I'm pretty sure I've been saying this for years

Apparently, what a surprise, planting loads of new forests could help prevent flooding.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25864631

Well I would never have guessed. I wonder if the the former environment minister has been reading my many rants on here

 

No, nobody does that.

 

There is unfortunately a down side to loads of forests which is fire, although careful selection of the the flora and creating fire breaks would help.
Hardly a year goes by that swathes of forest in either Spain, Portugal, Australia or California are not ravaged by wild fires.

 

Not really in the UK. Its rarely hot and dry enough for living trees to catch on fire.

 

Don't wish to disagree with you, clue, but:

2013
2012
2011

Just a small sample.

 

Yep, I know we do get them, but usually not on the kind of scale that warmer countries get.

Also I noticed in the 2011 link it mentions gorse fires. Gorse is a far bigger fire risk than woodland. Once gorse lights up, it may as well be made out of petrol. Its quite possibly the most flammable plant I've ever known.

Bracken is another biggy, especially at the back end of summer when it starts to die off and dry out.

A fire broke out on my land once, both bracken and gorse were involved and it was well away. I honestly thought I was going to have a major catastrophe on my hands, not worrying about my place so much as what else will get caught up if the flame front migrates to the masses of dead bracken along the verge, then along the side of the main road to the massive neglected area full of gorse. I've never dug so fast in my life. Partly I was trying (in what in hindsight would have been futile) to dig a fire break, but also the mud I was turning over was being hurled onto the flames. Fortunately between my dad and I, we somehow managed to stop the fire (which wasn't trivial, the flames were easily 10ft or more high) from leaving my land. In the frantic effort to contain it we neglected the trees on my land that were by this time being engulfed. Having somehow, by some tremendously good luck, contained it, we continued widening the fire break we'd made in case it came back, all the while it was raging away within the confines of a section of my land, and my trees.

Once the bracken and gorse had burned out, the fire just went out on its own. The trees that had been engulfed were blackened and lost most of their leaves, but they didn't ignite, and they are still there now 2 or 3 years later, and still growing fine.

But here's the thing. My trees were native broad leaf varieties. Mostly hawthorn and blackthorn (which both burn very well when cut and dried for a year or so), and rowan. Had they been a commercial 'crop' tree like pines, they'd have lit up much more easily.

I think the lesson there, if our environment minister is reading, is to choose wisely what you plant. A monoculture of conifers is not the answer. Apart from the increased fire risk, I don't think they are deep rooted enough to be really effective. I've seen plenty of them blown over in the wind. A diverse mix of broad leaf trees will not only prove more effective, but will also make a greater contribution to the environment in general. Perhaps less commercially rewarding though, so in the very narrow minds of government, probably not an option.

 

We get bracken and gorse fires around here when its hot and dry , unfortunately, most can still be traced to vandals and louts.

 

If we plant loads of Oak trees, then our great great grand children can start building warships again

Jack McH