Forum menu
Now that 2/3 of Summer Lightning is out in the open and deforestation is also progressing on Holmbury Hill, it seems the drive to "return" the Surrey Hills to it's "proper" flora and fauna is gaining pace. I know that the pines are not appropriate for this lattitude and that before they were planted, the area was the deciduous woodland and heath to which it is being returned, but I will miss the pinewoods. It always seemed like entering a foreign country, climbing up from the farmfields to the tall-treed slopes. The scent of pine will be gone too.
I hope they'll at least keep those two enormous Scots pines at the junction just above the trailhead to Telegraph Road opposite the seat...
They are supposed to be planting chestnuts havent seen much evidence yet though
I have noticed less birdsong too
Just plant a load of Japanese knotweed. That'll sort it
I did some "conservation" with the surrey wildlife trust a while back. It seems like they have some pretty drastic plans for the area that they control. They are trying to get it back to Heathland mainly. I love to ride in the pine woods though! I don't want all of the area to be heathland. I don't see any reason for it to be, however apparently this is how it was so this is what they want back. hopefully they will leave some but if they have anything to do with it, those Scots pines will be gone in a flash. ( they hate Scots pines!) I don't see a problem with it as it is really and although I don't mind some heathland I think unforeseen problems may arise from such a drastic change. To me at the moment, the positives of the change are not outweighing the negatives. I would prefer deciduous woodland rather than heathland
I bloody love the Surrey Hills. I'm going to take Thursday off and go and hound myself round there on my lonesome in the sunshine. Bliss.
Dave yes I dont get the obsession with everything being heathland either
I intend to go to the hurtwood AGM on the 12th April and see what i can find out
I bloody love the Surrey Hills. I'm going to take Thursday off and go and hound myself round there on my lonesome in the sunshine. Bliss.
Hopefully you are a friend of the Hurtwood then! 🙂 we need more bikers to join
http://www.friendsofthehurtwood.co.uk/
Heathland supports more wildlife/promotes more biodiversity than pine trees.
Heathland supports more wildlife/promotes more biodiversity than pine trees.
But you can see the MTB trails more easily!
Heathland is also quite rare, pine woods are ten-a-penny in Britain. Although I think heathland is a transition state so ultimately it'll need to be managed to stop it turning into native deciduous woodland anyway. The old 'conservation debate' rears it's head...
[i]They are trying to get it back to Heathland mainly. I love to ride in the pine woods though! I don't want all of the area to be heathland. I don't see any reason for it to be, however apparently this is how it was so this is what they want back[/i]
How it was when exactly..., seriously pi55es me off this trying to create some utopia, a bit like planning laws/restrictions.
And I too like the pines, heathland just ends up as scrub.
Probably 'how it was' before they ripped it all up for cash crop.
There are still plenty of plantations around if you want to ride through rows of pines.
There are still plenty of plantations around if you want to ride through rows of pines
For now anyway....
Happening at the other end of the Surrey Hills also, basically lopping down woodland to "return" the area to a previous historical state (I avoid using the word natural intentionally).
Bunch of arse IMO.
There are still plenty of plantations around if you want to ride through rows of pines.
Not in this part of the world. And they're not in "rows", either...
however apparently this is how it was so this is what they want back
and it used to be covered in ice, and it used to be underwater, and it used to be a primodial swamp...
Meh, pines are boring even when they're not in rows.
Sorry what part of the world do you mean Woppit?
I have a favourite spot on the way down Leith from the cricket pitch to the Rookery (narrow straight singletrack) on which I've never seen anyone else. There's a small clearing of bracken on the upside of the trail where I sit with a view out over the_Tilling Spring valley through trees in the sunlight, listening to the sound of pheasants and other birdlife calling on the hill, uninterrupted by any other sound except the distant, faint murmur of the occasional aircraft. Beautiful. All going, now... 😐
Hopefully you are a friend of the Hurtwood then! we need more bikers to join
I'm a North Londoner but not out of the question I move the tribe lock, stock down to the Dorking area some day. At which point you can count me in.
I want to live in that recently refurbished white thatched cottage on the pond at the bottom of the extended Summer Lightning.
Pine woodland is all over the place. We need more diversity. And usually when people talk about things being 'as they were' they mean just before the first human started messing about with it significantly.
Same here.. Notts wildlife trust are cutting down all the pine forests and shooting the deer to encourage stuff that's currently in favour.
It's the same as the obsession of keeping the south downs chalk grass land. I'm sure before 'we got our hands on it, it would have mainly been woodland!
I find it ironic that if you want to see a landscape in the south that's as nature intended, the best example is the new forest and that was planted!!!
I could be wrong but, don't the pines help to soak up the rain water and keep the soil puddle free? If they go won't that eventually lead to more erosion and more calls to ban cycling?
Chalk downland has been chalk downland for a few thousand years, and the reason for preserving it is the same as removing pines and reverting back to heathland in other areas. It supports and promotes more wildlife and biodiversity.
[url= http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/learning/themes-to-study/habitats/chalk-downland/why-is-downland-special ]Why is downland special?[/url]
I do understand the importance of protecting various habitats, thou I'll allways favour landscapes with more rather than less tree's. I find the replacing indigenous tree's with non-indigenous one's a bit odd!
