| Tree guards |
- Cost effective for small areas
- Can protect trees from herbicide damage
- Can make trees easier to locate
- Do not present a barrier to public access
- Do not prevent positive herbivore impacts on ground vegetation
- Can provide an early boost to growth
|
- Do not protect other elements of the woodland ecosystem
- Are costly for large areas
- Require regular inspection, maintenance and often eventual removal
- Are generally not reusable
- Taller guards can be unstable and cause damage to trees and stem weakness in windy situations
- Can be unsightly and attract vandalism
|
| Fencing |
- Cost effective for large areas and high stocking densities
- Often less visually intrusive than individual tree protection
- Offers protection for natural regeneration and other woodland vegetation
|
- Expensive for small areas
- Reduces accessibility to woodland users
- A breach can put whole planted area at risk
- May prevent beneficial herbivore impacts
- Some reduction of animal numbers may also be necessary when populations are high
|
| Electric fencing |
- Low capital cost
- Reusable
- Can be effective in protecting short tern regeneration e.g. coppice
|
- Generally reliable for domestic stock only
- Dependent on intensive checking and maintenance
- Requires reliable power source and earthing; breach or loss of power renders the whole fence-line ineffective
|
| Chemical repellents |
- Useful emergency measure for immediate and over-winter protection of small areas
|
- Expensive for large areas and where repeat applications are necessary
- Current repellents offer limited duration of protection and do not protect growth occurring after treatment
|
| Deer – shooting |
- Limits deer damage whilst maintaining positive impacts
- Recognises deer as a part of forest biodiversity, as a recreational resource, as a tool for habitat management, and as a potential source of income
|
- Requires time, experience, planning and long-term commitment to implement
- Requires co-operation with neighbours if used in small woodlands
- Public safety considerations may limit potential to cull
|
| Grey squirrels -poisoning |
- The most effective method currently available, particularly in terms of labour requirement
|
- Use of a hazardous mammalian toxin in the environment
|
| Grey squirrels -multi-capture traps |
- Easy to site and set; may be used even where red squirrels are resident
|
- High capital cost and labour requirement
|
| Rabbits – gassing |
- The most effective method of rabbit control
|
- Requires properly trained and equipped personnel
|
| Rabbits – cage traps |
- Non-target species can be released unharmed
- Does not require access to burrow systems
- Useful for removal of rabbits from within fenced areas
|
- Unsuitable for removing substantial numbers of rabbits
|
| Rabbits – box traps |
- Can catch substantial numbers of rabbits
- Useful for removal of rabbits from within fenced areas and for maintaining good relations with neighbours
|
|
