• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Tree planting 'threatening' Scotland's grand vistas (1 Viewer)

JTweedie

Well-known member
Scotland's "dramatic open views and vistas" could be threatened by plans to increase woodland cover, according to mountaineers and gamekeepers.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-38972081

This seems to be rather misguided criticism, especially from Mountaineering Scotland.

There's no reason why we can't continue to have dramatic open views and vistas while there are more trees present. The views will simply be from a higher elevation.
 
Better trees than wind farms.

What I would really like to know is what species they are planting - are they indigenous to the region?
 
Last edited:
Here's SNH's website about it: http://www.snh.gov.uk/land-and-sea/managing-the-land/forestry-and-woodlands/expanding/

To quote from it:

"This will mean the creation between 10000 and 15000ha of new woodland per year including 2000ha on the national forest estate. It is also intended that at least 4500ha of native woodland will be created - or restored from woodland planted with non-native species - per year, to help meet HAP targets and develop habitat networks."

The native woodland component seems quite small in proportion to the whole scheme, but there are other projects on the go which aim to restore woodlands with native trees. See the list on the page above.
 
"This will mean the creation between 10000 and 15000ha of new woodland per year including 2000ha on the national forest estate. It is also intended that at least 4500ha of native woodland will be created - or restored from woodland planted with non-native species - per year, to help meet HAP targets and develop habitat networks."
Sounds like their main objectives are financial (harvesting the wood) rather than ecological (restotring the native rainforests). Now there's nothing wrong with forestry on principle, but the concern about destruction of habitats doesn't seem entirely unfounded.
 
I think the key thing is to pick the best sites for forest regeneration. I do hope the plans aren't predominantly about simply replacing open moorland with dense pockets of Sitka spruce which already dominate many hillsides.
 
Ironically, native vegetation of Scotland would be almost entirely forest, and would have higher biodiversity than pastures and moors which are artificial creation.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top