I'm sure before 'we got our hands on it, it would have mainly been woodland
I dunno, it's quite dry. I thought it was grassy and a bit scrubby in places because of the poor soil and the drainage.
Tree's don't need much, that's the point of the continual managment of these different habitats. If it's not done you end up with scrub/heathland, followed by tree's...............Lavvvly!!!
Chalk downland has been chalk downland for a few thousand years, and the reason for preserving it is the same as removing pines and reverting back to heathland in other areas. It supports and promotes more wildlife and biodiversity.
A few thousand years isn't very long. I am sure there was plenty of wildlife and biodiversity before humans first arrived.
I agree with freeride frankie' comment :
[i]It's the same as the obsession of keeping the south downs chalk grass land. I'm sure before 'we got our hands on it, it would have mainly been woodland![/i]
At the risk of bring some semblance of a clue to the debate; chalk grassland and heathland (as well as hay meadow vegetation) would have been present in the UK prior to the actions of man through farming. Its what we would have had in open areas of the woodland created by grazers. Farming practices then expanded the extent of these habitats which are all very biodiverse. Its only in the post WW2 ear we have lost such habitats (98% of flower rich hay meadows for example). Many of the species which we have in the UK rely on these habitats. We couldnt go back to pre agricultural landscapes as we dont have the space for the vast areas needed and crucially the species to take advantage like wolves and bears etc are not present so the best option to conserve biodiversity is to manage the habitats we've got for the species that are still hanging on.
I agree with what your saying, and realise that these special sites need preserving. I realize that we need to eat and farm the land. But remember even before your hay meadows what did we have?
Forest!
At the risk of bring some semblance of a clue to the debate; chalk grassland and heathland (as well as hay meadow vegetation) would have been present in the UK prior to the actions of man through farming.
The BBC Nature website appears to disagree :
[i]"Chalk grasslands support an incredibly rich and diverse flora. [b]Originally created when the woodlands were cleared[/b], this grassland now relies on grazing and cutting to maintain biodiversity. The thin, lime-rich soils of this grassland habitat are derived from the underlying chalk or limestone rocks, and attract plants that don't grow in other soils. Home to many beautiful orchids and wildflowers, and the insects they attract including rare blue butterflies, chalk grasslands have been in decline in the UK for the last 50 years. The best examples are found in Wiltshire, Dorset and [b]the South Downs[/b]."[/i]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/habitats/Calcareous_grassland
Which suggests a diversity of opinion on the matter.
and what is flower rich meadow vegetation? Yes thats right open woodland ground flora. Why do you think the Pennine hay meadow is full of Wood Cranesbill?
mate do you want to see some of my publications on hay meadow and chalk grassland vegetation.
Bear in mind there can be a halfway house between grassland and forest.
They did the same thing a few years ago in my local wood. Cleared an area for "heathland". All that happened was it got overgrown with bracken. They've now decided they don't like Rhododendrons instead so they have cut all of them down. The place now looks like a bomb site.
Tn25 yep its much harder than most people think.
mate do you want to see some of my publications on hay meadow and chalk grassland vegetation.
If that's directed at me I simply very politely pointed out : [i]"Which suggests a diversity of opinion on the matter"[/i].
Now I'm not claiming that because something is mentioned on a BBC website which claims to offer [i]"videos, news, and facts"[/i] it is the definitive correct answer, but I somehow doubt that the BBC drag some random punter off the street to edit their educational/wildlife series and information.
So you might well be correct but there is really no need for patronising comments like that and remarks about [i]"At the risk of bring some semblance of a clue to the debate"[/i]. Try to make your point without acting so arrogant.
... and of course it'll be "returned" to heathland just in time for the climate to tip completely Mediterrannean and we start growing olive orchards and eucalyptus trees...
I'm all for places being put back into their pre WW2 / modern agriculture phase that is way back far enough. The downs were cleared of trees thousands of years ago surely so for all intents and purposes being grass is their natural state, not trees? Heathland supports more wildlife than coniferous plantations and that seals it for me.
One good thing about plantations is that they soak up people and being so close to London and lots of toens that is what the Surrey Hills are so good at. If its open heathland it would be much harder feel away from the madding crowd.
Mixed deciduous woodland is what is best IMO. Giant oaks, bluebells beneath beech trees etc. Unbeatable.
So you might well be correct but there is really no need for patronising comments like that and remarks about "At the risk of bring some semblance of a clue to the debate". Try to make your point without acting so arrogant.
maybe if you didnt posted such crap dressed up as fact i wouldnt need to.
'Giant oaks, bluebells beneath beech trees etc. Unbeatable'
You could even stick in a few scott's for good measure!
Can a discussion stay a discussion, not a bun fight, for a change, on this site???
Old paintings of the Tower clearly show it standing alone on a cleared heath, not surrounded by trees.
It was a bit of a shock when I rode SL a few months ago, having last been there a few years ago when it was forested, but it shoud be what it should be.
Us bikers are but a blip really.
And there's plenty of forest too.
(Surrey Hills are magic).
I'm not being argumentative but the tower is but a small blip in history! I'm sure the trails will still look ace when our descendents are defending there existance. While looking upon them from there hover mattresses!!! 😮