wrsni

My own woodland has had six growing seasons now since planting and I'm only just starting to understand what this woodland management caper is about. So whereas a year or two ago I would also have considered an area such as yours to have been "neglected", now I would say that it's simply been free from human interference. I suppose you could argue that without 'human interference' my woodland wouldn't exist as it was planted on prime arable land, and that's a fair point. But having established it, there is no doubt that over the past couple of years especially the entire area has taken on a life of it's own. I still 'interfere' and will continue to do so for as long as I'm physically capable, I have fruit bushes in it which need a wee bit of help to survive amongst the more vigorous native stuff, I have fruit trees the same. Some things are starting to spread and sucker but rather than let them totally colonise one area I take out bits and move them to other places to hasten the process, and so on. But my main aim now is to be as low impact as possible, if there's something I want to do that's grand but I try to do it in a way that allows nature to get on with what it's doing as well, because at the end of the day it does it better and on a scale which I could never achieve anyway. The one thing I did do from the very beginning was lay out a series of pathways and keep them maintained. It seemed a bit silly for the first couple of years having these lovely neatly cut grass paths through what looked like a bit of a mess at times, but now the benefit of them is being seen both in giving me more distinct areas of woodland edge which I can do something with a bit easier, but also I can let everywhere else do what it likes knowing that access for the future is taken care of already. So you obviously need access for thinning but this could also tie in with maybe letting a wee bit more light in somewhere if you wanted to add some fruit producing plants should something like that appeal to you. Clearing one or two paths permanently could be worth it if they were well placed and allowed you to keep much larger areas undisturbed but they could also give you other benefits too. So I'd say have a good think about the sort of relationship which you want with the area, it's been doing it's own thing for quite a while obviously and isn't going to respond well to someone taking charge of it and changing everything overnight. However, if you approach it sensitively and respectful of what's already there (even the bramble!) there's no doubt it will have a lot to give you in many different ways. Good luck and enjoy your time there. :)

Our Kubota ME5700 will handle a ton on the front loader no problem. It's also a very handy tractor with an excellent turning circle, you simply won't beat Kubota for tight turning with 4wd.

Multiple shoots below the cut on a few trees doesn't bother me, in years to come there'll be thinning to do, wood used for firing, etc, as long as I have plenty of healthy growing trees there'll be a job for all of them. Staking is just a matter of work efficiency, I have a finite amount of time to spend on the whole area so transplanting them in a way that they become independent again as soon as possible would be preferable.

For reasons of management within the woodland I need to shift half a dozen or more Norway Maple. They are in the ground 5yrs but it's a nice loam they're in so I should be able to get them out with little upset given a bit of time. However what worries me is replanting, they've really shot up this past couple of years with some of them probably ten to a dozen feet high and although they're really just a big long whip with little side growth they're still capable of catching a fair bit of wind. I don't really want to get in to staking and such like so would it be acceptable to cut them back to say five feet or so at the same time as they are being shifted. On one hand I can see it being advantageous as there'll be less tree to feed for a couple of years while the roots re-establish, on the other hand I'd be worried that two shocks at the same time may be tough on them. Thoughts and advice welcome. Thanks.

I think UKIP are beyond saving, hasn't Nuttall bailed already?

The GFA ensured that the prison gates would be opened and some people (from both sides!) guilty of terrible things would walk free. Some others escaped prosecution on the back of it. There was some very unpalatable stuff in it. I voted for it on balance, but only after a long struggle with my conscience. I also know many very, very, decent people who could not bring themselves to support it, nothing to do with sectarianism or bitterness. So don't judge when you're not fully aware of all the detail.

If you don't like a thread don't read it! So what's the problem?

I'm sure the bereaved from this latest atrocity take great comfort from the fact that Mr Abedi's liberty remained unimpeded right up until the second he blew himself and their loved ones to pieces. Honestly, that's a prime example of the sort of bleeding heart liberal bollox which has gotten us in to this mess.

You're going to have to get out from under the umbrella of the ECHR first, and last time I checked (although she does change direction pretty often) Mrs May was all in favour of keeping it post-Brexit.

Unfortunately Mr Stubbs, recent events seem to indicate that he is right and you are wrong. Which is why we are in such a mess and destined to remain so!

Incorrect. If you can prove political motivation for your act of terrorism you are treated completely differently than a criminal. Tried differently, sentenced differently, even treated differently in prison. That's what the provos went on hunger strike for in the early eighties and a precedent was eventually set.

I don't think you understand, a true Muslim will not condemn these attacks as they are totally in keeping with their beliefs. A "mainstream Muslim" condemning them would be meaningless as they would then not be speaking as a true Muslim. We have collectively allowed a situation to develop which cannot be undone.

What an utterly stupid, ridiculous thing to say. Plainly it HAS worked, there are over twenty dead and goodness knows how many more maimed and scarred for life. Try telling some grieving relatives that "it won't work". Do you work for the BBC?

My son went on one of these "meet the muslims" type things organised by his church and leaders of the local muslim community. When he came back I asked him if he was enlightened and/or any the wiser about the muslim ideology. He said "yeah, we are stuffed basically!" However, none of this matters now. How we vote in the upcoming election, how Brexit is handled, the Trump effect, break up of the UK, etc, etc, all irrelevant because the damage has been done and can't be undone. Look out for yourself and those you care about, think about events that you/them would like to attend and try to judge whether it's a sensible thing to go or not, and either hope or pray that you are not one of the unfortunates the next time it happens.

But a farmer from Hereford did it better! [ame] [/ame]

Hurray,................Brexit assured!

It has some merit I'll agree but you'd need to elaborate on how it would work it's way through the food chain. You'd be quite happy with the increased food prices which you'd have to pay as a result, yes?

Well that's about 99.9% of everybody's posts, including yours, rendered pointless immediately then!

Well not coming out with garbage like this would be a start!

Obviously!

Plenty of room for sheep and trees, the problem is that as with most things each side become totally entrenched in their own view with no compromise, a situation ultimately detrimental to both. General public gurning about farmers and their subsidies as usual without contributing any meaningful suggestions as to how to improve. Farmers gurning about lack of public respect, struggling to make ends meet, looking after the countryside for everybody without accepting that present methods are generally damaging to the environment and they need to change. But the change would need to come from the public first and foremost, and I agree that peoples attitude to the food they eat and where it comes from is pretty poor. They need to accept responsibility for their own part in things being as they are before pointing the finger at others.

Well then please don't be a prat and ask questions when you don't want answers or think you already know them!

That's just emotive drivel. Farmers only get what they're given!

Well how do you expect to be heard then?

Well indeed but surely it doesn't need explaining that the virtues of farming go much further. It's an industry which produces something that everyone needs, most produce something that some want, very different. Most industries are regional, farming encompasses every part of the country. Most industries are fairly self-contained, farming both uses product from, and produces raw material for, a vast array of other industries throughout the country. In fact it could support many many more jobs off it's back if there was the incentive to create them and willingness to work in them. Most industries siphon profits off to wealthy individuals and/or faceless investors, farmers however are notoriously poor at hoarding money. They're like weans, they love to buy stuff therefore their money largely goes back in to the economy. Most industries are either behind a huge shiney fascade, or a security fence with no access and no concept of what's happening. With farming you can set off and drive through the middle of the workplace anytime you want. I'm sure there's more but lunchtime is over!