wolfstalin Posted February 10, 2008 Share Posted February 10, 2008 As far as I remember the felling of a lot of trees is necessary to keep the common as heathland. If you don't remove some of the trees is all becomes woodland instead with the amount of mixed silver birch that self seed. If the intention is to manage the land and support the open landscape to keep the heathland, heather bracken and all, then I'm not so sure that it's a bad thing. Until we know what proportion of the trees on the common are being felled, and in what pattern, and what will be planted in their place, then I don't think that it's right to either object or approve the plan. I'm not a 'tree hugger' either but 2800 is awful lot of trees, plus you don't need a license to fell trees if the purpose is maintenance of the land in good order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
medusa Posted February 10, 2008 Share Posted February 10, 2008 I'm not a 'tree hugger' either but 2800 is awful lot of trees, plus you don't need a license to fell trees if the purpose is maintenance of the land in good order. I'm not suggesting that this is automatically right, but the information that I have seen is insufficiently detailed for me to make an informed decision whether it is 'disastrous for the common' or 'a sensible and prudent planning decision' or somewhere in between the two. The area is very large and whether the plan is something I would want to oppose is dependent on not just the number of trees, but also the pattern of felling, the species to be felled and the age of the trees to be felled. There are thousands of young trees that have self seeded all over the common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmyowls Posted February 10, 2008 Share Posted February 10, 2008 Just a thought maybe the council have got plans to build flats/apartments on the common NOW that would be a shock:hihi::hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfstalin Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I'm not suggesting that this is automatically right. Same here, hard to tell, but one thing I can say is that I don't trust that mob as far as I could throw um'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Just a thought maybe the council have got plans to build flats/apartments on the common NOW that would be a shock:hihi::hihi: It'd be a bit parky as well. I remember playing footy up there in the Sunday Sports about 30 years ago. Changing rooms were an allotment shed, shower facilities were a water butt and we had to clear sheep off the pitch. Then it started snowing............... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H.P Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I used to spend most of my time playing on the common when I was younger, we went for a walk with the kids last year and most of the heath lands on the top are overgrown with trees that were not there ten years ago. I do think that some work needs to be done up there but I agree that 2800 sounds like a lot. Mind you if you think about it a lot of the older trees up there will be aproching the end of thier life cycle, possibly they will be the ones to come down? and will there be any replanted to replace the older rotting ones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feargal Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I had the same experience as HP - what used to be heath is now overgrown with saplings. Some of the copses of saplings are very dense, so maybe 2800 trees wouldn't be as big an area as you think. About 10-15 years ago, you could sit on the crags near the top car park and have a great view out towards Loxley Valley and Stannington, but now you can't see anything for the trees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfstalin Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I had the same experience as HP - what used to be heath is now overgrown with saplings. Some of the copses of saplings are very dense, so maybe 2800 trees wouldn't be as big an area as you think. About 10-15 years ago, you could sit on the crags near the top car park and have a great view out towards Loxley Valley and Stannington, but now you can't see anything for the trees. Saplings are not trees, removal of saplings does not need a forestry commission license to fell trees, check it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caretta Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Felling of woodland on heaths is the only method of preserving this valuable habitat with its vast array of invertebrates, birds and plantlife, species which cannot survive in other habitats. Whilst woodland is also a priority habitat, sycamore and self seeded birch isnt as valuable as a more mixed woodland, and whilst there are many arguements for and against mankind's persistant 'management' of our 'wildspaces'- in this instance they seem to be preserving a habitat of European importance, whilst providing some sustainable fuel to keep toes warm- sounds like a plan to me! It is obviously only a short-term plan as the wood fuel burner will keep on requiring fuel and once these trees are chopped down, if there are no plans to maintain a coppice system on the common, the fuel will have to be found from elsewhere. However, if this system restores some well needed management (in my opinion) to Sheffield's wondrous and many neglected woodlands, then thats all the better. People always complain when a tree is chopped down- almost as many who complain when new ones are planted...some people are never happy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chavs Posted February 11, 2008 Author Share Posted February 11, 2008 But can people accidently stray off the path and walk into a tree? I like the idea of straying off the manmade paths. On the common there are many off-the-beaten track paths and I love exploring with the kids (as I did as a kid). The common has grown over the years but I dont see it as unmanagable. In the 70's there was an area known as "the hills" to the kids in Loxley and these were just heather. Now trees grow so it has extended but it does add to the area. Last year, I also managed to find an old cave we used to play in as kids. I can also still find all the old places we used to make dens and the trees we built tree-houses in. In my opinion some of the old paths have gone but thats because they were replaced by manmade ones. People stopped using the smaller ones and some are lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.