CLICK HERE FOR THE NEW 'GARDEN OF EADEN WEBSITE' AND SEED SHOP
.
You wouldn’t think it could be true in an ‘enlightened’ society such as ours, but in recent years there's been a steep decline in the amount of land that supports our native British woodland.
In comparison to other European Nations – where natural forests cover on average 37.8% of the land mass - Great Britain is in a terrible state laggings way behind with forests covering just 11.8% of it land mass.
.
To make things worse, government funding reductions and a complicated England Woodland Creation Grant Scheme (EWGCS) have severely suppressed the UK new woodland market. This has caused a 40% reduction in new woodland plantings over the last five years in non-Forestry Commission woodlands.
Much has been said about the destruction of the worlds rainforests and rightly so, but that is no excuse to neglect our native eco-systems. There was a time when this country was almost saturated with ancient wood land – a complex system that takes thousands of years to mature. Even if land was put back to woodland today it would still take centuries before the full benefit of this returning environment is realised.
WHY REPLANT NATIVE WOODLAND
This is not just about creating a varied and thriving habitat for our native animal species - many of which are also in decline - there is also the greater issue of climate change. Large woodland areas can help reduce some of its effects by - for example - preventing flash flooding by reducing runoff into rivers, but it is the relationship that woodland has with carbon dioxide that is the real advantage. Carbon dioxide is one of the main greenhouse gases and a major factor in rising global temperatures. However, by re-establishing Britain's natural woodland, it's possible to combat climate change - in a significant way - on our very doorstep.
As part of the normal photosynthetic process, woodlands absorb carbon dioxide (CO2) directly from the atmosphere and store it within its own growing vegetation. The more woodland we have, the more carbon dioxide is removed from the atmosphere- it is a very simple equation. To give you one example of the amount of woodland required to offset human activity, the amount of carbon that is absorbed and retained by half a hectare of established woodland over approximately 10 years will compensate for the emissions made by one car during an average driver's lifetime. Re-establishing native woodlands really is everyone’s responsibility, unfortunately so few of us have the required land resources to begin with.
The eyes of the government are slowly being opened to this problem stating that it wanted to see 10,000 hectares of new woods planted each year to store carbon, as part of the Low Carbon Transition Plan. However with no money yet on the table, who is going to make this happen?
SO, WHAT CAN WE DO?
Unfortunately, the majority of home owners in this country who are lucky enough to have gardens do not usually have enough room in them to safely accommodate even just the one native tree. Of course if you are one of the few who do have the space then you owe it to your children to plant as many different native tree and shrub species as you reasonably can.
But what about the vast majority of the population you do not live on private estates? Well, take a look around where you live and where you work. Are there areas of land local to you that have been left to waste that could benefit with the addition of a few trees? Ask your boss of you can plant saplings within the grounds of where you work. Approach your local cash-strapped council and ask if you can plant native trees into roundabouts and suitable verges. Write to your nearest National Trust or English heritage property - or even a local school or college - to see if you can help to replant there. The options are endless but it is all about making that first step. Or are you really prepared to trust the government with the future of your children, and your children’s children?
Please read Jo's additional comment further down, she makes a very valid point.
Percentage of woodland coverage comparison data taken from the Forestry Commission document 2006.
For more information click onto:
Are Slug Pellets Poisoning Our Wildlife
British Birds of Paradise
Caring for Insect Eating Birds in Winter
Easter Island - a Lesson in Environmental Exploitation
Edible Crop Pollination and the Decline of Bees
Fall in Bee Populations Linked to Decline in Plant Biodiversity
How to Attract Bumblebees to the Suburban Garden
How to Attract the Hummingbird Hawk Moth
How to Make a Wildlife Pond
Light Pollution and the Decline in Bat Populations
Light Pollution and the Decline of Native Insects
Light Pollution - The Hidden Threat
Lost Frog Returned from Extinction
Nectar Rich American Wildflowers for Attracting Native Bumble Bees
Nectar Rich Plants for Attracting Long-Tongued Bumble Bees
Non-Native Invasive Species - The Japanese Knotweed
Non-Native Invasive Species - The Harlequin Ladybird
Non-Native Invasive Species - The American Signal Crayfish
The Eagle Owl - Friend or Foe?
