the online meeting place for all who love our amphibians and reptiles |
|
GCNs and bark mulch |
Post Reply |
Author | |
Matt Harris
Senior Member Joined: 03 Jun 2003 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 233 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 25 Jul 2012 at 2:30pm |
Has anyone ever heard of GCNs being affected either physically or behaviourally by commercial bark mulches?
We have a developer who want to use bark mulch under shrub (Hawthorn/hazel/holly etc) planting in GCN terrestrial habitat, but I am concerned that conifer-based bark mulch (they usually stink heavily of pine oil etc) might deter or even damage the newts. There seems to be little alternative for landscaping, apart perhaps from wood chippings, than bark mulches which seem invariably to be derived from spruce, pine, cedar, hemlock etc. |
|
Local Authority Ecologist
|
|
GemmaJF
Admin Group Joined: 25 Jan 2003 Location: Essex Status: Offline Points: 4359 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
In a sort of reverse answer Matt I came across a consultant who was advocating using bark mulches as they were "beneficial" to newts.
Having never observed a newt anywhere near the stuff and having similar reservations as yourself I challenged the view. The distinction being where the mulches are derived from, if it was non-coniferous bark chippings I think they could be of benefit but as you say most commercially produced materials are pretty unpleasant and are intended to suppress vegetation growth and are used to reduce maintenance. I can't help thinking that such materials will not be in the least bit attractive to newts and could easily be detrimental to them. I would be sure not suppressing the vegetation under the shrubs and letting nature be nature would be a far better solution for the newts, if not human aesthetics. Edited by GemmaJF - 26 Jul 2012 at 11:46am |
|
Noodles
Senior Member Joined: 05 Dec 2010 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 534 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The use of bark mulch as amphibian refuge is as old as the hills (well, newt mitigation anyway). It immediately simulates a loose, moist woodland floor type substrate with plenty of inverts. Ideal for 'burrowing' etc. As for its resin content i would argue that newts commonly use coniferous woodland and must subsequently crawl over and through dense mats of resinous pine needles. Moreover, i reckon that any resin content would soon deteriorate in an exposed location. Not fact of course!
|
|
GemmaJF
Admin Group Joined: 25 Jan 2003 Location: Essex Status: Offline Points: 4359 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Strange then after clearing dozens of sites over the years I've never recorded any of the native newt species in the stuff. Despite them being present in leaf litter immediately adjacent to piles of well aged coniferous mulch.
Just because it is recommended doesn't mean it is of any use. I would also assume those that recommended bark mulch expected people to use less toxic alternatives than commercially produced coniferous mulches. One might even assume that one would use a chipper and produce a suitable mulch from easily available materials already present on the site rather than buying in a toxic non-composting soil dressing. But that is always the case, things go in guidelines and are then interpreted by those with practically no field experience and mistakes are made. Other examples: Log piles 3 inches high Artificial hibernacula the size a suitcase Shall I go on? If you are still not sure, try dropping a newt in a jar or turpentine and see if it is good for it. Edited by GemmaJF - 27 Jul 2012 at 9:43am |
|
Noodles
Senior Member Joined: 05 Dec 2010 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 534 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Its good that you have comparative data from mulch piles adjacent to woodland leaf litter. How very convenient
P.S. I think its use is recommended in one of or both the GCN Conservation Handbook and GCN Guidelines. Obviously one would not use a variety with chemicals in but the fact that coniferous mulch is distressing to newts is pure conjecture. Do you have any variables on your observations. I suspect not.
Edited by Noodles - 27 Jul 2012 at 9:53am |
|
Suzy
Senior Member Joined: 06 Apr 2005 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1447 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
There are so many ground cover plants that would do the same weed-supressing job and be possibly more wildlife friendly.
|
|
Suz
|
|
Noodles
Senior Member Joined: 05 Dec 2010 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 534 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Good point Suzy. If in doubt leave it out.
|
|
Noodles
Senior Member Joined: 05 Dec 2010 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 534 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
From The GCN Conservation Handbook. Note the use of the word deciduous! Sourcing this appropriate material would appear to be the solution to your client's problem Matt. Mulching Providing a deep litter layer (100mm or preferably more) of deciduous or mainly deciduous bark mulch artificially creates a litter layer. Composted bark mulch is even better as it compacts well and holds moisture more effectively. Used in association with new tree plantations it can be immediately successful in providing habitat for newts. Mulch also reduces growth of ground flora that competes with newly planted tree stock. As plantations grow and are thinned, the cut poles and branches can be left on the surface between trees as further dead wood. By 10-15 years the plantation should provide good quality newt habitat, as an understorey of bramble, ivy or other plant cover develops.
|
|
GemmaJF
Admin Group Joined: 25 Jan 2003 Location: Essex Status: Offline Points: 4359 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I totally agree Noodles with that one word being the key here.
You will note that the guidelines recommend deciduous bark. Stating composted bark is better. Coniferous bark practically does not compost at all and is full of naturally produced toxic chemicals. Unfortunately what seems to happen is people read the guidellines, remember that mulching is recommended but then recommend the use of commercially produced coniferous mulch which is really not suitable. And it was indeed convenient to be able to compare naturally produced deciduous leaf litter to swathes of coniferous based mulch placed under ornamental plantings at a couple of sites. Not exactly a rare opportunity for those of us involved in large scale mitigations though. Along with the general 'chemical saturated' properties, it was also surprisingly dry under the surface. In fact nothing at all, including common invert species was making any use of it as far as we could see. When it says mulching in the guidelines it does not indicate buying commercially produced coniferous mulch at all, despite this being favoured by some landscapers and consultants. They are simply missing the rather important detail of the materials that the mulch should be formed from. But I think I said that already in my first post........ Edited by GemmaJF - 27 Jul 2012 at 5:47pm |
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |