Talk:Coppicing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Can anyone change the header to Coppicing as I am not sure how to do it?

Many thanks, Dieter

Hi Deiter- I've already created a redirct page from Coppicing to Coppice quercus robur

I think he's right that the "procedure" title is much better than the "noun" title; the latter enourages dictionary-like entries rather than full encyclopedia articles. --LDC

fine by me quercus robur


Thanks for the help


Dieter


Hi, Quercusrobur, Your "Pruning Fruit Trees" is excellent. It puts the pruning as regards fruit trees very much into perspective. The thing is, though, is "pollarding" and "coppicing" not more in the realm of Woodland Management? Has the correct pruning of fruit trees not more bearing on the ultimate yield of fruit rather than the yield of timber on the one hand, and "rods" for twining on the other as in the case of oak, ash, willow? If you want to redirect both, "Coppicing" and "Pollarding" into the "Pruning" article that would be fine by me, but they should be kept as a separate paragraph, I think. What do you think?

Diet

Hi Diet- I think that coppicing, ollarding & pruning should definately be kept as 3 seperate entries, but cross linked- however the stuff about apical dominanace is important to all three articles (pruning copicing & polarding is all about controling apical dominance in dfferent ways in order to obtain diffeent results), so maybe that para could be copied and pasted, with some minor tweaking, into each of the articles- means a little duplication, but any person looking up just one of those areas will then get the 'theoretical' information as well as the practical bits... quercus robur


Hi, Quercus Robur,

Hell, I seem to have lost the article on Pollard/Pollarding trying to Redirect into the "Pollarding". I shall rewrite it when I have a bit more time in an hour or so. Sorry


All old versions of articles are kept. Click the "history link", and you can resotre one. I'll write this up on the FAQ later. In the meantime, i've taken the last good version of pollard & put it on the pollarding page -- Tarquin 09:49 Oct 5, 2002 (UTC)

Hi, Tarquin Many thanks. will peruse FAQ, Dieter


Hi,Quercusrobur,

Looks great, drawings and integration of article Many thanks Diet

[edit] Too many images?

The new images are great - but I'm worried that there are now more images on this page than are necessary. Do we really need them all? Do they all add something? Your views sought. Naturenet | Talk 19:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps a consensus of other editors may determine that. I think, to see an old coppice stool after many years though might just give an idea what they really look like after time has elapsed. Perhaps a gallery format might do the trick? Or should we add more text to even things out? Dieter Simon 22:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
On second thoughts, if others think there too many images, I will remove one of the two photos of the same Banstead stool. Dieter Simon 23:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
I have reflowed how the images are displayed. I hope you like it. 71.199.123.24 01:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Aspen

Is clearcutting an aspen stand coppicing? If it qualifies it must be one of the most commonly coppiced forests, at least in the united states. 128.101.70.98 15:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Possibly it could be called that, are the aspens felled, allowed to regrow, and then felled again? If so it's a kind of coppicing. But if it is not called that locally it's probably not right to describe it so normally. Naturenet | Talk 08:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Aspen is different from the coppiced trees described here because all of the current examples shoot from stools, and aspen root sucker shoots.128.101.70.96 16:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/o/p/Talk%7ECoppicing_67b0.html"