OK, ‘management plan’ is a little too grand a title for the forward looking images in my head, but I like experiments and I already have several trials underway, including:

• The food forest

• The ‘Apple Trio’

• The pleached hedge

• A new-for-2026 silvohorticulture trial

With these trials underway, and a new project outside the orchard in an early stage of development, it might seem strange to be thinking about introducing yet another trial at the orchard. However, trials and experimentation have been the foundation of this orchard project and that isn’t going to change anytime soon.

In any case, I appear to have started this new trial already. Without even realising it!

The Forgotten Tree

Shortly after publishing the ‘Apple Coppice System’ article I went for a walk around the orchard, coffee in hand, as I tend to do after publishing something.

Wandering into the wild orchard element of the site I glanced at this tree, and stopped dead in my tracks:

Although it may not be immediately obvious, closer examination reveals … a pollarded Apple tree!

How on earth could I have forgotten this tree?

Well, this tree and I have a history and, if I am honest, it’s been a troublesome relationship. As a result I don’t give it much consideration.

It fruits well, but the fruit is fairly tasteless. So much so that a few years ago I was contemplating removing the tree completely. An opportunity to attend a grafting course changed my direction and I decided to try to produce a multi-variety tree, sometimes called a ‘family’ tree. An apple tree with several different varieties grafted to one tree.

With that in mind the tree was cut back very heavily, with the intention of producing new growth of a size appropriate for grafting.

I’d love to be able to show a photographic record of this but, having flipped through the many hundreds of photographs and videos of the orchard, it would appear that I haven’t recorded much of the history of this particular tree. A subconscious reaction to my dislike of the fruit perhaps?

However, I do have the following timelapse video showing me thinning the early regrowth in preparation for grafting, which appears to have been filmed in August 2020. This at least shows the basic framework on which I had hoped to produce the ‘family tree’, and it seems to suggest that I pollarded it in the winter of 2019/20:

I hadn’t considered this to be a pollard simply because the intent was to graft new varieties to it, not to allow it to simply regrow.

As it turned out my grafts failed. Unfortunately it is a skillset I still have to master. As a result, and rather disgruntled with the tree, I just let it be.

As you would expect, the tree responded by regrowing and, nestled in an area which is now being developed as a ‘Woodland Edge’ element, I’d essentially forgotten about it.

Things are about to change.

The regrowth of the original variety was an accident, an unintended outcome, but one from which I may be able to draw some lessons.

Firstly, although I have no data on the rate of regrowth or records of the time taken for the tree to produce fruit once again, I can say that it has regrown strongly and it is producing fruit once again.

The tree is ready for another pollard this winter. This time I will be taking records, particularly:

• Fruit produced this year

• Regrowth rates per year

• Time taken to come back into fruit, with yield data

There is also a willow which is ready for another pollard this year, which will provide a useful comparison on regrowth rates. I’m expecting a huge difference of course, but I’d like to know exactly what that difference is.

The Cherry Pollard

I can’t finish without mentioning an intentional pollard involving a fruit tree.

This Cherry formed the canopy layer in the food forest element of the site, until the shade it created became too much for the lower layers. After a shaky start, when it lost it’s first regrowth for some reason, it is now showing stong regrowth.

I’ll write more about the cherry tree as part of a future article on the reimagining of the food forest, but for now the following series of photographs will hopefully tell part of that story:

I find these kind of opportunities for experimentation in the orchard motivating, exciting and endlessly fascintating. I hope it is worth recording, and I hope you get something useful from my writing.

Thank you for reading.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Pay What You Think It’s Worth…

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar, which you can do via Pay Pal by clicking here.

Thank you, John.

References & Links

The 2026 symposium brings together 53 speakers from 15 countries, and I’m particularly looking forward to hearing the latest news from Chris Evans on the progress of his apple coppice system, a system which he introduced with a video site tour at the 2023 event.

The Apple Coppice Trial

The apple coppice trial site which Chris featured in the tour video consists of three trial plantings:

• Bramley apple trees on a small rootstock

• Bramley apple trees on an M25 rootstock

• Ungrafted M25 rootstock

There are four trees planted in each trial, and the aim is to monitor the performance of the trees as they respond to a coppice or pollarding rotation.

Coppicing or pollarding an apple tree may seem to be at odds with good fruit tree management. Given it can take several years for an apple tree to begin producing fruit, why cut it back whilst it is in a productive phase?

However, it is important to note that the primary function of these trees is to produce firewood not fruit, with the fruit production being seen as an additional benefit, a ‘stacked function’, rather than the principal goal.

Why Grow Apple as a Timber Crop?

Apple is a hardwood considered to be a good firewood and is valued for it’s aroma, often used for flavouring poultry, pork, fish, and cheeses.

In the past, apple wood has come from orchard prunings or from termination of unwanted or unviable orchards. An apple coppice system has the potential for producing apple wood regeneratively whilst also producing some fruit within the coppicing/pollarding rotation.

Rootstock & Scion Vigour

Prioritising timber production influences the choice of variety, as good vigour is probably more important than it would be if the primary function of the tree was to produce a fruit yield.

Hence, in this trial, Bramley has been chosen because it is a very vigorous tree.

A ‘new to me’ piece of information is that Bramley is so vigorous that it has an effect on the rootstock to which it is grafted, resulting in a larger tree than one would expect on any given rootstock:

For example, an MM106 rootstock will normally result in a tree which is about 4m / 13ft when fully grown. But with a Bramley the tree will probably grow to about 5m / 16ft in normal circumstances on the same rootstock.

• GardenFocused.co.uk5

Chris has chosen to graft Bramley to two rootstocks for comparison, a small rootstock and M25, a rootstock which is itself very vigorous:

• Name of rootstock: M25 (very vigorous)

• Suitable for: Standards

• Start fruiting: After five or six years

• Ultimate height as trained as bush: +4.5m (15ft) x 6m (20ft)

• Growing conditions: Most soils including orchards in grass and on poor soils.

• They are too vigorous for most gardens except where the soil is poor

• Spacing: 6m (20ft)

  • RHS6

The combination of a Bramley scion grafted to an M25 rootstock should, logically, produce a tree which is even more vigorous than the rootstock itself.

The third group tests the M25 rootstock as a tree in its own right, i.e. an ungrafted tree which grows true to it’s roots.

Planting Scheme

The trial site is at Waterloo Farm a 20 acre smallholding in North Herefordshire, UK.

All trees have been planted on a 2m spacing, and have been planted with an understory of soft fruit (currant) and perennial kale. In the subsequent Q&A video, Chris explained that he was introducing leguminous shrubs into the system, notably Eleagnus and Sea Buckthorn. In this sense the trial site appeared to be moving into a food forest style of planting.

Comfrey on the perimeter of the trial site provided protection from grass spreading from outside the trials area, as well as providing additional pollinator support and mulch material.

At the time of the video the trees in the trial were coming up to five years old, having been planted out as two year whips.

Chris was looking at an initial coppicing at year seven followed by a five to ten year rotation.

Pre-Trial Tests

To verify the concept of apple tree coppicing and pollarding, Chris tried an initial test within Waterloo Farm’s established 25 year old orchard, pollarding a Sweet Coppin cider apple.

This showed strong growth in the first year after pollarding. He was anticipating a stem of 3 or 4 inches in diameter some three years after pollarding, at which point the tree would be ready for re-pollarding giving a three year rotation, potentially with a fruit crop in the intervening time.

He also coppiced a Stoke Red cider apple which again showed strong one year growth.

Initial Trial Results

Chris reported that:

• The ungrafted M25 trees fruited in their fifth year. Interestingly he reported that they produced a very nice fruit.

• The growth rate of the ungrafted M25 is much slower than both the Bramley on M25 and the own root Bramley.

• There was little difference noted between the grafted and own root Bramley.

Q&A Video

The Q&A video brought up several interesting points.

For example, in terms of emphasising tree growth over fruit production, he has considered removing fruits to maximise wood production, as trees put a lot of energy into fruit to the determent of biomass. However, he recognised that there is a lot of work in removing flowers or young fruit.

There was also much discussion about the formation of tap roots, but I intend to cover this is an separate article as it is a topic worthy of more in-depth treatment, and dovetails nicely with some earlier work I did on tree root development7.

Conclusion

All in all, this is a fascinating trial. It has sparked many questions and thoughts, which will no doubt feed into my trials at The Woodland Orchard, and I can’t wait to learn more from Chris’ update at the symposium in November.

Do the trees deliver significant fruit production as well as useful timber?

I’m looking forward to finding out.

You can see the tour of the trial site and the Q&A session, along with the other presentations from the 2023 symposium here.

You may also be interested in my follow up piece, ‘The Accidental Pollard’, which looks at coppicing and pollarding apple and cherry trees on my own site.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth…

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar, which you can do via Pay Pal by clicking here.

Thank you, John.

References & Links

“Welcome to Silvohorticutural Agroforestry - the future of vegetable growing”

Horticulture may be seen by some to be the poor relation of farming despite the economic and nutritional value of the sector1. However, it offers exciting opportunities for the commercial exploitation of agroforestry, and it can be argued that horticulturists may be the best placed to reap the benefits of integrating trees with food production systems.

For example, many market gardens will have established routes to market for tree crops, unlike much of broad scale agriculture. Direct-to-consumer sales channels such as veg box schemes, farm shops or pitches at farmers markets offer ready made sales channels for fruit, nuts and value added products like apple juice or preserves.

The smaller acreage of a typical market garden, and the focus on intensive cultivation of higher-value crops, also lends itself to the introduction of experimental crops, whilst the use of tunnel growing systems has the potential for broadening the range of tree crops beyond those appropriate to outdoor alley cropping systems.

