THE GALE OF OCTOBER,
1987
G . D . HEATHCOTE
The gale during the night of 15th-16th October, 1987, destroyed much of Suffolk's woodland and many hedgerow trees. From Forestry Commission data it has been calculated that in Suffolk alone 2.8 million trees were destroyed, and it seems likely that this is a conservative estimate. These notes on the damage to trees were made after, and strongly influenced by an extremely informative talk given to teachers in Bury St Edmunds by Dr. Oliver Rackham. However they do not necessarily reflect his views. Dr. Rackham stressed that the gale was by no means unique. Relatively little damage was done to buildings and there was little loss of life. There are records of severe gales in Suffolk back to the Middle Ages, when certain people were given the right to fallen trees after a gale. It seems to be generally agreed that the extensive damage to trees in Suffolk and elsewhere in the south and east during this particular storm was partly due to its severity, but also to the fact that it came at a time when the soil was waterlogged and the trees still retained their leaves. Severe gales are not uncommon in our region. I remember one when a gust of 96 mph was recorded at Broom's Barn Experimental Station at Barrow, and when an old wooden barn was moved several inches by the wind. Last October many trees were uprooted. This suggests that their rooting systems may have been poor. Some will have been transplanted trees which never developed the good rooting system of a naturally-grown tree. Others may have been growing on unsuitable soil. Beech plantations on chalk around Newmarket suffered severely, for example. It was noticeable that some plantation trees growing on the periphery of a wood survived while those in the centre of the wood fell. Probably those on the edge had the opportunity to send roots into the neighbouring fields and suffered less from competition. Some have tried to explain this by the effect of a wood on the passage of hurricane-force winds, rising and then producing a whirlwind effect. Not only beech trees suffered in this way. It also affected poplars and conifers. Some trees broke off where the trunk divides, a clear point of weakness, and others shed branches - which can be considered a natural defence mechanism, enabling trees to stay upright. Many isolated trees in hedgerows survived better than those in woods, although they lost branches. What should be done with damaged trees after such a gale? Probably it is best to do nothing, or very little. Of course roads and paths must be cleared of fallen timber and any trees which are leaning dangerously, but hardwood trees such as oaks will remain in good condition for a long time after felling and they can be left where they lie until the market for such timber is favourable. Much damage can be done to the ground flora and severe compaction of the soil by heavy machinery if attempts are made to clear woodland when the soil is waterlogged. Some fallen trees will continue to grow and they, and dead fallen timber, can provide valuable habitats for
Trans.
Suffolk
Nat. Soc.
24
96
Suffolk Natural History, Vol. 24
wildlife. Uprooted trees can sometimes be replanted. If some of the top weight is removed the root plate of an uprooted tree may fall back into the hole and the tree continue to grow. Broken trees can sometimes be pollarded or coppiced and continue to make useful growth. There are some clear lessons to be learnt from the gale. If trees are planted in unsuitable soil they will always be at risk from storm damage, and plantation trees should not be planted too close, or should be thinned at an early stage. Conservation organisations such as the National Trust and the Suffolk Wildlife Trust are doing all they can to rectify the damage done by the October gale. In general I think it is better to concentrate on looking after existing trees than to replant after a gale. Dr. G. D. Heathcote 2 St Mary's Square, Bury St Edmunds, IP33 2AJ
Trans. Suffolk
Nat. Soc. 24
Plate 4: D o d n a s h W o o d , Bentley a f t e r the h u r r i c a n e in O c t o b e r , 1987 (p 95). (Photo: C o l i n J . H a w e s )