Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Alan I agree at certain times of year Sycamore can support a certain amount of species, but compared to say Oak there’s no competition. I don’t think the odd standard/boundary tree makes much difference, but I was thinking more of the dense concentrations you can get when they spread unchecked.
Would anyone agree in these situations they do need managing more closely?
Or do you think a tree is a tree whatever species it is, so should be left to its own devices? |
I do agree about them being no where near as diverse an ecosystem as a oak tree. But they grow large much faster and supports tons and tons of aphids which small birds love and will provide these aphids until very late in the season. I knew a twitcher who always checks out the sycamores on his patch for unusual passage migrants - hume's leaf warbler for example and he often gets lucky.
And what with ever more effective pesticides being used in gardens, I feel that a sycamore particulalrly in an urban setting must be very valuable to blue tit families and other small birds.
However, as you have suggested in some habitats I don't think removing the sycamore does any harm at all. Actually removing areas of mature trees as you point out within woodland can be a good thing esp if coppiced or replanted as these glades will support some of our rarest butterflies and birds that have declined at the same rate as traditional woodmanship.
I think a dense stand of Sycamores is probably of lesser value than a mixed stand of trees but it may also be worth considering how our native woodland will fair within a potentially warmer climate as native trees suffer and perhaps decline, we might need to think that some woodland is better than none sycamore or not?