Wild Nephin

Connacht wrote: »

I know this area very well and spend time up there, but am not an ecologist.
I've heard about this project for a few years now and it has wonderful potential, especially for outdoors 'green' low-impact tourism, like wild camping, hiking, survival skills, etc.
It is a haven of otter, pine marten, red deer, ravens, kestrels, the odd passing eagle and more. There are no red (or grey) squirrels.
However :
First of all, this area is (with very few exceptions) a vast blanket bog, so broadleaf trees wouldn't stand a chance of thriving there. Any comparison with Clonbur (limestone pavement) is of little value, as the terrain is totally different.
IMO if the place is left alone, what will happen is that the conifers will slowly die out, becoming suffocated / drowned by the bog.
Second, Coillte and its sub-contractors continue to clear-fell large tracts of the area, leaving the usual landscape that looks like someone has come along and blanket-bombed the place. I guess I can understand that - they're cutting what they deem to be still feasible.
Third, I suspect the Fisheries people will have a big say in any recreational activity that might take place along the very important river systems in the area.

What I would really love to see is a thinning of the existing conifers. They are so densely planted that there is no light getting in, with resultant no understorey (not even grass) and very low biodiversity, with incredibly few birds. However, I realise that's virtually impossible to achieve. Cutting every second or third tree out of a plantation is impractical and would leave the remaining ones susceptible to windthrow, as their root systems are so shallow.

So while I really look forward to the day the last tree fellers and lorries depart, you shouldn''t think it can be turned into some sort of beautiful native forest of oak, ash, holly, etc. like Killarney NP or Clonbur.

magicbastarder wrote: »

i was wondering if ringbarking more than a certain amount of trees might lead to too great a fire risk?

THE announcement that Coillte, in conjunction with the National Parks and Wildlife Service, is to develop 4,000 hectares of forestry in north Mayo as a wilderness area for conservation and amenity use is very good news. The land is on the eastern boundary of our newest National Park, around Ballycroy.

The National Park consists of one of the largest areas of unspoilt blanket bog left in western Europe and is also important for the conservation of salmon and sea trout because it contains most of the Owenduff river catchment. What amounts to an expansion of it, which will include much of Nephin Beg mountain, is welcome. Public consultations with local residents and land owners in the Keenagh area are underway.

But there is a background to this story which is not quite so positive. The reason Coillte is doing this is that the forestry in question has become a liability. The 4,000 hectares is planted with low-quality conifers. The cost of felling and extracting the timber in such a remote location would far exceed its market value. The problem is increased because when a plantation like this is clear-felled there is a legal obligation to re-plant it.

For over 100 years the State set annual planting quotas with the laudable aim of re-foresting Ireland and making us self-sufficient for timber. But the economics of forestry are always challenging because you’re planting a crop to be harvested in 40 or 50 years when market conditions are bound to be very different.

And the State has had a tendency to set ambitious planting quotas but to only provide enough money to buy the cheapest land, which was often very remote and not suitable for growing trees. There were also political considerations — state forestry on land that had agricultural potential was extremely unpopular with the electorate.

Many of the trees grew rapidly. This might seem like a competitive advantage but when conifers grow rapidly their annual growth rings are set further apart and this reduces the strength of the timber. Much of the product of Irish forests is only suitable for pulping.

The final nail in the coffin was the increase in global trade which meant timber could be imported cheaply.

A new wilderness area is a lovely idea but Coillte and the National Parks and Wildlife Service will have to come up with an imaginative solution about what to do with a very large number of value-less trees. A forestry plantation doesn’t have a huge amount of conservation value.

magicbastarder wrote: »

too wet for broadleaf because of soil degradation due to leaching, or just too wet? i've been in both derryclare and glengarriff woods, and both seemed fairly healthy, especially the former.

Oak wood clearance has resulted in changes in soil morphological, physical and chemical properties. Increased effective precipitation and reduction in nutrient cycling has caused greater podzolisation in well drained areas and has resulted in a greater degree of hydromorphism (sic waterlogging) in the poorly drained areas. The accumulation of surface organic material, evident in many of the soils in the cleared area, with or without the development of an iron pan, is a precursor to the formation of blanket peat.