Published by Chelsea Green Publishing, ‘Silvohorticulture: A Grower’s Guide to Integrating Trees Into Crops’ brings together two authors with real world experience in this sector, and they suggest another advantage that the horticulturist may have when it comes to exploiting a tree crop:

‘Vertical stacking of crops is a concept already used by vegetable growers through intercropping, for instance when underplanting tomatoes with basil or growing swede beneath kale plants. it is likely, therefore, that vegetable growers already understand and make use of three-dimensional space. Maybe we have a head start on our arable and livestock colleagues when it comes to understanding and exploiting the benefits of stacking crops vertically.’

• p. 5

Andy and Ben’s combined experience are the foundations for this book, enhanced with academic research with 70 academic references, a resource list of 38 books and information sources, case studies from farms adopting silvohorticulture, photos of established silvohorticulture systems, and a useful tree directory providing a pollinator rating, flowering months, biodiversity benefits, and suggested saleable outputs for each tree.

The book also benefits from illustrations by Kate Verity and an insightful foreword by Iain Tolhurst, himself a respected pioneer of silvohorticulture:

“At last, a comprehensive manual for horticulturists aspiring to integrate trees into their farms”

“I feel a little cheated – why was this book not available to me when I took the somewhat headless plunge into planting trees with vegetables? I could have benefited so much if this book had been around then, saving myself precious time, sleepless nights (‘which tree species?’) and procrastination.”

• Foreword, by Iain Tolhurst

This book provides guidance on every aspect of establishing a silvohorticultural system, from initial consideration as to why a grower would want to introduce such systems, undertaking soil and site assessments, understanding the positive and negative interactions that may occur between trees and crops, how to approach initial site design, planting and establishment, and ultimately how to manage the maturing systems.

In short, the authors have produced a foundational text for any growers wanting to introduce trees into their horticultural practices.

Silvohorticulture in Commercial Production

I think the most important aspect of this book is that the authors have approached the subject as commercial growers.

There is a mountain of valuable advice available from back yard, amateur growers and the world is a much better place for it. However, this has resulted in an abundance of anecdotal evidence with subjective commentary and a shortage of objective evidence. It is in commercial horticulture, with growers who have used silvohorticulture to strengthen the foundations of viable commercial enterprises, where data, particularly related to yield and profitability, can truly confirm or refute the claims made for the integration of trees into food production systems.

Not that these lessons are only applicable to commercial operators. Any horticulturist, whether a gardener or a farmer, professional or hobbyist, can take the lessons from this book and apply them to their own context with increased confidence.

An Unbiased View

The authors are balanced in their presentation of silvohorticulture. This is not a rose tinted presentation and the authors explore the downsides and challenges of mixing trees with vegetable crops as well as offering empirical evidence of the upsides.

In short, they are as honest about their failures as they are about their successes:

“For instance, at Eastbrook Farm, the gooseberry plants under the apricot trees have failed miserably because, when the gooseberries want the most light, the trees are spreading with big leaves and little light finds its way through to the ground level. Conversely, the raspberries are planted under almond trees, which have a finer leaf and a more upright growth habit; these are thriving.”

• p. 36

This example usefully illustrates the pros and cons of farming vertically. As I have found in my own experience at ‘The Woodland Orchard’, positive interactions between plants cannot be taken for granted, and light is one of several significant factors.

‘… not only is tree choice on its own important, but … if all of the interactions between tree and crop are not taken into account, trees can quickly have a negative impact on the crops around them’

• p. 46

The interaction between trees and other crops is complex. It is apparent that we still have much to learn and the authors are not afraid to highlight this:

‘One of the most compelling arguments made about the benefits of agroforestry systems is the potential increase in productivity that can be achieved by including trees alongside your crops. Understanding how to take full advantage of these benefits, however, is not easy and much of the evidence is still somewhat inconclusive.’

p. 30

The range of interactions is broad, from the creation of microclimates to competition for water and nutrients, from the potential for introducing habitat for beneficial insects to the complexity of the nitrogen and carbon cycles.

To take just one aspect of soil fertility as an example:

‘Planting trees in cropping systems provides a habitat, undisturbed and rich in root exudates, in which fungi can thrive. What is less proven is how far the carbon built up immediately under the trees moves out into the cropped areas. This spread no doubt depends on crops grown and rotational factors as well as soil and climate.’

The complexity and diversity inherent in silvohorticultural systems are their greatest strengths, yet also the greatest challenge for the early adopters embracing these systems.

And these systems are being embraced. At the time of writing, my own ‘Agroforestry and Silvohorticulture Resource Guide’ lists 28 agroforestry sites in the UK, and the list is growing as I come across more.

Case Studies and Lessons From Real Farms

The book reinforces the increasing popularity of silvohorticultural systems in the UK with case studies from Shillingford Farm (Devon), Troed-Y-Rhiw farm (West Wales), and Andy’s home base at Abbey Home Farm (Cirencester).

There are additional photos and reports from silvohorticuture systems at Wakelyns Farm, Eastbrook Farm, Henfaes Farm, FarmED, the Churchill Agroforestry Project, Close Farm, Riverford Farm and Tolhurst Organics, all of which offer lessons learnt from some of the pioneers of silvohorticultural practice.

For example, Martin Bragg at the 420 acre Shillingford Farm in Devon (UK) planted his first alley cropping system in 2002 learning key lessons including the importance of choosing appropriate alley widths and the benefits resulting from increased shelter.

Nathan Richards and Alicia Miller at the 23-acre Troed-Y-Rhiw farm in West Wales combines outdoor and tunnel agroforestry systems. Established in 2008, they have been expanding the range of crops that may be grown in West Wales, including peaches and apricots in their cropping.

A key message from the book is that introducing of trees into growing systems not only has a beneficial impact on crop health and yield today but, as the climate changes, agroforestry may well become essential rather than merely beneficial.

A Design Process

The book does not provide a standard approach for all sites:

“Every situation where vegetable production and trees are integrated is unique. This challenge was one of the key motivations for writing this book. Off-the-peg solutions won’t work. Every location requires a bespoke design…”

• p. 18

The book supports this with a 7-step design process which starts with an assessment of the land or farm as it is now, highlighting existing assets such as existing trees or availability of equipment, along with site-specific challenges such as soil erosion and its causes.

The process steps through the high level and detailed design of the site culminating in the management processes which will maintain and further develop the operation and the site.

The inputs to this design process are multi-factorial, such as topography, water, availability of staff and contractors, and route to market for produce. There are also temporal, time-based considerations. for example:

“The peak time you might need to irrigate newly planted trees is spring and early summer; coinciding with coinciding with high water demand for horticultural crops, this timing could present problems.”

• p. 23

Clearly tree-crop interactions form the foundation of any silvohorticultural site design, but some of the interactions to consider may not be immediately obvious. For example, the use of trees to boost the effectiveness of Natural Pest Management (NPM):

“Research carried out on predatory insects in Spanish orchards demonstrated that woody habitats are far more effective at boosting lacewing populations than flower habitats”

• p. 39

“Many of the predatory insects that feed on other insects, such as aphids, use pollen as an alternate source of protein to power their flight while looking for insect prey to eat or place their eggs. Early in the spring, pollen is hard to come by in the countryside and one of the earliest sources is on the catkin of willow (Salix spp), common hazel (Corylus avellana) and common alder (Alnus glutinosa). These three species will produce pollen in succession from February to April, depending on geography and aspect, and for this reason they have formed a major part of our agroforestry planting at Abbey Home Farm.”

• p. 66

It’s important to recognise that the interaction between trees and crops goes further than light, shade, shelter and water.

My Biggest ‘Takeaway’ From The Book

One of my tests for a book is to examine how it may change my thinking, decisions and actions. A book that nudges you into a positive change of direction is surely a worthwhile read.

For example whilst I was preparing my article on root pruning in agroforestry systems I got hold of a copy of ‘The Landscape Below Ground’2, the proceedings of a 1993 workshop on root development in urban trees. Not only did that book influence the title of my article, published here on Substack as ’An Exploration Of The Landscape Below Ground’, it completely changed the way I look at ‘The Woodland Orchard’.

The layout of the orchard had evolved over the years influenced predominantly by what I could see, with decisions on new plantings and changes in management based on by my visualisation of how the orchard could look above ground. With an increased understanding of the complexity of root development I now see, or at least try to visualise, growth patterns beneath the surface, and that has had a huge impact on understanding how the orchard works.

As a result of ‘Silvohorticulture: A Growers Guide’, that view of ‘how the orchard works’ is now starting to include what I might call ‘third party’ interactions, and in particular the dynamic associations between trees, insects, and other plants.

My first action as a result of reading this book has been to survey the orchard to draw up an inventory of the plants which make up this complex mosaic. It seems odd that a simple plant list for a site I have been working on and living with for 20 years could reveal so much, but when this list is used as a basis for an analysis of interactions a new perspective on the orchard opens up.

The book has also opened up new areas for further work. The material on nitrogen fixing trees in particular is worthy of a deeper dive article which I will be working on over the next few months.

Conclusion

Agroforestry is a hot topic at the moment, and silvohorticulture an important area of development.

In ‘Silvohorticulture: A Grower’s Guide to Integrating Trees Into Crops’, Andy Dibben and Ben Raskin have produced a foundational text, an essential read for anyone interested in combining trees with food production.

