being eradicated 😊 too. K

That would be nice. It would help if developers stopped building on floodplains though.