Read on Twitter
One thing I have learnt in recent years about deadwood is that these types of log piles only have a very limited value for wildlife. They are often too dry and aerated and thus a limited number of deadwood species use them. The value in deadwood comes with wetness, rot and decay. https://twitter.com/_joelashton/status/1324466829054664708
Size also is important. To create log piles the larger pieces are cut into smaller bits, which can be of less value. A large tree trunk left to lie on the ground will be of greater value than it cut and piled into a log pile. This practise is done on reserves everywhere.
Even I have done it, mistakenly thinking it was the right thing to do ecologically. I am now going to try and improve things when I am next able to. Ways to improve it would be to have some larger logs left lying on the ground. Maximising surface area in touch with the ground.
In some situations it might be possible for large trunks to just be left in situ on the ground. Where you have to tidy up a bit, seek perhaps to find hidden corners of sites where large pieces of wood can be moved to. In many ways, neat log piles should be a last resort.
Not sure how to make log piles themselves more ecologically valuable. What do others think? Perhaps by filling some of the gaps with soil? Or making logs varying lengths? Or making them lower in height?
Lots to consider but lots we can do to improve this deadwood resource.
Lots to consider but lots we can do to improve this deadwood resource.