Although aimed at the professional farmer, any horticulturist whether a gardener or a farmer, professional or hobbyist, can take the lessons from this book and apply them to their own context with increased confidence. I’d highly recommend it as essential reading for all horticulturists.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth…

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

Thank you, John.

References & Links

This is a living document, a constantly evolving reference list for anyone who is contemplating, planning or implementing the growing of crops and/or livestock with trees, from farm scale enterprises to domestic scale gardens and allotments.

I welcome suggestions for additional resources. Please submit these in the comments below, along with any error corrections or other feedback related to the Resource Guide.

With thanks,
John Robinson, The Woodland Orchard

Version 2.1 - 13th April 2026
- Added review of ‘Silvohorticulture’, by Dibben and Raskin
- Full change history at end of document.

Contents

• Definitions

• The Resource Guide

  • 1. Books

  • 2. Conference Proceedings

  • 3. Handbooks, Guides and Training Manuals

  • 4. Government Programmes and Guidance

  • 5. Non-Governmental Organisations

  • 6. Active UK Farms and Trial Sites

  • 7. Events

  • 8. Agroforestry & Silvohorticulture on Substack

  • 9. Agroforestry & Silvohorticulture on YouTube

  • 10. Related Resources

    • Ground Covers & Support Species

    • Mulching

• Suggestions For Additional Resources

• Change History

Definitions

For clarity, I have adopted the following definitions for these terms:

Agroforestry: The deliberate, strategic integration of trees and shrubs into crop and livestock farming systems to create more sustainable, productive, and diverse land-use systems.

Silvohorticulture: The application of agroforestry techniques in a horticultural setting, notably market gardens, allotments and gardens.

Whilst Silvohorticulture can be considered to be a particular form of agroforestry I’ve highlighted it as a distinct term to reflect different contexts. In my view, Agroforestry emphasises the introduction of trees into agricultural systems, often at broad scale, whilst Silvohorticulture is specifically referring to horticultural systems, ranging from commerical fruit and vegetable growers to domestic scale gardens.

The principles apply to both contexts.

The Resource Guide

1. Books

“Silvohorticulture: A Grower’s Guide to Integrating Trees Into Crops”

• Authors: Andy Dibben & Ben Raskin

• In ‘Silvohorticulture: A Grower’s Guide to Integrating Trees Into Crops’, Andy Dibben and Ben Raskin have produced a foundational text, an essential read for anyone interested in combining trees with food production. Although aimed at the professional farmer, any horticulturist whether a gardener or a farmer, professional or hobbyist, can take the lessons from this book and apply them to their own context with increased confidence.

• Read my full review here.

“The Agroforestry Handbook: Agroforestry for the UK”

• Second edition: Edited by Ben Raskin

• Full review in preparation.

“Creating a Forest Garden”

• Author: Martin Crawford

• Full review in preparation.

“Temperate Agroforestry Systems ”

• Edited by: by Andrew M Gordon, Steven M Newman, Brent R W Coleman

2. Conference Proceedings

“The Landscape Below Ground”

• Proceedings of an International Workshop on Tree Root Development in Urban Soils, Edited by: Dr Gary W Watson & Dr Dan Neely

  • Conference presented by The Morton Arboretum, and published by The International Society of Arboriculture.

  • Although this is not a book on agroforestry per se it contains much of interest for those trying to understand more about tree root systems. Much of this is highly relevant to our understanding of trees in cropping systems.

  • I drew material from this book for my article ‘An Exploration of the Landscape Below Ground’.

3. Handbooks, Guides and Training Manuals

• “Training Manual for Applied Agroforestry Practices - 2025 Edition”

  • University of Missouri Center for Agroforestry

  • https://centerforagroforestry.org/resource/training-manual-for-applied-agroforestry-practices/

• “Tree Root Systems”

  • Martin Dobson. Arboriculture Research and Information Note 130/95/ARB

  • Published by the Arboricultural Advisory and Information Service, 1995

4. Government Programmes and Guidance

• USDA - Agroforestry

  • USDA Agroforestry resources, including links to the NRCS National Forestry Manual and the USDA Agroforestry Strategic Framework

• Forestry Commission - A Guide to Agroforestry (for England)

  • An introduction to agroforestry for England, including grants to support agroforestry

• Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs - Advice for Northern Ireland

  • General information on forestry. Use the search bar to identify specific agroforestry resources

• Scottish Forestry

  • General information on forestry. Use the search bar to identify specific agroforestry resources

• Natural Resources Wales

  • There doesn’t appear to be anything specifically supporting agroforestry at the time of writing, but the search bar would be useful to identify resources when (if?) these appear

• REFOREST

  • “REFOREST (Agroforestry at the forefront of farming sustainability in multifunctional landscapes in Europe), a Horizon Europe project funded under EU’s Land, ocean and water for climate Action, aims to promote agroforestry as a land use type allowing food production while maintaining ecological sustainability.”

• LERN (Developing the Large-scale Ecosystem Recovery Network)

  • “LERN aims to enhance understanding of nature recovery by establishing a national network of experimental woodland creation sites to provide robust evidence supporting policy and practice.“

  • “LERN will establish a national network of experimental woodland creation sites to test different approaches, e.g.,

    • tree planting

    • natural colonisation

    • hybrid methods”

  • UK Government funded via Defra’s Forestry Research and Development (FRD) programme.

5. Non-Governmental Organisations

• The Ancient Tree Forum

  • The only UK organisation focused solely on the conservation of ancient and other veteran trees

  • Includes work on ‘wood pasture’, or silvopasture as we now call it.

• Organic Research Centre

  • UK’s leading independent organic research organisation

  • Undertake research into organic and agroecological farming methods, including agroforestry

  • Sign up to their e-bulletin for monthly updates: organicresearchcentre.com/e-bulletin/

• The Farm Woodland Forum

  • “We are an informal group of farmers, foresters and researchers with a common interest in farming with trees in all its aspects. Until 2003 we were known at the UK Agroforestry Forum.”

  • Website includes the Agroforestry Map, showing agroforestry sites in the UK.

• European Agroforestry Federation (EURAF)

  • “The European Agroforestry Federation (EURAF) aims at promoting the use of trees on farms as well as any kind of silvopastoralism throughout the different environmental regions of Europe. EURAF has more than 500 members from 20 different European countries.“

  • Good resources on the EURAF website, including policy briefings and the Agroforestry Map of Europe.

  • Organise the European Agroforestry Conference every two years. The 2026 event is the 8th in the series, titled ‘Agroforestry at the Heart of Europe’ and will be held in Switzerland, 22nd-26th June 2026.

• The James Hutton Institute

  • Science-based and innovative work finding “solutions for the challenges posed by the climate and nature crises on the sustainability and resilience of our crops, land, natural resources and communities through the development of transformative tools, interventions, products and land management practices.”

  • Projects include agroforestry. More details here.

• Agricology

  • An “independent knowledge platform”, free and open to everyone.

  • “We bring together research from the field and farmer experiences on using practices that restore the farm ecosystem. These include reducing tillage to improve soil quality, planting ‘cover crops’, adding pollinator strips or using ‘trap crops’ (which divert pests from crops instead of using chemicals), and using agroforestry systems.”

  • Founded in 2015 “by the Daylesford Foundation, Organic Research Centre (ORC) and the Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust Allerton Project, with collaborative contributions from over 40 organisations”. Now managed by the Progressive Farming Trust.

• LEAF (Linking Environment And Farming)

  • Operate the LEAF Marque “a lead­ing glob­al assur­ance sys­tem recog­nis­ing more sus­tain­ably farmed prod­ucts.“

  • Organise the Open Farm Sunday event across the UK. The next Open Farm Sunday is on 7th June 2026.

  • Organise an education programme for farmers, young people and teachers.

  • Manage the LEAF Network which “consists of LEAF Demonstration Farms, working farms committed to delivering and promoting sustainable farming practices and LEAF Innovation Centres - research establishments pioneering new approaches to push forward the boundaries of Integrated Farm Management (IFM) through research and development”.

  • Projects include supporting eight farmers across the UK with the design and implementation of agroforestry systems on their farms.

• Future Trees Trust

  • Future Trees Trust is a charity dedicated to the improvement of broadleaved trees, working with scientists and forestry experts to create genetically diverse, climate-resilient woodlands.

  • Their sites include 30+ research trials across the UK, 20+ grafted seed orchards, and a National Centre based at the Heritage and Rural Skills Centre, part of the Buscot & Coleshill Estate in Oxfordshire, UK.

• National Coppice Federation

  • Formed in 2013 the National Coppice Federation (NCFed) aims to promote coppicing as a form of woodland management, bring together regional coppice groups and provide a unified voice for the industry; and to encourage and promote best practice.

• Farm Carbon Toolkit

  • “Founded in 2009 as a Community Interest Company to enable farmers to connect with each other and take practical steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”

  • Incorporates agroforestry in many aspects of the organisations activities, such as the TreeFEED project. This project has examined trees for livestock forage, testing 12 species “including natives (Hazel, Hawthorn, Elder, Willows, Alder, Aspen), non-natives (Red Alder), and high-growth hybrids (Poplar A4A, Willows ‘Endurance’ & ‘Terra Nova’)”.

6. Active UK Farms and Trial Sites

• Tollhurst Organic

• Whitehall Farm

  • Whitehall Farm is a flagship, pioneering organic farm that demonstrates broad scale agroforestry which works as a commercial enterprise.

  • My thoughts from my visit to the farm in 2025 are included in my article ‘Of Apples and Arable”.

• Woodoaks Farm

  • A 300 acre regenerative farm straddling the M25, the London Orbital Motorway, less than 30 miles from Trafalgar Square.