Pesticides Toxic to Honey Bees
Plants that Attract the Hummingbird Hawk Moth
Seed Bearing Plants for Attracting Wild Finches
Sustainability Through the Consumption of Things Conserved
The Decline of Butterfly and Caterpillar Habitat
The Decline of Insect Eating Birds
The Importance of Log Piles to Native Wildlife
The 'Native Trees' of England
The Rainforest
What can we do to Help Save the Rainforests
What is 'Slash and Burn' Farming and How does it Affect the Rainforests?
What is the Rainforest?
Which Plants can Attract Bats into the Garden?
Why are Tropical Rainforests so Important?
Why is the Amazon Rainforest being Destroyed?
Why Shark Fin Soup is Devastating World Shark Populations
Why Should we Protect the Rainforest?
9 comments:
Hiya,
Nice try, but not enough...
Pity you didn't bring up the practice of cutting down perfectly sound 100 to 200 year old trees to be burned in the fire places of second homes, because "it makes the place so cosy".
When I see all the trailers trundling round the villages with logs and look at the stumps of trees with up to 200 rings, it breaks my heart.
Wood from hardwood trees is NOT a renewable source. It takes a human life time to replace what people burn in a few years.
Corporate planting schemes of 300 saplings here and there, will never offset the carbon foot prints from business travel let alone yuppie open fires from people with central heating.
This problem ought to be tackled from both ends: the use of the trees and the planting of them.
We have 24 (very) tall hardwood trees on 3/4 of an acre, because we feel strongly about the need for more trees. We have never ever burnt a tree in the three open fireplaces that came with the house. Not even at Xmas.
It is people's respect for what grows so slowly, that has to be fostered. Until then, planting a bit here and there, usually with grant schemes, is not going to work. It is precisely those grants that have caused the problem to worsen: farmers cut down full grown hardwood, sell it, and then take grants to replant with fragile saplings that need deer protection and look awful for decades with their plastic collars.
HARDWOOD IS NOT A CROP.
Jo
I like the thought of -we can do something. When we see an open bare spot to inquire about it and see if we can plant some trees.
vickie
I found your blog through Blotanical. It's brilliant - look forward to many return visits.
this is a topic dear to my heart, or rather painful to my heart. Here in Australia there has been much cutting down of old growth forests which has been opposed by Wilderness Society and the Greens political party and others. Now people are beginning to see the link between this and global warming, but sometimes it feels like we are on a train and can't stop. But there are changes, and we must focus on positives not to lose hope.
Hi there, found you through Blotanist. Thank you for caring about Britain's vanishing woodlands. And for your kind comments about my blog. :)
Really interesting post Simon - thank you!
I just read a wonderful article in a recent National Geographic about ways that forward-thinking landowners and lumber companies (?!) are managing the redwood forests along the western USA. Sounds like most of what's left of the really old trees are already protected, but people are figuring out ways to manage second-growth redwood forests to provide environmental benefits (erosion control, wildlife habitat, aesthetics) while allowing some profit through the selective cutting of deformed or small trees. This leaves the remaining trees room to mature and will allow the lumber companies to function in the future. Carbon credit programs are helping get this started by providing some funding now. I can't explain it all very well in this little comment and would recommend reading the article. I was teary-eyed by the end of the article, thinking that finally we're figuring out ways to get some of the resources we need without trashing the source. Here's hoping that Great Britain can find similar ways to conserve and restore its native trees.
Interesting post. We are lucky that we live a few paces away from mixed woodland but it is not managed and there are many old oaks that are and have died.
I still enjoy walking there but regret that that is probably where I got my tick bites which led to over 6 years of suffering from Lyme disease.
At least now well again and armed with knowledge and able to protect myself I can again walk the woods.
A lot of waste ground could be planted with trees such as wet ground along rivers or the so-called "playing fields" owned by many councils.
Btw, if you think we're bad you should consider that southern Iceland used to be one huge birch forest. We're comparable to Ireland or Denmark, the reason we lack forests is because we're always using land for something else. Even the uplands are full of sheep eating tree saplings - in much of Europe their uplands make up their primary forested area.
Post a Comment