Randomised planting plans

[Meadowcopse]

I have a small area of 0.3ha to plant reasonably densly in a triangle opening out on it's longest side to a young informal orchard with meadow beyond.

I was looking into planting plans and apart from "erm, we'll stick an ash here, an alder there, maybe an oak over there and so on 200 odd times - I concluded that from say 10 tree species of various quantities of each, that there was a model (mathmatical or otherwise for this).

I've trawled through various Google searches along the lines of "randomised tree planting plan" and it turns up a wealth of stuff (although mainly examples of trials and existing young woodlands where it is just stated that planting was random).

I'll actually be working roughly on a grid pattern for spacing, but with deviations from the straight lines and some species in clumps and lower, slower growing stuff less densely planted before the margin to the orchard.

Just curious as to how other folk established their planting schemes and patterns with mixed species and the intended future use?

Daniel

(Cheshire)

[Kris Hemin]

Based on a grid, as you say, to have a basis for 2m spacing or you'll have gaps and clusters, but we grouped species in blocks. Five apples here, eight oaks there and so on to for natural drifts and not single examples dotted all over of each species. So if you have twenty oak in total you might have four patches of oak - not, of course, as blocks in the grid but adjacent to each other. Fifteen years later it is thinned and leaves a pretty natural feel, with new seedlings and suckers spreading both the random nature of the planting but also age profile of the woodland.

[Stephen1]

Hi Daniel

One other thing to keep in mind when planting a small area randomly and at high density is the relative early growth rate and vigour of different species.

You have to plant fairly densely, so that species such as oak are drawn up, but the risk is that vigourous species will outcompete less vigorous ones. Species such as alder, willow, large leaved lime, poplar, sweet chestnut and sycamore can very often overtop and produce their own joined up canopy over species that grow more slowly to begin with - completely supressing them. (Yes I know the last two are non-natives - but there are compelling reasons for including them in small scale plantings. Sweetchestnut - gives large diameter trees with heartwood similar to oak very very quickly- once other trees in the planting scheme reach a reasonable size the sweetchestnut can be ring barked, and left to give (relatively shorthly after planting) long lasting standing deadwood that is rot-resistant and used by many of the invertebrates that use standing dead oak.

Sycamore grows quickly and although supports low biodiversity it supports very high numbers of the few invertebrates it does attract - very good for birds/dormice etc. Also sycamore gets a bad press for being invasive and taking over - but this is overstated. On some soils and in certain parts of the country it is invasive and can dominate woodland, but in most areas despite there being large numbers of seedlings present, and even many small noncanopy trees, it Doesn't often make it into and dominate the cnaopy.

I think Kris has it right in suggesting grouping species together in clumps.

I'm often up your way let me know if you'd like to meet up for a chat about it sometime? - I'd love to see how you're getting on with the meadow part of your project - that's what I'm mostly working on at the moment!

[jillybean]

This is the sort of thing i love about the SWOG Forum, those useful tips and support that owners give each other. it makes great reading. Canopy, non canopy, clumps,natives, the stuff of planning. more please, you Buffs!