  • Gifted to the Soil Association Land Trust by Sally Findlay, for use as an organic research, training and demonstration site.

  • 60 acre silvoarable field and around 75 acres of semi-natural woodland.

  • Hosted the Agroforestry Show in 2023 and 2025

  • The farm offers volunteering opportunities, school visits, and hosts private and public events. Details at woodoaksfarm.com.

• Abbey Home Farm

  • A1,600-acre organic farm near Cirencester, UK, producing vegetables, fruit, eggs, milk, beef, pork, lamb, heritage grains, oats, wheat, barley and spelt.

  • Andy Dibben, the Head Grower, has introduced alley cropping system in 5-acres of the outdoor vegetable production., and a system of fan-trained of Peaches in the farm’s glasshouses.

  • Featured in ‘Silvohorticulture’, Dibben & Raskin

• Agroforestry Research Trust Sites:

  • Forest Garden at Dartington

  • Littlehempston forest gardens

  • Trials Site, near Dartington

  • Note that details of public tours of these sites can be found here.

• Wakelyns

  • A 23 hectares (57 acre) organic farm near Fressingfield, Suffolk, UK, embracing “Organic farming, short food chains, enterprise stacking on one of the earliest, most diverse, agroforestry sites.“

  • Offers “Courses, events, Wakelyns Bakery, holiday accommodation (and NGO retreats), horticulture, crafts, volunteer opportunities, and more“.

• Grange Farm, Normanton on Soar, UK

  • 150ha mixed farming with beef, arable, and 100ha of Agroforestry

• Spains Hall Estate

• Shillingford Organics

  • 420-acre fruit and vegetable farm in Devon, UK

  • Alley croppping, silvohorticulture system incorporating vegetable, fruit, nut and willow for biomass

  • Featured in ‘Silvohorticulture’, Dibben & Raskin

• Troed-y-Rhiw

  • 23-acre mixed organic farm in West Wales

  • Small scale alley cropping in the open air and fan-trained stone fruit integrated with vegetable production in polytunels

  • Featured in ‘Silvohorticulture’, Dibben & Raskin

• Bromborough Estate

• Riverford Farm

• Eastbrook Farm

• ‘Growing with Nature’, Alan Schofield

• Henfaes Farm & Research Centre, Llanfairfechan, Wales

• FarmED, Gloucestershire

  • Based at Honeydale Farm, a 107 acre demonstration farm in the Cotswolds.

• Churchill Agroforestry Project

• Close Farm

  • Interview with Fred Bonestroo of Close Farm.

• Colesmoor Farm, Dorset

  • A LEAF ‘Exploring Agroforestry’ Farm

• Over­bury Estate, Gloucestershire

  • A LEAF ‘Exploring Agroforestry’ Farm

• Fedw Ari­an Farm, Bala, Wales

  • A LEAF ‘Exploring Agroforestry’ Farm

• Lon­gloch Farm, Fife, Scotland

  • A LEAF ‘Exploring Agroforestry’ Farm

• Moor Farm, Haver­ford­west, Wales

  • A LEAF ‘Exploring Agroforestry’ Farm

• Will Evans, Wrex­ham, North Wales

  • A LEAF ‘Exploring Agroforestry’ Farm

• Ruth Ash­ton-Shaw, Dum­fries, Scotland

  • A LEAF ‘Exploring Agroforestry’ Farm

• Low­er Nill Farm, Oxfordshire

  • A LEAF ‘Exploring Agroforestry’ Farm

• Coed Glas, Carmarthenshire, Wales

  • Coed Glas is a regenerative land-based project located near the National Botanical Garden of Wales in Llanarthney, Carmarthenshire.

  • Managed by Dana and Stu, who are working to establish a silvopasture comprising around 1300 fruit, nut, pioneer and fodder trees.

  • A crowdfunder has been launched to support this work.

• Sunshine & Green, Ark Farm, Cavendish, Suffolk, UK

  • A growing market garden operation with agroforestry

  • Posts regularly on social media

  • Initial update on a new agroforestry system on a Facebook reel

• North Lingy Moor Farm, Richmond, UK

  • 600-acre mixed farm near Richmond, North Yorkshire / 116-hectare (286 acre) regenerative cattle grazing farm

  • Introducing willow coppicing with around 2,500 willow trees in an alley cropping agroforestry system as a source of cattle fodder, shelter, biomass and water management. Also introducing around 1.4km of new hedging.

    • - Linkedin

• Food Forests and Forest Gardens, typically non-commercial domestic or community sites:

  • The Woodland Orchard

    • My own site.

  • RISC Rooftop Food Forest, Reading UK

    • Some thoughts from my two visits to the RISC Food Forest can be found here.

• More to be added. If you know of any sites not already listed here please do let me know in the comments.

7. Events

• Agroforestry Show

  • Organised by the Soil Association and the Woodland Trust.

  • Held in 2023 and 2025

  • On-line assets from the shows include recorded sessions from the 2023 event.

  • My own thoughts from the 2025 show can be found here.

• Agroforestry Open Weekend

  • Held each year since 2021, growing from 6 participating farms in 2021 to 50 in 2025 across the UK, Ireland and beyo.

  • Next event: Friday 15 – Monday 18 May 2026

  • https://agroforestryopenweekend.org/

• International online forest garden / food forest symposium

  • Organised by the Agroforestry Research Trust.

  • Previously held in 2021 & 2023. Click on years for the materials from these events.

  • Next event: 3-6 November 2026

  • I have produced the following content reviewing Chris Evans’ Apple Coppice Trials, from his presentations at the 2023 symposium:

    • The Apple Coppice System

    • The Accidental Pollard

• Groundswell

  • The principal Regenerative Agriculture Festival, providing “a forum for farmers, growers, or anyone interested in food production and the environment to learn about the theory and practical applications of regenerative farming systems.“

  • The next event will be held Lannock Farm on 1-2 July 2026.

  • Sessions from previous festivals can be found at their YouTube channel.

8. Agroforestry & Silvohorticulture on Substack

• Martin Crawford

  • Written by Martin, the founder and principal of the Agroforestry Research Trust.

  • Education and research in forest gardens / food forests and perennial systems. Interested in growing, eating, propagating all edibles especially perennials.

• The Agroforestry Network

  • “Creating connections for Successful Agroforestry & Sustainable Food Systems”

• Index For My Own Writing On Substack:

  • “Of Apples and Arable - Agroforestry Outside the ‘Permaculture Bubble’“

    • Lessons from commercial agroforestry

    • My first contact with commercial alley cropping

  • “Initial Thoughts from the Agroforestry Show”

    • A Slow Van & Accelerating Change

    • A report on my first visit to the Agroforestry Show

  • “An Exploration of the Landscape Below Ground”

    • Thoughts from the Agroforestry Show - part 2

    • Exploring how tree roots develop, and how they respond to root pruning

  • “Agroforestry: Back to the Future?”

    • Agroforestry in the Doomsday Book!

  • “No Hobbits Were Harmed in the Making of This Food Forest”

    • “A ground breaking food forest, above ground”

    • Thoughts from a visit to rooftop food forest at RISC, Reading

9. Agroforestry & Silvohorticulture on YouTube

Many of these channels produce a broad range of content, particularly related to regenerative agriculture, which has relevance to agroforestry and silvohorticulture.

Some channels will feature more relevant content than others, and over time they will be arranged into a more organised list. For now, they are listed in no particular order, but I can say that I have found value in every one of them, which is why they are here.

You will excuse me for starting the list with my own channels.

• The Woodland Orchard YouTube Channel

  • My main channel for long form videos, documenting work at The Woodland Orchard including trials in food forestry, silvohorticulture, coppicing and pollarding, hedging and wild orchard management.

• The Woodland Orchard Shorts Channel

  • A new channel which will host short form video content (in development)

• Forest Research

  • Research agency for the Forestry Commission. Forest Research provides evidence, data, and innovative research to support sustainable forestry, policy development, climate change mitigation, and tree health protection

• Agricology

  • The YouTube channel for Agricology, an independent knowledge platform supporting all farmers and growers to transition to more sustainable and resilient farming systems. It is a free platform, open to everyone.

• The Soil Association

• The Agroforestry Show

• Minnesota Soil Health Coalition (The Soil Health Channel)

• Joseph’s Dream

• Anemone

• Groundswell Agriculture

• CherryFarm pruning & grafting

• Irish Agroforestry Forum

• Royal Scottish Forestry Society

• RealFarmED

• WoodlandsTV

• Six Inches of Soil

• The Organic Research Centre

10. Related Resources

Ground Covers & Support Species

• The International Legume Society

Mulching

• In preparation

Suggestions For Additional Resources

I welcome suggestions to add to these resources.

Please include these in the comments below.

With thanks,
John Robinson, The Woodland Orchard

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth...

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

With gratitude, John.

Change History

v1:
- 30th Jan 2026 - First draft
- 1st Feb 2026 - Added ‘Ground Covers & Support Species’ section
- 2nd Feb 2026 - Added ‘Handbooks, Guides and Training Manuals’ section
- 2nd Feb 2026 - Added ‘Events’ section
- 3rd Feb 2026 - Added ‘Non-Governmental Organisations’ section
- 5th Feb 2026 - Added ‘Agroforestry & Silvohorticulture on Substack’ section
- 8th Feb 2026 - Added ‘Agroforestry & Silvohorticulture Sites in the UK’ section

v2:
- 12th Feb 2026 - Reformatted to improve structure
- Feb to April 2026 - Expanded the list of resources, particularly agroforestry sites

v2.1
- 13th April 2026 - Added review of ‘Silvohorticulture’, by Dibben and Raskin
- 4th May 2026 - Added links to my content reviewing material from the 2023 Symposium on Food Forests and Forest Gardens

Prior to the visit I posted a photo from my previous tour of this site, asking what was so unusual, possibly even unique, about the location of this particular food forest.

