Copse, covert, wood, forest, jungle. All terms for land covered with trees. I'm wondering what the precise definition of each is and what factors determine if, for example, a wood is not a forest or a copse is not a wood. Maybe it’s the area or perhaps the number of trees or even both, something else or none of these. I’ll come back to this.
One thing for sure is whether you have a small wooded area or a large one some idea of the number, type, age and condition of the trees is essential if the steward is to manage it effectively. By that I mean look after the older specimens, sustain their numbers, encourage sustainable diversity and where needed introduce new species. Overall, the woods need to have a balance to enable the different woodland layers to thrive for the benefit of flora and fauna. With a small, accessible wood that should be fairly straightforward: the only difficulties perhaps being the identification of the trees if they are unfamiliar and estimating the ages of the trees if there are no records available. Both of these can be overcome with patience and diligence. If the wooded area is large and diverse in species, or difficult to access due to the topography, then the challenges become greater.
In theory, counting trees should not be too difficult one would think. They are static, don’t suddenly appear or disappear and are mostly long lived. Changes are generally slow except of course when extreme event occur. Counting trees in a wood is not quite straightforward. I’m sure the experienced forester could wander through a wood, consider the age, the density, types of trees and topography, look at a map and tell you how many trees are there. Without that experience someone like me has to resort to counting.
A little while ago I did a rough count on one of the daily walks. I certaintly missed many and double-counted others but it was a useful start and the result quite surprising. Ignoring the small saplings and not counting trees in the hedgerow my first estimate is as follows. 20-30 mature conifers, 180-200 ash, 100 hazel, 20 mature oak and 70 beech, 70-80 hawthorn, 10 decent sized blackthorn, 15 elder, 5 mature birch, half a dozen holly (mostly under 2m but a couple of mature ones. There are also the many saplings planted since we’ve been here: spindle (20), rowan (10), field maple (10), cherry (10), hornbeam (10) and hawthorn (10). We grew from conkers 5 horse chestnuts which are doing well and a purchased a healthy small leaved lime, along with home grown beech and oak. I’m not sure I will include all of these in the main listing until I’m sure they will survive. There is sure to be some attrition caused by deer, weather, poor soil conditions, drought and disease. They are all labelled with a date when planted. Whilst I’ll maintain an inventory of these I’ll wait to see which are most likely to survive beyond the juvenile stage before including them in the main listing.
I’ve made a start, fashioning from tin some numbered plates to attach to each tree which can then be logged onto a database . That seems to a be a sensible first step and will no doubt take some time to complete given the numbers involved. But, using the principle we use to not get too overcome by big jobs - eating an elephant: one mouthful at a time - it is achievable. 2 walks a day with the dogs x 10 labels a walk x 7 walks a week. You get the idea.
I try to keep costs down and was faced with a small challenge of stamping each plate with a unique number without having the benefit of number stamps. I found a technique from the 1970’s of using a staple gun to mark each tree with a series of symbols to represent each digit. This seemed rather crude and inelegant. Our system of numbering is difficult to improvise without the proper tools given the rounded number shapes. But of course, the Romans had devised a way of marking clay tablets with straight-lined marks . Thus the end of a screwdriver and a hammer was all I needed. Plus, naturally, a quick refresher on Roman numerals.
Reporting on each individual tree will take longer though I’ve yet to decide what level of detail I’ll record. I’m thinking approximate age, height and girth, general health and thoughts on actions should the tree need a little help. My thoughts are to start with the mature specimens and leave the younger trees till last. The suckering trees like the blackthorn and self setting trees like the elder, hazel and hawthorn will be a challenge and difficult to count so a rough estimate will suffice. Keeping an eye on the extent of ash dieback and looking after the choice specimens like the mature oak and beech means a more detailed picture of the woods is needed.
Although I use the term ‘woods’, this is probably an Americanism: the usual English term being ‘woodlands’. I don’t mind that and it sounds more informal and folksy. How woods differ from forests is not so easy to resolve. The terms seen to be interchangeable. There are technical differences but in common usage we tend to think of woods as light, diverse, benign places and forests as dense, dark and slightly threatening places. An easier one to get out the way is ‘copse’ which was a group of trees originally grown for firewood through the practice of coppicing. There would usually be single species such as ash or hazel which regenerate when coppiced on a rotation basis. This group of trees would lack the richer biodiversity of woodland. A copse, if left unattended could in time become woodland, as the size, range of species of trees and other flora increases. So a copse would probably not have a complete ecosystem to sustain it unlike a woodland.
Various agencies here, in the USA and the UN differentiate woodland and forests principally by size and the percentage of canopy cover. Otherwise, differences between the two also include biodiversity, the amount of light reaching the ground layer (this is linked to amount of canopy cover of course) and consequent range of shrubs and smaller plants. The origin of the term forest dates back centuries and describes tracts of land that the king owned for his own use (hunting and timber for eg) and would include non-wooded areas within this 'forest'. In folklore and culturally there are psychological difference.the forest for examples carries perceptions of danger and foreboding. Hansel and Gretel were taken to the forest and not the woods because of the grim associations with the former and where the witch lives reinforcing the idea of the forest’s association with evil. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hansel_and_Gretel. If you trespassed onto the king's forest it could be very dfangerous of course as wood collection and poaching were harshly penalised - the Black Act of 1723 made poaching with a blackened face a capital offence https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/candp/crime/g04/g04cs6.htm. One way of conditioning chlidren to avoid danger was through fear reinforced by folklore and tales.
I'm not sure if elsewhere in the world languages differentiate between types of wooded areas in the ways we do. In western Canada my niece tells me 'forest' is the usual term, possibly becasue of the vast areas involved.
Finally, a dictionary search says 'covert' is a group of dense bushes and trees that animals hide in. Hence 'covert operations' as a military term.
https://www.quora.com/How-large-should-a-copse-or-wood-be-before-it-can-be-called-a-forest
https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/blog/2018/03/difference-between-wood-and-forest/



