next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_1E07_01D14552.9C42BFB0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi again Nick & All, Jan 2, 2016
Your Beech story has the ring of truth because, until coke came =
along and moved most iron works to be near coal mines, the iron industry =
in the South East was still expanding full tilt.=20
I had not encountered the term 'sheep wrecked' before; amusing =
expression but so true it is sad.=20
I am unsure when this applied but for some considerable time one =
could not cut live trees on the commons, in England at least. But anyone =
could take dead wood, gathering it "by hook or by crook". And, so I =
understand, anyone could pasture livestock on the commons, leading to =
"forests" with one tree is a vast otherwise treeless expanse. It has =
been general experience throughout the world and for all time that land =
held in common will eventually be land degraded. There is every =
incentive to take while one can and no incentive to invest in the =
future.=20
Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Nicholas Hill=20
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca=20
Sent: Friday, January 01, 2016 9:24 PM
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
Thanks David
But I question the logic of the last Para.=20
In my county Devon, we have some good stands of beech. The story was =
that these were planted for charcoal but since the technology changed w =
coal coke replacing charcoal, the beech were left and are now =
substantial.=20
Needs study but it opens up assumptions which is good.
In this same county we have Woodbury Common where tradional cutting of =
trees perhaps grazing and the cutting of furze (gorse) led to the =
romantic moorland that is probably product of continual nutrient removal =
and not a native system in this place. Monbiot as you know has some hard =
words for the sheep in the lake district and in scotland which prevents =
the reinstatement of Caledonian forest (sheep wrecked)
Nick=20
On Jan 1, 2016 8:04 PM, "David & Alison Webster" <dwebster@glinx.com> =
wrote:
Hi Nick & All, Jan 1, 2016
The idea that---"England....was charcoaling most of its =
forests." for the reduction of iron and the use of coke prevented =
widespread deforestation is a widespread myth but is at variance with =
the facts.=20
The large ironworks which developed for volume production, e.g. =
casting of large cannon were not at all portable so they had to rely on =
nearby forests and take care to not deplete them, as outlined below
From: http://www.ukagriculture.com/countryside/charcoal_history.cfm
"Although historians have often considered that the excessive =
felling of timber to fuel the iron industries resulted in woodland loss, =
it is now recognised that this theory is wholly incorrect. The iron =
industry was long term in nature and iron works jealously guarded their =
supplies. Furthermore, most of the timber used in the charcoal kiln was =
of coppice origin. Coppice material was of regular size, was easy to =
handle and load and required minimal recutting. Woods close to the iron =
works survived because their place as fuel providers to the iron =
industry raised their economic importance and prevented their loss to =
agriculture as happened elsewhere."
The above is in substantial agreement with information from =
Edlin which I posted a while ago; it being--
As covered in some detail in Trees, Woods and Man, H.L.Edlin, =
1956, 272=20
pp. most deforestation was a gradual consequence of other practices =
such as=20
mowing natural hay or bedding in relatively open woodland and the =
teeth of=20
domesticated animals which killed any regeneration. Without =
regeneration the=20
forest gradually died out. This information is scattered & I will =
not=20
attempt to dig it out.
But can quote from the passage which relates to charcoal (p. 88) =
"Vast=20
quantities of wood were consumed for charcoal. to "reduce" the iron =
ores to=20
metal before the use of coke was understood (Straker, 1931). But it =
was cut=20
from coppices of broadleaved trees, which sent up fresh shoots from =
their=20
stumps within a year of being felled; and these coppices were =
managed by men=20
who knew the elements of rotational cutting. So today in the very =
region=20
where devastation might otherwise have been greatest, we find the =
only large=20
portion of England with an outstandingly high proportion of =
woodland; in the=20
five south-eastern counties of Kent, Surrey, Sussex, Berkshire, and=20
Hampshire 14.6 per cent of the land as against 5.8 per cent for =
England as a=20
whole."
Yt, Dave Webster, Kentville
=20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Nicholas Hill=20
To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca=20
Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2015 4:32 PM
Subject: Re: [NatureNS] Red Herring & Forestry
A friend recently accused me of being "gnomic", and ill-educated =
lout as i am, i took issue at being called a gnome, but moving into this =
here case at hand, I think the gnomes have it: "And warning that use of =
biomass is not green is perhaps already an effective way to indirectly =
kill trees." Not exactly gnomic but not entirely designed for clarity =
and explicitness. Then we have: "And if not now, then without doubt in =
the future." This non sentence leaves us without a doubt in the future =
waiting with and like Godot for some Christmas clarety.=20
Seriously, I see Dave's point and Jamie's. England found a way =
through Edward Darby to stop using beech trees for coking to make steel; =
Darby figured out how to substitute coal for wood and thank god because =
England had run out of most decent sized trees and was charcoaling most =
of its forests. David is right that the first quotation is an =
overstatement but Jamie's point was most welcome in today's Herald. We =
not only are running the risk of losing good forest but we are running =
down our forest soils so that tree regrowth is poor, forest composition =
is weedy, wildlife suffers, and the carbon balance (ie. that less carbon =
dioxid