Sharyn (@sugarwomble)’s commented, “Hobbits?”. A wonderful idea which sounds like fun, but regrettably wide of the mark, while Helen A (@helena939451) dropped an excellent clue with her comment “Things are looking up”.

The main visual hint could be seen in the following image, taken during my previous visit in July 2024.

This food forest floor features some quite prominent rectangular elements, which could be mistaken for some form of cloche.

However they are not cloches, they are roof lights.

This food forest forms part of the Reading International Solidarity Centre (RISC) and the roof lights bring daylight into the RISC conference room below the food forest.

That;s right, remarkably, this food forest is on a roof.

I’ll admit I’d have been a little nervous about this project if I had been responsible for it at the outset. However, time has shown that my nervousness would have been ill founded.

Twenty five years on from the project inception, and twenty three years on from the completion of the initial planting, this 200 square metre forest garden is now a well established polyculture with around 160 different species of plants. It supports tree, shrub, climber, herbaceous and ground cover layers.

The initial brief came about because the previous, leaky roof had to be replaced. As it turned out, funding to replace a roof was harder to find than funding for a garden, resulting in a potentially mundane project turning into an exciting opportunity.

A £47K budget came from The Big Lottery and Landfill Tax, funding the project which included strengthening of the roof and the installation of the required layers of insulation, drainage and a herbicide treated roofing felt to prevent root penetration into the layers below the soil.

The garden has matured into a food forest with a good amount of canopy cover, and I suspect that most visitors express surprise that there is sufficient soil to support trees of this size.

The roof garden soil is 30cm deep, and I remember commenting on this shallow soil profile on my initial visit to the site.

Since then, as I have documented in ‘An Exploration Of The Landscape Below Ground’1, my understanding of tree root development has improved considerably, so I am no longer surprised that trees can exist quite happily with this soil depth.

To reinforce the point, my investigation of the soil profile at ‘The Woodland Orchard’ revealed that my own trees grow well in an even shallower profile, with most of the orchard growing in only 20cm of soil over a sandstone base.

As ‘An Exploration Of The Landscape Below Ground’ showed, trees don’t reach down, they reach out. On my journey home after the visit, the penny dropped. The surprising thing about the RISC food forest isn’t related to soil depth, it’s related to the width of the site and the total soil volume accessible to the trees.

The trees at the Woodland Orchard may grow in a 20cm soil profile but they are able to reach out beyond the property boundary and into adjacent gardens. By contrast, the RISC food forest is contained within the 200 square metre roof area. This means that the 30cm soil profile provides a total soil volume of only 60 cubic metres.

It occurs to me that the RISC food forest is, essentially, a very large container garden.

Clearly the food forest works well in this context, although there are two caveats worthy of note, and both are familiar to anyone growing in containers: water retention and root mass.

Water Retention

Water retention varies hugely according to soil type. Consider this assessment from Horsch":2

In principle, you can say that… 

… sandy soils can store approx. 6 - 10% of their weight in water. 

… loamy soils hold approx. 20 - 30% of their weight in water. 

… clayey soils store approx. up to 40% or more of their weight in water.  

The humus content, too, determines the amount of water that is stored in the soil. The values how high the water storage by the building up of humus really is vary.

In general, the following applies: humus can store three to five times its own weight in water. In an article, the Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture indicates values of an increase of 2 – 4% for the water capacity and 13 – 28% for the usable field capacity due to a building up of 500 humus equivalents/ha (one humus equivalent corresponds to 1 kg humus carbon).

Building up humus, thus, is one of the most efficient ways to increase water storage capacity. 

The initial installation of the RISC food forest brought in a peat-based soil which I would expect to have been naturally water retentive from the start, and this has been enhanced over the past 23 years by mulching and retention of leaf fall on the soil surface.

However, although the water retention of this soil should be very good, water storage will always be limited by the fact that there is only 60 cubic metres of it, and in dry weather the garden does dry very quickly. Irrigation is essential and is implemented through a solar powered irrigation system, which discharges at night to reduce loss from evaporation, and uses saved runoff from adjacent roofs and runoff from the food forest itself.

Being located above the conference room means that the heat from the building also warms the soil, an advantage in overwintering certain plants but presumably a contributory factor in evaporation in colder ambient temperatures.

Root Mass

On my previous visit, a volunteer commented that it was starting to get difficult to introduce new plants into the food forest due to the density of the roots.

On this tour Kirsty, our tour guide, confirmed that root pruning was necessary to open up planting holes for new introductions. I’m intrigued by the question of how much of the ‘container’ this food forest grows in is now made up of root mass.

Although some species have not survived the initial planting, I am not aware that this was due to root restrictions and it may be that no issues have shown up in the first 20 odd years of the food forest’s life.

It is worth noting that root mass will be effected by pollarding, coppicing and other above ground pruning, which at this stage of maturity is a routine maintenance activity. In particular, there is a focus on pruning in order to control weight on the roof, and this activity will undoubtedly have an impact on root systems.

Root System Respose to Pruning

I’ve been collecting literature on root response to above ground pruning for a few weeks now, and there will be a full article coming on this in the future. My current understanding is that a reduction of above ground growth results in quite large reductions in fine root density, but the larger structural roots remain unaffected.

Control of root mass by pruning is a potentially complex topic. Could it be that, if we view the roof space as a very large container, there are as many lessons to be drawn from container growing as there are from more conventional locations?

The primary threat for a root bound container plant is circling roots that could girdle and strangle the trunk. This is an area I’m hoping to do more work on as I am intending to introduce a new container garden in my yard, in parallel with improving my tree nursery operation. I’m hoping there will be some relevant learnng across all these contexts which will lead to a better understanding of what is happening underground.

As you may have concluded by now, I have a growing fascination with root development. Understanding how roots respond to above ground interventions, particularly coppicing and pollarding, as well as below ground interventions such as root pruning is a hot topic for me. It feeds into my own orchard maintenance and future development plans, and into my understanding of the wider topic of agroforestry.

Lessons from rooftop gardens and related trials may bring important lessons as in many ways they offer a more controlled environment than conventional locations.

An Iconic Food Forest

The RISC food forest continue to inspire and inform. It has quite properly been recognised for the innovation of those who conceived and designed it and, if I can use the phrase, their ‘ground breaking’ approach. It was shortlisted for the Observer Ethical Garden Award in 2009 and continues to attract students of gardens and architecture seeking to take lessons from it.

If you would like to see the garden for yourself, there are open days at RISC from time to time and private tours are also available. For information see the RISC website.3

Acknowledgements

I’d like to thank Kirsty Dabbs from RISC for her presentation and tour of the garden, and to Forest Research who scheduled the tour as part of their event in the conference room below, of which I’ll write more in the near future.

The RISC forest garden was designed by Paul Barney to a brief by RISC.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Postcript

As I headed home via Kings Cross, I glanced up from the Kings Cross Station Square and spotted this:

Look up!

There, the roof just visible above the station concourse, to the right of the hotel building…

Good ideas are worth spreading!

Thanks again for reading, commenting and sharing.

Best wishes, John.

Pay What You Think It Is Worth...

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

Thank you, John.

References and Links

The last 12 months have been transformative both personally and for the orchard, so there has been much to be thoughtful about.

Christmas was spent in ‘Clav’, the VW Campervan which takes its nick name from an ancestor of my partner Jeanette, tree collector, horticulturist and farmer John Clavering Wood (1778-1835).

The trip gave me the opportunity to visit some ‘new to us’ woodlands and a chance to open my recently acquired copy of ‘The New Reading the Landscape’1, in which author Richard Muir explains ‘how to recognise and interpret the complex evidence for historical change in England’s countryside’.

The attractions of walks, conversation, and food meant that only 16 pages of the 243 page book had been absorbed before we had to head home. However, those pages spoke loudly as we wandered through the woods, with my eyes newly attuned to signs of prior land use emerging from the undergrowth.

In particular, evidence of ridge and furrow ploughing made it clear that these woods had been planted on land which had previously been farmed. The practice of ridge and furrow has medieval origins, although a little more reading may be required to be sure if this particular example was medieval or later, perhaps Victorian.

The evidence of prior agricultural land use on the woodland floor brought to mind the divergence between forestry and agriculture, but it wasn’t the only ‘voilà’ moment. I couldn’t suppress a smile when I returned to ‘Clav’ after the walk, opened the book and my eyes fell on the phrase ‘silva pastilis’.

Silva pastilis is Latin for ‘wood pasture’ or ‘pasture woodland’. Silvopasture, as we tend to refer to it today as we explore reintroducing trees to agriculture through the practices of agroforestry.

Silva pastilis is recorded as a specific land classification in the Domesday Book, the land survey of England ordered by William the Conqueror and published in 1086.

So as I return to the winter work in the orchard I do so having been reminded that, just as a woodland may grow on a ridge and furrow field, ‘new’ techniques build on what has gone before. We have less of a learning curve and more of a learning spiral, circling back on ourselves but hopefully with increased understanding.

A learning spiral, which hopefully spirals upwards.

I wish you a very Happy New Year. May 2026 bring you everything you hope for. Onwards, and upwards.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

References & Links

The experimental nature of the sector is exciting. I’m fortunate to have the space to undertake my own small scale experiments and trials, and grateful to have platforms like Substack to share ideas, thoughts and results. Writing deepens learning, and highlights where a deeper dive is needed. Interaction with readers amplifies these benefits and comments are invaluable, particularly when someone nudges me towards a rabbit hole that may have otherwise gone unexplored.

