Trees

[Mick F]

I suppose my comments are aimed at domestic trees and not forests and woodland, and the fact that up until 25years ago, we (as a society) used the trees. Note the encroaching woodland in my photo. It wasn't there before ........... but it is now.

Why?

Because wood and trees used to be consumable items and now people are being actively encouraged to plant them in their gardens.

Plant woodlands! Encourage them!
Don't plant trees in suburban gardens where people live.

[TrevA]

But your photo isn’t an urban or a suburban view. Land left to its own devices will revert to woodland. It’s not necessarily people actively planting trees, it’s the trees themselves seeding new woodland, with the help of squirrels and birds, who will carry and drop seeds, acorns, sycamore helicopters, etc.

[Mick F]

I agree, but it is illustrative showing how trees were trimmed, cut, and the wood used.
Note the millions of them across the valley in the first photo. It's not as though we hardly had any.

[ed.lazda]

The original photo looks like managed conifer woodland, grown for timber. It will likely be replanted, if it hasn't already. There has been a lot of felling of these woods where I live in Northumberland over the last few years. The cynic in me suggests it may be the commercial lifetime of a timber tree since tax breaks were introduced for planting forests.

If you want to plant trees in a garden or other urban area, it's easy to choose ones of appropriate size. Apple, hawthorn, rowan, hazel are all OK for medium sized gardens. Better not to put in oak or ash, foreign invaders like sycamore or eucalyptus, or, perish the thought, bloody Leylandii.

For those who need it, I know an excellent pruning method for Leylandii. With a chainsaw, at ground level, use the bits for compost and/or firewood, and plant something decent instead.

[Philip Benstead]

I agree, but it is illustrative showing how trees were trimmed, cut, and the wood used.
Note the millions of them across the valley in the first photo. It's not as though we hardly had any.

Cornwall has the fewest trees of any county in the UK. You may need to go back to sea to a clear horizon?

[francovendee]

Here we're surrounded by clumps of trees, not exactly woodland but plenty of trees. What has changed, in the twenty years living here, is the big trees have mostly been felled for timber and logs. The logs now for sale are much narrower and I guess it's because all the big trees have gone.

[Psamathe]

...
Don't plant trees in suburban gardens where people live.

Why not? when they reduce air pollution which is worse in suburban gardens why not plant trees and reduce the air pollution? (avoiding some species like Sitka spruce).

Your comment makes no sense.

Ian

[Psamathe]

...
Note the millions of them across the valley in the first photo. It's not as though we hardly had any.

UK has close on the lowest level of forest cover in Europe. UK 13% compared to e.g. Germany at 33%, France 31%, Italy 32%, Spain 37%, EU average 38%. Netherlands is lower at 11% but historically a fair amount of their land area was underwater (so not really a fair comparison)! Just because you can take a photo of a forest in the UK does not mean "It's not as though we hardly had any.".

Ian

[Cowsham]

I like trees -- used to build tree houses in the massive sycamores on our driveway when I was a boy -- the higher the better -- could see right over the town from one. Great fun when it was windy.

[Cugel]

...
Don't plant trees in suburban gardens where people live.

Why not? when they reduce air pollution which is worse in suburban gardens why not plant trees and reduce the air pollution? (avoiding some species like Sitka spruce).

Your comment makes no sense.

Ian

The comments make sense if one is tidy-minded. There are many such: consider the number of leaf-blowers that are bought and used - possibly the most pointless and wasteful consumer item ever dreamt up but beloved of tidy-minded persons.

At one time (and still the case in some locales) a garden was defined as serried rows of neat wee plants, all the same, around the edge of a lawn cut to a fraction of a millimetre and stopped from dying with gallons of chemo-fertiliser. Also kept free of "weeds" and "pests" (AKA other lifeforms) with even more chemicals, many of which leached out of the "garden" to elsewhere to wreak havoc on even more lifeforms.

But oh so tidy! And neat! Nature in a uniform.

Cugel

[Psamathe]

...
Don't plant trees in suburban gardens where people live.

Why not? when they reduce air pollution which is worse in suburban gardens why not plant trees and reduce the air pollution? (avoiding some species like Sitka spruce).

Your comment makes no sense.

Ian

The comments make sense if one is tidy-minded. There are many such: consider the number of leaf-blowers that are bought and used - possibly the most pointless and wasteful consumer item ever dreamt up but beloved of tidy-minded persons....

The "tidy-minded" do so much damage to our countryside. e.g. those who collect up fallen branches to feed their insatiable woodburner just don't even try to understand countryside, don't seem capable of appreciating the damage they cause at so many levels.

Ian.

[pwa]

I suppose my comments are aimed at domestic trees and not forests and woodland, and the fact that up until 25years ago, we (as a society) used the trees. Note the encroaching woodland in my photo. It wasn't there before ........... but it is now.

Why?

Because wood and trees used to be consumable items and now people are being actively encouraged to plant them in their gardens.

Plant woodlands! Encourage them!
Don't plant trees in suburban gardens where people live.

A suburb without trees would be a very drab and unattractive place. It is possible to plant the wrong tree in a garden, I agree, but many gardens will be improved with a small tree planted in the right spot. Our own eucalyptus was not chosen by us. It was there before we had the house. But it is well established so I manage it to keep it at the right scale, and I'd not want to lose it. The garden would be visually poorer without it. We'd have nothing over 3 metres.

[Mick F]

Exactly!

Many gardens would be improved with a small tree planted in the right spot.
Very true indeed ................ but they grow, and unless someone maintains them and looks after them, they run riot and become too big, and too big to cut safely.

They planted a tree in the village some years ago, and I asked why they'd chosen a birch.
I was informed that it was free, so they planted it.

Birch in the middle of a village?
Terrible tree, and I made my views known. A small flowering cherry would have been fine.
Look at the birch now!
It clogs the gutters up, drops the twigs and makes the place look a mess.
I told them, but they wouldn't listen to me!
........ and when it's thirty or forty years old, it'll die and be a hazard.

[Philip Benstead]

Exactly!

Many gardens would be improved with a small tree planted in the right spot.
Very true indeed ................ but they grow, and unless someone maintains them and looks after them, they run riot and become too big, and too big to cut safely.

They planted a tree in the village some years ago, and I asked why they'd chosen a birch.
I was informed that it was free, so they planted it.

Birch in the middle of a village?
Terrible tree, and I made my views known. A small flowering cherry would have been fine.
Look at the birch now!
It clogs the gutters up, drops the twigs and makes the place look a mess.
I told them, but they wouldn't listen to me!
........ and when it's thirty or forty years old, it'll die and be a hazard.
Screen Shot 2022-11-22 at 15.02.06.png

You should ask the guy sitting on the bench, I feel such he will give you firm support???

[Mick F]

Fibreglass.
He's named "William" as Gunnislake used to be called Williamstown.
This photo dates back to before the birch was planted.
Photo was in 2013.