talk to me about trees

[The Seeker]

ok so they say if you cant beat them join them, trees seem to be all the rage, realistically what sort of return can you expect? how much work are they? id say i have at least 100 acres of rough rough ground but if the money was right i could find more. anyone got links as to prices or payments? local large land owners are plating 10000's acres of good grassland for trees am i missing something ?

 

[delilah]

am i missing something ?

The elixir of life ?

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Replacing good grassland with trees can actually release carbon in large quantities (depending how it's done).

Trees are not the answer.

The right trees in the right place may be part of the answer.

 

[The Seeker]

hey im not saying its right im just saying talk to the about the £ involved

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

hey im not saying its right im just saying talk to the about the £ involved

I've not done it so don't know but several who have were on a CLA ELMS T&T meeting with me a few weeks ago and said the payments available were nowhere near enough to cover doing the job properly.

 

[Ffermer Bach]

hey im not saying its right im just saying talk to the about the £ involved

Grazing land may be worth £4000 an acre, planted with trees worth half that, and once planted can never be pasture again, so ignoring the damage that tree planting does to the environment it is a financially unsound thing to do too

 

[The Seeker]

So why are the big boys doing it ?

 

[The Seeker]

in my mind i cant see it adding up but im a simple farmer, why are large landowners putting perfectly usable grassland down to trees?

 

[Ffermer Bach]

So why are the big boys doing it ?

I have no idea, but I think you won't find any farmers doing it.

 

[The Seeker]

yes but large landowners are? why

 

[delilah]

yes but large landowners are? why

Because, as I have already hinted, they can think beyond the current generation.

 

[Ffermer Bach]

are they? and is Dyson?

 

[BrianV]

Because, as I have already hinted, they can think beyond the current generation.

More like possibly because large landowners can afford to lose a staff member or two & still live very well on the income provide by the fields being planted to trees!

 

[The Seeker]

plus where are all the saplings coming from ? they must need millions?

 

[delilah]

Replacing good grassland with trees can actually release carbon in large quantities (depending how it's done).

Trees are not the answer.

The right trees in the right place may be part of the answer.

Just for the benefit of any Defra policy makers, Countryfile producers etc who may have stumbled in here and don't understand that:


In the work of Guo and Gifford (2002) a meta-analysis was undertaken of data from 74 international land use change and soil carbon storage studies. It measured the effects of land use change in 537 instances and was used to determine the importance of land use and land use change on soil carbon stocks. The analysis showed that there was a decline in soil carbon stocks after land use conversion from grassland to plantation forest (−10 percent), native forest to plantation forest (−13 percent), native forest to cropland (−42 percent), and grassland to cropland (−59 percent). There were significant increases in soil carbon stocks after land use changes from native forest to grassland (+8 percent), cropland to grassland (+19 percent), cropland to plantation (+18 percent), and cropland to secondary forest (+53 percent). The conversion of native forest or grassland to broadleaf deciduous tree plantation had no effect on soil carbon stocks, but conversion to pine or conifer forest reduced soil carbon by between 12 and 15 percent. This analysis of land use change and soil carbon data also suggested that, if a given land use change is responsible for soil carbon losses, then the reverse change could potentially increase soil carbon stocks. But it is important to recognise that it can take decades if not centuries to recover to the original level of soil carbon stocks after disturbance due to land use change (Guo and Gifford, 2002).

 

[quattro]

Seems to be quite abit of land sold for trees up here lately
And probably for decent money

 

[Longlowdog]

Remember, whether you plant them voluntarily or with grant aid once they become a group of trees they are woodland forever. You will not get permission to fell to revert to pasture or arable. Never. But if you want to build a new useless railway you can cut down 500 year old oaks.

 

[Pigken]

So why are the big boys doing it ?

Carbon credits int it, will be able to lease them out to folk or some. Or make their own business appear carbon neutral by offsetting with trees planted. False economy.

 

[Hilly]

Seems to be quite abit of land sold for trees up here lately
And probably for decent money

They go to around £4000 acre can be as sh!t as it comes as long as it can be planted .

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Carbon credits int it, will be able to lease them out to folk or some. Or make their own business appear carbon neutral by offsetting with trees planted. False economy.

Ironic, isn't it, in the light of @delilah post #15.