So I’ll start this article by thanking Harvest McCampbell (@Gardening & Foraging for Life) for prompting a deeper dive into root development, specifically in relation to root pruning.

Root Pruning In An Agroforestry System

Although an alien concept in the context of food forests or forest gardens, root pruning is commonplace in most alley cropping systems.

Indeed there are case studies, notably at Tolhurst Organic2 and Abbey Home Farm3, showing that tree roots have a detrimental impact on the establishment and/or yield of the alley crop when root pruning is not carried out.

Root pruning has been shown to be successful in systems with annual crops in the alleys such as Whitehall Farm4 and in at least one system, New Forest Farm5, which has a perennial crop of asparagus in the alleys.

The question is how does this impact the trees?

“On the apple and other trees, I am still curious about the long-term effects of inhibiting their root systems. I wonder if anyone has studied this, or if the practice is even old enough for anyone to have applied modern scientific practice for such study.

“… for instance, does it have an effect on their susceptibility to disease or pests, their life span, or their productivity over time, as compared with a more traditional commercial type orchard, or to more traditional permaculture type polyculture where the roots are rarely disturbed.”

• @Gardening & Foraging for Life (Harvest McCampbell)

A short answer to Harvest’s question is that the trees appear to be fine. I have been unable to find any reports of detrimental impacts on tree health, yield or longevity across several systems that have been in place for many years.

Of course, the root prune tends to be done on an annual or biannual basis, which mean the roots being cut will be young and should represent a small percentage of the total root mass of the tree. Cutting older, well established tree roots will only occur if root pruning is delayed, and this has to be considered carefully.

“Deep ripping of tree roots (up to 24 inches deep) projecting into the companion crop area will reduce competition. Unless done from the outset, do not rip both sides of the trees the same year. Allow a 2-year interval before ripping the other side. Deep ripping will need to be repeated on an annual or biennial interval.”

• Training Manual for Applied Agroforestry Practices - 2025 Edition, page 37
  University of Missouri Center for Agroforestry6

This all felt quite uncomfortable to me when I first encountered the idea.

Development of The Woodland Orchard resulted from a combination of influences, notably the concepts underpinning food forests, permaculture and wild orchards, and root disturbance of any kind was rarely on the ‘to do’ list.

Alley Cropping and Food Forests - A Different Perspective

Food forests are usually described as collaborative systems in which trees, shrubs, ground covers and other plants work together in ‘guilds’ of complementary companion plants. Discussion around food forest guilds is usually focused on the layers above ground, whilst root systems are expected to find their own niches naturally, either exploiting different soil horizons or interacting with each other in mutually beneficial ways.

This diagram from ‘The Permaculture Garden’ by the late Graham Bell7, one of permaculture’s pioneers, illustrates the concept which underpinned the creation of my own food forest within The Woodland Orchard:

The permaculture perspective on tree systems is also neatly summarised in the YouTube video “Trees in a Whole System” by Geoff Lawton8, in which he says:

“Trees in a whole system work as guilds, as a cooperative family, translating, storing manufacturing, interacting, messaging and trading.” whilst also being “Cooperative with a soil community.”

“Mycorrhizal fungi trade nutrients between roots. Legumes and other species fix and supply nutrients.”

From this perspective, any intervention which seeks to restrict root growth to avoid root system interaction does not make sense.

Such interventions are either simply unnecessary, because root systems will exist naturally at different soil horizons, or unwelcome, as they remove desirable interactions between root systems.

So let’s dive a little deeper into what is happening beneath our feet, and how our actions may change the ‘landscape below ground’.

The Landscape Below Ground

I do like the phrase ‘landscape below ground’. It’s a ‘new to me’ phrase that has broadened the way I think about landscapes and landscape design. I discovered it when I stumbled on a copy of the proceedings of a workshop on tree root development, held in 19939.

Although focussed on root development in urban soils, the insights offered by this workshop are relevant to understanding tree root development in general.

Beneath Our Feet - Myth vs Reality

The landscape below ground is influenced by many factors, notably the rooting habits of species, soil type, depth of soil horizons and the availability of water, nutrients and gasses.

It may not be the easiest thing to study, but it has been studied. Indeed, shortly before I wrote this article the Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) completed the root excavation of a large Pinus contorta, commonly called a Lodgepole Pine, in the RHS Garden at Wisley in Surrey, UK. Suffering from disease and requiring removal, the stump of the tree was retained and the soil around it air blasted to expose the root plate.

At 80 years old it shows the extent and form of a large, mature tree. I absolutely accept that this may not be typical of the root system of the average middle-aged apple tree, but it does give a hint as to how difficult it can be for some plants to co-exist with some trees.

I’m grateful to Catherine for the use of her photo, which clearly shows the shallowness of the root plate. What it cannot show, of course, is root growth beneath the root plate. It is a common belief that a tap root, central to this root plate, will extend deep into the lower soil horizons, but in truth this is not a common occurrence.

This is summarised well in a research and information note published by The Tree Advice Trust10:

“A common misconception is that the root system is a ‘reflection’ of the trunk and branches (Figure 1). In fact, a tree’s root system is surprisingly shallow, dominated by long, relatively small, lateral roots spreading out close to the soil surface (Figure 2) rather than by a deeply penetrating taproot. It is uncommon for trees to have roots deeper than about 2m, though exceptionally some small (a few mm in diameter) roots can extend to 5m or more. Most roots are found close to the soil surface, with 90% or more of all roots located in the upper 60cm.”

• Tree Root Systems, by Martin Dobson, Arboricultural Advisory and Information Service

I’ll reinforce the point that most tree roots are “found close to the soil surface, with 90% or more of all roots located in the upper 60cm”.

In an agroforestry system this rooting depth brings trees into direct competition with alley crops.

In terms of vegetable crops, the following table, from ‘Silvohorticulture: A Grower’s Guide to Integrating Trees Into Crops’, by Andy Dibben and Ben Raskin11, shows the following rooting depths:

The authors offer further commentary on how deep to root prune the trees, adding:

“The next question is how deep to prune. In theory, this should be governed by the depth of the roots of the crops themselves. Most vegetable crops grown in temperate zones will have a maximum rooting depth of 15-60 cm (6-24 in). Although, if they are actively fed and watered, they will not always reach the full depth stated in table 7.2.”

“Assuming adequate nutrient and water supply to the crop, it would be advisable to prune to a depth of at least 50 cm (20 in) for a vegetable system.”

Presented with repeated pruning of roots in specific areas around a tree, how might the tree respond?

Tree Root Systems and the Impact of Root Pruning

It would seem reasonable to expect root pruned trees to try expanding their root systems into soil regions where they experience no disturbance.

In an alley cropping system the most obvious area with no soil disturbance is along the tree line.

As a consequence, it would therefore also seem reasonable to expect this strip of land to become quite congested with root systems from multiple trees competing for space. So is it possible that the tree strip alone will support sufficient root mass to keep the trees healthy and productive, or is there something else coming into play? In particular, what is happening to the severed, lateral roots on the edge of the strip?

In his presentation at the Agroforestry Show Andy Dibben suggested that the trees respond to having their roots pruned by trying again, but deeper:

“The theory is that if you keep doing this the tree stops trying to put roots into that area and the roots go lower down and underneath the crop root zone”

• Andy Dibben’s talk, ’Silvohorticulture’, at the 2025 Agroforestry Show

This is reinforced in the book ‘Silvohorticulture: A Grower’s Guide’:

“Root pruning is used to direct roots below vegetable cropping depth.”

• ‘Silvohorticulture: A Grower’s Guide to Integrating Trees Into Crops’, page 102

Would the trees, having had their first attempt at lateral root growth, try again at a lower soil horizon?

The following image from ‘The Landscape Below Ground’ would seem to suggest that this is indeed what happens. Even without root pruning, if soil conditions are right, trees may naturally produce a second layer of lateral roots:

There are several things to take from this diagram.

Firstly, it shows the three main root types. The tap root, the main vertical root, from which the lateral roots branch off, and sinker roots, which grow down from those horizontal, lateral roots.

Secondly, it demonstrates that the tap root can form a second layer of lateral roots, at a deeper soil horizon. It would therefore seem entirely reasonable to assume that the repeated pruning of lateral roots at a depth of, say, 60cm will cause the tree to develop a lateral root system at 60cm or lower, reaching out under the alley crop’s rooting zone.

Of course, there are still questions to be asked regarding the impact of this lower rooting zone on the alley crop. I can see potential for positive impacts, such as nutrient mining in soil horizons beyond the reach of the alley crop and/or improved drainage for the alley crop if drainage is an issue. I can see some potentially negative impacts, such as moisture levels being reduced in the alley crop root zone as a result of water being taken by the trees at lower soil horizons.

It also occurs to me that the presence of a tree root zone below the alley crop could explain the experience at Whitehall Farm, where an increase in worm activity occurred in the centre of the alley crop, at some distance from the tree rows.

I hope to return to this in more detail in the future, I have a feeling it’s a big topic, but for now let’s look at the third insight offered by this diagram:

“The second layer of roots forms at the interface between those soil layers that bear oxygen and those that do not.”

In the absence of root pruning the second layer of roots is being formed as a result of the soil conditions, specifically the lack of oxygen.

Oxygen, Soil Structure and Root System Depth

I think it is common to think about plant roots seeking nutrients and water. It is perhaps less common to think of roots needing oxygen.

