1/2 million giant redwoods growing in the UK Vs 80k growing in California.

So coincidentally I just discovered that these articles are all basically bollocks. They all seem to be just repeating and quoting an earlier article which incorrectly compared the number of mature giant redwoods in California, vs the total number in the UK, but in reality there are hundreds of thousands of younger trees outside of the old growth groves that just aren't catalogued in the Cali numbers

Seems to be an honest mistake- California just can't get excited about a hundred year old giant redwood when they've got the big lads to look at, whereas for us even the tiddlers are a big deal. And of course the preservation arguments rightly focus on the old growth to exclusion, as there's no way to replace a 3000 year old tree unless you did it 2999 years ago.

Even if there was no comparison to California that there are 500k Giant Redwoods in the UK is a surprising fact on it’s own.

Yep, definitely.

Leave Curious explores the redwoods of the UK.

Just checked to make sure but there’s a pretty big one in the grounds of The Manor House Hotel in Castle Combe, a pretty s****y place with its own golf course, where a ‘village’ was set up for filming of the Robin of Sherwood series.

We have a few here in Clumber Park/ Thoresby

Also I've been to sea that giant one - General Sherman. Big lad. Sequoia National Parks was one of my favourites.

And that crazy on you can drive through up the Pacific coast - called in at that.

Novelty aside they are great.

So coincidentally I just discovered that these articles are all basically bollocks.

Thought it was a bit odd.

Having driven up there their forests are immense.

au contraire, the natural cycle of wildfires clears the land and opens the cones providing the idea conditions for germination.

Its putting out wildfires that is the problem.

<quote> wzzzz
Free Member

au contraire, the natural cycle of wildfires clears the land and opens the cones providing the idea conditions for germination. </quote>

Was, but currently isn't. The ground and deadfall's drier, the trees are drier, the wildfires are hotter. And human interaction is a problem; basically wherever there's human inhabitation and development we try to prevent fires but that often means that when there is a fire, it's much worse, since it's been longer since the last one. This last one's a work in progress, they do controlled burns and manual clearance now in the old groves to try and reset it a bit but it's a massive job.

Sequoia are fire resistant but not fire proof, they estimate that 20% of all of the surviving oldgrowth giants have been destroyed by fire in the last 10 years

It did seem an unlikely statistic. We’ve driven down through the Big Sur and it’s not exactly a small place - think “Northumberland”, all of it. And that’s just the bit on the coast.

The big trees there are big. Really mind-blowing huge.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

Multiple posters have stated that the seeds require fire to germinate.

I don't think this is true. Fire is an important feature of the life cycle of the natural forests, particularly in creating space for new trees to germinate, but the seeds themselves do not need any heat or smoke. At least, that is the result of 5 minutes of web searching, looking at a number of seemingly reliable sources. I didn't see any support for the claim that fire and/or smoke was particularly helpful.

(Some tree seeds do require smoke and/or fire. But sequoia are not one of them. Feel free to collect seeds from your local tree and give it a go.)