Jump to content

Log in or register to remove this advert

Massive Sequoia


scotspine1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Log in or register to remove this advert

11 hours ago, Haironyourchest said:

Gerald Berenek explained why logging the old growth actually benefitted the biodiversity of the forest, especially with sequoia. Not that the really huge specimens shouldn't have been spared, ideally, and nowadays of course, they are. But it's not all black and white.

 

 

This is similar to the discussion we have doing conservation work in British woodlands, where we basically cut down loads of trees to let light in and increase biodiversity. We currently believe that's better because the wildlife has adapted to the cycle, I also remember good old Oliver Rackham saying one of the big problems with conservation work is changing ideas and fashions.

 

The other thing I remember is that Cathedral Grove which is an old growth park where Reg Coates has been working is thought to have burned around 600 years ago because the oldest trees are around that age. So I have an idea that given a few hundred years Beranek is right, it will grow back and be pretty much as it was before.

 

It's a common idea that cutting down all the trees destroys a forest, whereas the picture is far more complicated because you are leaving behind all the stuff under the ground where there's far more going on than we understand. The areas in the UK where most firewood was cut historically, such as Sussex Downs for the iron industry, have the best preserved woodlands.

 

Where they cut less firewood they dug, burned and ploughed to plant wheat or potatoes, lots of ancient woodland was lost to this in the UK since the war so it's easy to point at the Americans but we are guilty here too.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember reading something about how much  of south wales valleys were wooded until they swapped over from coppicing the wood and making charcoal, too using coal for industries etc so the woodland lost its economic value.

 

Now the former extensive  woodland area is mostly degraded moorlands rough pasture plagioclimax veg like much of the uk uplands

 

Think it was rackham

 

Also selective felling may kind of replicate the role of the extinct ( hunted to extiction in the neolithic) megafauna that plants may of co evolved with....

 

Links in with the keystone species idea

Edited by Stere
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Dan Maynard said:

This is similar to the discussion we have doing conservation work in British woodlands, where we basically cut down loads of trees to let light in and increase biodiversity. We currently believe that's better because the wildlife has adapted to the cycle, I also remember good old Oliver Rackham saying one of the big problems with conservation work is changing ideas and fashions.

 

The other thing I remember is that Cathedral Grove which is an old growth park where Reg Coates has been working is thought to have burned around 600 years ago because the oldest trees are around that age. So I have an idea that given a few hundred years Beranek is right, it will grow back and be pretty much as it was before.

 

It's a common idea that cutting down all the trees destroys a forest, whereas the picture is far more complicated because you are leaving behind all the stuff under the ground where there's far more going on than we understand. The areas in the UK where most firewood was cut historically, such as Sussex Downs for the iron industry, have the best preserved woodlands.

 

Where they cut less firewood they dug, burned and ploughed to plant wheat or potatoes, lots of ancient woodland was lost to this in the UK since the war so it's easy to point at the Americans but we are guilty here too.

The natural regen in parts of West Sussex after the 87 storm is very good . Better in fact than some of the replanted areas .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Stubby said:

The natural regen in parts of West Sussex after the 87 storm is very good . Better in fact than some of the replanted areas .

Yes and I wonder how much that is due to a general reduction in rabbit population, whereas roe and muntjac seem to have increased but less damaging?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


  •  

  • Featured Adverts

About

Arbtalk.co.uk is a hub for the arboriculture industry in the UK.  
If you're just starting out and you need business, equipment, tech or training support you're in the right place.  If you've done it, made it, got a van load of oily t-shirts and have decided to give something back by sharing your knowledge or wisdom,  then you're welcome too.
If you would like to contribute to making this industry more effective and safe then welcome.
Just like a living tree, it'll always be a work in progress.
Please have a look around, sign up, share and contribute the best you have.

See you inside.

The Arbtalk Team

Follow us

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.