This has a profound impact on an understanding of root system development. It explains, for example, why most trees will not be deep rooted. Why would we assume that a large tree would develop a deep root system, mirroring its shape above ground, when it is far more likely to find the oxygen it needs close to the soil surface?

It’s something that is clear from the literature:

“… roots grow down only in the layers of the soil where there is sufficient oxygen.”

• Thomas O. Parry, ‘Size, Design and Management of Tree Planting Sites’, from ‘The Landscape Below Ground’

Maximum root depth varies greatly, from only 10-20cm in waterlogged peaty soils to, exceptionally, tens of metres in loose, well-aerated soils or fissured rock. However, there is no such thing as an intrinsically ‘deep rooted’ or ‘shallow rooted’ tree species (Sutton, 1969). All trees can develop a deep root system (2-3m deep) if soil conditions allow.

• ‘Tree Root Systems’, by Martin Dobson, Arboricultural Advisory and Information Service

To reinforce the point, the converse is also true. Soil horizons that are not aerated will stop root growth:

“It is very easy to stop the growth of roots. They cannot penetrate soils that have limited oxygen supplies, heavy clay contents, and are well compacted. They will not grow where there is no oxygen.”

• Thomas O. Parry, ‘Size, Design, and Management of Tree Planting Sites, page 6, from the landscape below ground

So, whilst it is clear that trees have the ability to root at a lower soil horizon as a result of root pruning, it is also clear that they will only do so if soil conditions allow.

In other words the soil structure at and below the depth of the pruning, the ripping depth, is crucial, and that the ripping depth must be within a soil horizon which has potential for root growth. This can be influenced by the level of the water table, soil compaction or soil type.

It would be interesting to learn more about the soil profiles of the agroforestry sites which report success following root pruning. The only reference I have so far is from Dibben and Raskin:

“There is one further limiting factor to rooting depth, of course, and that is the depth of topsoil. When we grew at the Community Farm [Andy Dibben’s previous farm], some fields had nearly 2m (7 ft) of loamy topsoil, while at Abbey Home Farm we are grateful for the bits of land that have 30 cm (1 ft). This shallower depth will stop trees rooting out below the crops, but should also make it easier to root prune.”

• ‘Silvohorticulture: A Grower’s Guide to Integrating Trees Into Crops’, page 119

This is highly relevant to my own experience at The Woodland Orchard. Test pits have shown that the orchard, including the food forest area, is growing in fairly shallow soil.

This was confirmed when we dug the wildlife pond, which revealed a 20 cm layer of topsoil over a deep layer of sandstone:

I intend to do more investigation on the soil profile at The Woodland Orchard, and hopefully this will be the starting point for a new experiment or two.

Trees Are Adaptable

One of the key messages from this exercise has been that trees are very good at adapting to circumstances.

The ability of roots to find new soil horizons in which to spread is illustrated by a 1988 study of root barriers12 where roots were found to grow over or below the barriers. In fact this particular study demonstrated that none of the root barriers had contained the root growth.

Interventions in the landscape below ground are tricky to fully understand, but it’s obviously important to do so.

This has been a rewarding article to write, and I’m thankful to Harvest for posting the comment that prompted it. I feel that the short answer, ‘the trees seem to be fine’, would not have been enough.

If you have made it this farm, thanks to everyone for reading. I hope you have found some value in the article.

Until the next time, best wishes, John.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth...

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

Thank you, John.

References & Links

Last Tuesday, Clav and I slogged southwards, taking our chances with the more rapid modernity filling the lanes of two of our major motorways. The motorway network is not the natural habitat for Clav, so it was a relief when we turned into a farm track that evening.

Clav and I are more at home in a field, particularly when the field displays the characteristic parallel lines of a silvoarable agroforestry system.

Silvoarable is not a common sight anywhere in the English countryside, and even more surprising to be found less than 30 miles from Trafalgar Square and the statue of King Charles the First, the traditional centre of London.

This particular silvoarable field is part of Woodoaks Farm, a 300 acre organic farm which straddles London’s orbital motorway, the M25. Gifted to the Soil Association Land Trust for use as an organic research, training and demonstration site, Woodoaks demonstrates several approaches to regenerative agriculture and horticulture as well as supporting a diverse range of ‘stacked enterprises’.

With Clav parked up and the kettle boiled, drinking a rejuvenating coffee sitting alongside 1950s furniture seemed highly appropriate, as I looked out across the 70 acre agroforestry field. The 1950s was a time of huge change in agriculture, and this is an event and a location focussed on the contemporary changes that many believe to be essential.

I’m here for the Agroforestry Show1, a two-day event jointly organised by the Soil Association2 and the Woodland Trust3.

I had joined around 1,000 other attendees in seminars, workshops and farm walks. My aim was to learn more about the current state of agroforestry in the UK, particularly following my eye opening visit to Whitehall Farm (which I documented in the article ‘Of Apples and Arable’4). I wanted to catch up with the latest academic research which will underpin the further development of the sector, and to take lessons that I can apply in my own domestic scale site at The Woodland Orchard.

I hoped that my personal ‘yield’ from this event would underpin my writing and influence the future development of The Woodland Orchard, and so it proved. There will be much to write about over the next few months, but I also wanted to put together this summary of my immediate takeaways from the event.

The Big Picture

Agriculture is facing challenging times. The uncertainty resulting from changing weather patterns is matched by the uncertainty generated by government policy. Farming news stories have made grim reading recently.

Yet at this event the sense of forward momentum, energy and enthusiasm for new techniques and approaches was palpable.

However this is not just a group of enthusiastic early adopters, there is real substance to these developments.

For example, whilst the UK government attitude to farming is a real concern, I was encouraged to learn that they have a statutory commitment to have 10% of UK farmland in silvoarable production by 2050, and that the Forestry Commission has a dedicated Agroforestry Development Manager.

Part of this forward momentum is being generated by research programmes, with the farmer led trials undertaken by the University of Reading being particularly encouraging. Their ‘Trees-in-fields network’5 lead by Millie Hood seeks to create a network of silvoarable farmers implementing long term trials which will assess the performance of different planting strategies. Alongside this, there will be a PhD study to specifically research a range of different options for understory plantings.

I was fortunate to be involved in a workshop on the understory project run by Leila Nicholson. A major aim of my redesign of The Woodland Orchard is to improve the diversity of the understory as I open up the canopy layer. To facilitate this I’m keen to understand the successes and failures that I’ve had with understory plants in the past, and to gain information from the experience of others, so I’ll be very interested to follow the progress and outcomes of these understory trials.

The Trees-in-fields network is still recruiting potential participants, and links to the project can be found in the references below.

Training and Certification

There was also news from Stephen Briggs, from Whitehall Farm and the Abacus Agriculture consultancy6, that certified agroforestry training will be rolling out this winter, with the certification undertaken by Lantra7 an awarding body focused on land-based training. This is being developed alongside an Agroforestry Advisor Register, to help maintain the quality of advice available to farmers wishing to introduce agroforestry operations on their farms.

It is tempting to think that agroforestry is a niche interest in the UK but initiatives like these challenge that perception.

Making the Transition

The move to any regenerative system can be a tricky transition for a conventional farm. Tree-based systems are particularly challenging due to the length of time it takes for them to establish, but experience at Woodoaks reinforces the message that a transition to regenerative systems needs to be done sooner rather than later.

Five years ago the Woodoaks’ agroforestry field was a bare, ploughed field with no biodiversity at all. An early attempt to grow oats resulted in yields so poor that every field on the farm was put straight back into fertility building.

It takes time to recover fertility.

The agroforestry alleys have now had a herbal ley in them for three or four years, grazed off by sheep in the winter, and then cut for silage. My understanding is that this fertility building phase is now coming to an end, but it reinforces the message that regenerating soil means acting as soon as possible.

I suspect that this has also influenced the decision to plant trees in only two out of the eight tree rows in this system to date. The two rows that have trees have been planted as hedgerows with an emphasis on fruit and nuts, featuring Apples, Pears, Crab Apples, Cherries, Damsons and Hazels.

As it happens this mix is the same as The Woodland Orchard when it was in its ‘wild orchard’ phase, but planted with the higher density of a hedgerow.

The other six tree rows are currently in a wild flower mix, similar to the field margins elsewhere on the site.

It seems to me that the initial establishment of the tree rows with a wildflower or ground cover mix makes sense for a number of reasons.

Firstly, it can help prepare the ground prior to trees being planted, helping them to get away well.

It can also provide the opportunity to test the field design, making sure that it works with the farm’s systems and machinery prior to committing to the placement of the tree rows. It’s relatively easy to move design elements around if the design is implemented with annual crop and ground covers, and rather more difficult once you have trees or perennials in the ground.

Seeing the tree strips laid to a wildflower mix persuaded me to make a start on a project I’ve been thinking about at The Woodland Orchard for a while, specifically the installation of a linear food forest in the style of Stefan Sobkowiak’s ‘The Permaculture Orchard’.

This project has been delayed for several reasons, not least because I’ve been considering alternatives to the fruit and nut trees I already have in the main body of the orchard.

I now realise I can make a start without making a firm decision on the tree plantings. Establishing a wildflower mix will prepare the ground whilst also giving me the flexibility to change my mind if I decide on another direction in the future. In effect I’m creating a wildflower strip that is a ‘tree row in waiting’.

Enterprise Stacking and Land Access

For me, one of the most attractive aspects of an alley cropping system is the potential for improving land access for new entrants to farming.

