These objectives seem fairly logical and rational, but as the management and conservation of Epping progresses with time, the question must be posed “is this a successful idea and aiding towards helping maintain the forest and its biodiversity/ecosystems as much as possible, or should the forest be left to let nature take its course?”. This is a key point of controversy concerning the future of Epping Forest today.
There are many methods of management that have been adopted; the first to be considered is physical management. Cattle have been reintroduced onto the forest, grazing is a method of management in order to keep down/control invasive vegetation. This is of importance, as if left unattended; this type of vegetation will spread so greatly that it will in turn prevent other things from growing. This method of management will have a beneficial impact on the composition of flowers in the grassland allowing competition with vigorous grasses like tufted hair grass. It will also benefit the invertebrate community which will aid many species, birds in particular. The stress/pressure from grazing leads to plants such as thistles, to adapt and in turn change their morphology so that they will grow horizontally rather than vertically. This is not to say that grazing does not have its downfalls, the pressure will also lead to capping of the soil surface, which will in turn push the soil closer together, and compact and compress it, consequently leading to problems such as water logging. Eventually, this will result in impermeability of the soil surface due to cohesion forces, so that no new seedlings can sprout. This ‘smeared soil’ will also lead to a perched water level, which could become stagnant and boggy. An alternative to the use of cattle is to use a systematic herbicide, this was attempted however it had its problems. It was not only very expensive but also required much manpower. It is likely that the answer is to use cows, but to use them sparingly – using half the amount of cows will mean that the erosion pressure will decrease significantly, but would the reduced number of cows be sufficient enough to prevent invasive vegetation? The use of animals such as cattle and deer to keep some areas of the forest free of trees, and to leave open areas, or Plains covered with grass has preserved habitats and communities which would not be present if the land was completely blanketed by woodland, this in turn increases the variety and diversity of organisms that live within the forest.
There are also methods of management and conservation concerning the tree population; tree materials are often required for every day usage, such as timber etc. There are methods of management that allow tree material to be obtained for this use, whilst also ensuring that the tree does not perish completely. These methods include pollarding, coppicing and copparding. Pollarding is cutting a tree fairly high, at approximately 2.5 – 3 metres high in order to obtain the material, but also to prevent tree damage from organisms. The main problem is deer, if the tree is cut any lower then deer will graze the top shoots which is likely to kill the tree. It is for this reason that pollarding is often carried out in areas of high deer population. Coppicing is based on the same principle, but the trees are cut lower – either below knee level or at ground level. This leads to the tree growing outwards (due to growth of the cambium layer) and produces small, young growth. Finally, copparding is a compromise of the two. Copparding is when a tree would be cut higher than the knee. The principle for cutting trees in this way is that if the branches were not cut, they would only grow one way, over a period of time this would lead to the tree growing slanted and eventually, due to the weight balance the tree will fall over and die. Furthermore, if you remove the apical dominance of a tree in this way then dormant sites of growth are stimulated; there is a renewed apical dominance in the side of the tree. Although the trees are being cut down, in a sense this is the best of both needs – it provides humans with the materials that they require and in turn helps tree growth in a sense (prevents the trees from toppling over). Finally, this cutting of trees means that different areas become attractive to different animals, according to their ecological requirements. For example, places where trees have been recently pollarded will be colonised by reptiles that require open areas for basking in the sunlight. This will in turn increase the biodiversity in such areas.
Another method of forest conservation is the culling of organisms that damage tree and plant life. The main example is deer, this creature will chew around the cambium layer of trees and plants, once the cambium layer has been chewed away the tree can no longer survive. Therefore, the culling of the deer will in turn promote the growth and species diversity of much woodland life. This is also applicable to squirrels and other such organisms that feed on trees. This is possibly the largest type of interference with nature in the management of the forest – actually killing off some of the organisms, but is this a sacrifice that will have to be made in order to save tree life, or should nature just be left to take its course?
The final method of woodland management is ploughing and burning, although this may sound extreme it does enhance crop growth significantly. Although this has perhaps the most problems out of all the methods mentioned. The key argument here is that this type of action is greatly disadvantageous to the environment, leading to much pollution. It will also damage the habitat of a large number of organisms, particularly plant and invertebrate populations.
In the 1870s, the Corporation of London had been concerned that free access to open countryside was being threatened by landowners wanting to enclose common landing by building development. As a result, two acts of parliament were passed – the Epping Forest Act, which made the corporation of London the conservators of the forest, (this act also made pollarding illegal), and the Open Spaces Act, which enabled the corporation to acquire and safeguard land within 25 miles of London for the “recreation and enjoyment” of the public.
There is much controversy surrounding the issues of management of Epping Forest, as is mentioned towards the beginning of this essay, but it seems that the only way forward is to use such techniques, although it means interfering with nature. Following on from information above concerning how grazing and open areas of the forest lead to a greater diversity, in the past 100 years the amount of grazing has decreased substantially. This is for several reasons; the first reason was the introduction of a disease in 1956 that infected the rabbit population and in turn led to a sharp fall in their numbers. Secondly, the increasing number of visitors to the forest led to the fallow deer being gathered into an enclosure to prevent their disturbance, and finally, fewer commoners turned their cattle out onto forestland to graze. In the areas that were once open heath covered in grass and heather, bushes and trees began to invade, as the level of grazing was insufficient to keep them clear. Left to its own devices, Epping Forest would gradually develop into climax woodland with a consequent reduction in the variety of communities and hence its diversity.
This provides evidence that the grazing technique of management should be continued, and this is just one example. Many of such techniques actually help the forest to stay as it is, being a favourable habitat, and increasing biodiversity. After all, if nature was left to simply take its course, it would lose its productivity and much of its wildlife. Furthermore, the forest would not be as successful and appealing both visually and scientifically as it is today for the public.
If the variety of different communities and ecosystems in Epping Forest is to be maintained or increased a programme of planned management must be implemented. This management plan has been devised by the Conservators of Epping Forest in conjunction with English Nature. Recommendations include the reintroduction of a pollarding cycle in selected areas of the forest, the removal of scrub growth, which has invaded open grassland areas, and the clearance of rank vegetation and silt from overgrown ponds. Each area is carefully monitored to record the effects of the management strategies on the diversity of each habitat. Management will ensure conditions are kept as advantageous as possible, and hopefully lead to a brighter future for Epping Forest.
