Help save Loxley & Wadsley Common

[tree lover]

What is wrong with a natural environment? There is little enough of it in Sheffield! If you want a managed area go to a park. Don't be so arrogant in your assumption that you are the only person who knows anything about environmental matters.

[pininsho]

What is wrong with a natural environment? There is little enough of it in Sheffield! If you want a managed area go to a park. Don't be so arrogant in your assumption that you are the only person who knows anything about environmental matters.

 

The problem with a completely 'natural' environment (which would be a wild wood which dominated this landscape a thousand years ago) is that it holds a limited species of wildlife. Put simply wildlife that lives in woodland.

If you create different habitats for wildlife then you get more diversity of species.

Simply allowing the common to revert back to woodland (of which we have a great deal in Sheffield) is not a good idea when this type of heathland habitat is so rare and we have such a good example on our doorstep which should improve in future years as long as a management regime is kept up.

[tree lover]

Interesting that you say revert back to woodland (so it was woodland originally and naturally). What is wrong with natural woodland and the wildlife associated with it? We do have woods in Sheffield, we also have hundreds of acres of heathland. Stand on the Commons and you will see some of it. The rangers have been chopping down trees for 15 years and yet all that has replaced them is bracken and brambles, and scrubby regrowth. This regrowth will need cutting back constantly at a huge cost to the council tax payers.

[pininsho]

Interesting that you say revert back to woodland (so it was woodland originally and naturally). What is wrong with natural woodland and the wildlife associated with it? We do have woods in Sheffield, we also have hundreds of acres of heathland. Stand on the Commons and you will see some of it. The rangers have been chopping down trees for 15 years and yet all that has replaced them is bracken and brambles, and scrubby regrowth. This regrowth will need cutting back constantly at a huge cost to the council tax payers.

 

It all depends on what you mean by natural. Ever since the Stone Age man has used the 'wildwood' to provide him with food, shelter and warmth, creating clearings when he felled the woods which created different habitats which enabled different flora and fauna to take advantage of. The result was man helping to increase the biodiversity of an area (almost cetainly unwittingly) doing what he did 'naturally' to enable him to survive.

At this time man was very much a part of the natural world and not distant from it as a lot of people seem to be today.

On your next point you're mixing up heathland with moorland.

The difference is (and I stand to be corrected here) that heathland is characterised by having thin sandy soils whereas moorland has more peatier soils so although the two have similar plants because they are both acidic soils there are subtle differences.

On your final point...yes bracken is a problem but it grows just as well in the shade of woodland as it does in open areas. I hope the management can reduce this over the coming years but it does seem to be a major problem.

However, look on the bright side at least it's not Japanese Knotweed.

[beckelina]

The Forestry Commission and the Council Rangers.

 

Cheers! I'm going to see if they might get me a copy of their management plan.

[hillsbro]

On your next point you're mixing up heathland with moorland.

The difference is (and I stand to be corrected here) that heathland is characterised by having thin sandy soils whereas moorland has more peatier soils so although the two have similar plants because they are both acidic soils there are subtle differences.

 

Quite right - and in fact, lowland heath is quite a rarity nowadays, as most of it has been lost in the past century or so. It certainly supports a wide variety of wildlife (see for example this web page http://countrysideinfo.co.uk/heath_puzzle/puzzle.htm) though a mixture of heathland and woodland would of course accommodate a wider variety of wildlife, especially birds and woodland plants.

 

Personally I see nothing wrong with sensible, restrained management of the common so that the typical heathland flora & fauna can continue to exist side by side with woodland. This has characterised the common for as long as I can remember, but the trees do seem to have gained the upper hand in recent years. Certainly - wild wood is the natural vegetation for this area. It boils down to what people want in, and from, their environment.

[algy]

Quite right - and in fact, lowland heath is quite a rarity nowadays, as most of it has been lost in the past century or so. It certainly supports a wide variety of wildlife (see for example this web page http://countrysideinfo.co.uk/heath_puzzle/puzzle.htm) though a mixture of heathland and woodland would of course accommodate a wider variety of wildlife, especially birds and woodland plants.

 

Personally I see nothing wrong with sensible, restrained management of the common so that the typical heathland flora & fauna can continue to exist side by side with woodland. This has characterised the common for as long as I can remember, but the trees do seem to have gained the upper hand in recent years. Certainly - wild wood is the natural vegetation for this area. It boils down to what people want in, and from, their environment.

I think that's part of the problem. Management has been neglected for so many years that now it's restarted it looks drastic, whereas if it had been a continuous process over the years the trees wouldn't have colonised the heathland.

[tree lover]

It all depends on what you mean by natural. Ever since the Stone Age man has used the 'wildwood' to provide him with food, shelter and warmth, creating clearings when he felled the woods which created different habitats which enabled different flora and fauna to take advantage of. The result was man helping to increase the biodiversity of an area (almost cetainly unwittingly) doing what he did 'naturally' to enable him to survive.

At this time man was very much a part of the natural world and not distant from it as a lot of people seem to be today.

On your next point you're mixing up heathland with moorland.

The difference is (and I stand to be corrected here) that heathland is characterised by having thin sandy soils whereas moorland has more peatier soils so although the two have similar plants because they are both acidic soils there are subtle differences.

On your final point...yes bracken is a problem but it grows just as well in the shade of woodland as it does in open areas. I hope the management can reduce this over the coming years but it does seem to be a major problem.

However, look on the bright side at least it's not Japanese Knotweed.

 

But the soil on the Commons is alkaline!

[Greybeard]

On your final point...yes bracken is a problem but it grows just as well in the shade of woodland as it does in open areas. I hope the management can reduce this over the coming years but it does seem to be a major problem.

 

There is a special technique to killing bracken - it involves just bruising the stems rather than cutting it down, which stimulates growth.

 

I wonder if the council have one of these ?

 

http://www.brackenbruiser.co.uk/index.html

 

I've seen it used towed by a horse on really difficult terrain.

[hillsbro]

But the soil on the Commons is alkaline!

 

This is news to me. I always thought that acid soils characterise lowland heath. Certainly, the heather and bilberry that are found on the commons prefer acid soil. The council website (see http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/index.asp?pgid=19887) seems to support this view:

 

"Loxley and Wadsley Common. This is an area of lowland heath in the west of the city designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (S.S.S.I.) and a Local Nature Reserve. This type of habitat is unusual for Northern England and consists of a mixture of heathland, woodland and open acid grassland".

 

But it seems to me that the pH of the soil is of less importance than the preservation of biodiversity and the maintenance of a suitable environment for all who have a stake in the commons - people, flora and fauna. Whilst I personally prefer things to be as natural as possible, and there might well be a danger of over-management, I think that suitable, restrained management of the commons is probably the best all-round policy. It may be that limiting the tree cover is a suitable policy to pursue, but as long as there are some areas of woodland, this will maintain the diversity.