Alleys can support multiple enterprises, such as a rotation of arable and livestock, whilst tree rows can support a variety of different perennial crops. This diversity of farming, happening in well defined spaces across a landscape and integrated with a farm-wide rotation, brings opportunity.

A farm which stacks functions also stacks expertise. The skills, time and equipment needed to farm a wide range of crops may be unrealistic for a single farmer. However, by changing the business model it is possible to turn this negative into a positive.

Alleys and tree rows can be farmed by multiple operators, implemented through a tenancy system, or a co-operative system.

Stacking operators broadens expertise on the farm and improves resilience. It takes away the solitary work environment typically associated with modern farming, and improves land access for new entrants whilst bringing in specialist skills to support the diversity of cropping.

Woodoaks Farm demonstrates this concept, with the alleys in the agroforestry field being farmed by a tenant farmer, the Whitby family.

Indeed the design of this field was established in collaboration with the tenant, with 48m wide alleys (compared to the 24m wide alleys at Whitehall Farm) and 24m margins in order to be compatible with the Whitby’s equipment which had a 24-meter working width.

The field is laid out with nine alleys and eight tree rows. Based on google map measurements the strips appear to range from around 180m to 580m in length and around 6 to 7m wide (compared to the 3m wide strips at Whitehall Farm).

As mentioned above, two tree rows have been planted up as edible hedging with the work done by Woodoaks Farm volunteers supported by the tenant farmers. The intention is to develop these further as a community focussed project. The next row to be planted is likely to be an Apple row, with about 40 apple trees, again with the focus on the community.

For the remaining five tree rows, Woodoaks are looking at options to tenant out these strips individually to people who may want to use them to develop small-scale enterprises.

The fringes of the field such as the hedge rows are looked after by Steve Dutch, Woodoaks Farm’s Ranger.

This business model really opens up the potential in this eight row system to support between four to ten operators over these 70 acres if each alley, each row and the margins/hedges were treated as separate enterprises.

Although a fully commercial farm may opt to plant all the tree rows with a single type of crop, as Whitehall Farm has done with apples, Woodoaks is a demonstration site. The diversity across the tree rows fits well with the mission of the farm, showcasing a variety of different tree row crops, and the stacking of enterprises would similarly demonstrate the potential for hosting multiple enterprises within this integrated farm system.

Steve suggested that he’d like to see a row of biomass timber crop to produce wood chip mulch around the site. Notably Woodoaks already have a partner called Willow Solutions elsewhere on the site growing a willow strip on the farm, so there is some experience already of such a working relationship.

Farm Incubators

As an aside, there is a parallel here with my own career. Starting out as a self employed consultant, a full office lease was beyond my reach. Luckily I had the opportunity to became a tenant in a ‘rent-a-desk’ scheme in a business incubator unit on a university science park.

For a modest monthly rent I gained a desk, a chair, a filing cabinet and a phone. More importantly I gained a relatively prestigious address, a route to market thanks to the science park marketing and ‘easy out’ terms which limited my risk to a short notice period. I think I was seen as a useful proof of concept, because I gradually added desks to the agreement as I employed people, and continued doing so until a full unit on a more conventional business lease could be justified.

I digress, but I can see some parallels here in terms of establishing a supportive system for new entrants into the industry.

Multiple Operators at a Domestic Scale?

Although The Woodland Orchard does not operate as a commercial site, there are a lessons to be taken from this field at Woodoaks.

I have always felt that, at least in terms of food production, the most important element of the orchard is missing. It’s unfortunate that I have been unable to bring in livestock, as I believe this has held the progress of the orchard back.

This is compounded by the fact that, for the last fifteen years or so, I have not accepted animal inputs onto the site. I’ll write more about this in due course, but this decision was a reaction to manure from a local farm bringing in an unwelcome parasitic worm into the site, after which I decided to restrict the amount and type of inputs brought in from outside.

I believe that animal inputs supercharge the soil building process, and my preference would be to introduce chickens for eggs and soil creation. Unfortunately other commitments mean that I am unable to look after livestock of any description, but I am now giving thought to inviting in another operator, who perhaps has the desire to look after some hens but not the space.

Literally, food for thought.

In part 2…

In part 2 I take a deeper dive into tree root development, prompted by a question in the comments on this article.

Thank you for reading this far. As always I welcome any comments or insights you may have in the comments, and do keep in touch.

Best wishes, John.

Leave a comment

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth...

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

Thank you, John.

References and Links

Embracing a diversity of information sources can only be an advantage in attempting to understand the regenerative mechanisms at play in the orchard. Indeed, I consider it to be essential to broaden my view, beyond my established influences, to avoid restricting my learning opportunities within self imposed barriers.

Outside the ‘Permaculture Bubble’

I started The Woodland Orchard nearly 20 years ago. Initially planted as a conventional domestic orchard it has, over the years, transformed into a mix of food forest and wild orchard.

Although I have never described The Woodland Orchard as a permaculture project, my primary influences have been permaculture or permaculture-related sources.

I discovered food forests thanks to permaculturists. I learned about tree guilds, polycultures and vertical growing from permaculturists. I was introduced to the advantages of perennials by permaculturists.

However, I somehow missed much of the progress being made in regenerative agriculture, unrelated to the permaculture movement, particularly with regard to agroforestry. Discovering these ‘new to me’ projects was a surprise, but also something of a relief. A relief because, whilst I am grateful for the many inspirational permaculture projects and people I have encountered, it is also true that I often become frustrated by the lack of clarity and absence of rigour in many aspects of permaculture.

In particular, I have become increasingly concerned about the small number of commercial scale enterprises which describe themselves as permaculture projects.

Commercial scale enterprises are important for two reasons.

Firstly, a commercial context will provide vital data on the success or failure of regenerative techniques. A domestic or community garden doesn’t need to keep detailed records of yield and performance, but for commercial operations this data collection is a necessity. In a commercial enterprise the true effectiveness of regenerative approaches can be assessed in the harsh light of real world data, and in the ultimate test of financial viability.

I also believe it is essential for commercial production to introduce regenerative practices. This is where the bulk of the food for the general population comes from, and I think that will continue to be the case in the future.

The majority do not want to move to an agrarian lifestyle, and they need a food supply.

There’s also a new impetus behind my own interest in regenerative growing, because the goals of my work at The Woodland Orchard are changing.

The Woodland Orchard - Time To Change Tack?

Initially, the development of this site away from a conventional domestic orchard was driven by the vision of creating a place of wildness. The Woodland Orchard was never intended to be an orchard focused on production, even at a domestic scale.

The early objective was to create a wild orchard, with mown paths slicing through long grass in which there was a selection of broadly distributed fruit trees.

This quickly developed into a vision of a walk through a woodland, rather than an orchard. This would be more densely planted but would still be mainly composed of fruit trees.

From there it was a short step into moving to a full blown food forest, simply by adding lower layers below the established canopy of apple, pear and other fruit

This has been an evolving project. Essentially I was creating a food forest by reversing the process I would have followed if starting from a bare field, as each phase built upon what had already been planted. Even the layout of the site is not one which I would adopt if I were to start again with a blank sheet of paper.

I’ll come back to this in future articles, but it’s important to recognise that being open to changing the vision for the site as it develops is an important part of past and future developments here.

Of late I’ve become more interested in production. Not from a pressing need for increased yield, as the site already produces more than enough fruit for our requirements, but from an increasing interest in testing more thoroughly the techniques I am using.

Testing Regenerative Claims

There are many bold claims about regenerative growing systems, and there are few more bold than those made by the permaculture movement.

For example, suggesting that permaculture can increase production to such an extent that 70% of existing farmed land could be abandoned and simply left to nature is, if nothing else, eye catching.1

Leaving aside the human cost of such a move, including the destruction of established rural communities that this would entail, this is an impressive claim.

Surely no commercial grower would turn their back on the increases in yield that would make such a transition possible?

Producing food at scale as a commercial enterprise is never going to be an easy business, and any changes to established practice will increase risk. If we are going to propose wholesale changes in farming practice, we’d better be sure of our numbers.

So it is enormously encouraging that so many commercial producers are giving regenerative techniques a try. In doing so, commercial growers are providing us with the empirical data that will underpin the adoption of regenerative techniques in real-world, broad scale production.

Commercial Agroforestry in the UK

Given that trees have been my main focus over the past 20 years, it will come as no surprise that it is the agroforestry sector that interests me the most. My domestic scale, food forest inspired orchard has given me confidence that tree-based growing systems are worth pursuing, but I’ve always had concerns that the concepts may not transfer to commercial production.

Looking beyond the permaculture movement has given me a broader view, and what I have seen is very encouraging. What has surprised me most is the number of commercial agroforestry projects in the UK today.

So when the opportunity came to visit Whitehall Farm, near Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, I jumped at the chance.

The UK’s Largest Silvoarable Agroforestry System

Whitehall Farm is a flagship, pioneering organic farm. In particular it is a demonstration of broad scale agroforestry which works as a commercial enterprise.

I was grateful for the opportunity to visit in May 2025, thanks to an open day organised by RASE, The Royal Agricultural Society of England, and hosted by the farmer Stephen Briggs.

Stephen is a first generation farmer. Training as a soil scientist after an initial education as an engineer, he was inspired by the agroforestry he’d seen while living and consulting in Africa, and he was keen to experiment with these approaches in our temperate climate.

The planting styles and goals of Whitehall Farm and The Woodland Orchard are quite different, but the common themes are clear.

When I hear Stephen say “Nature doesn’t do monoculture”, “Think three dimensionally”, “Encourage natural pest control with enhanced biodiversity”, I’m hearing principles familiar to any permaculturist or food forester. However, this is not the chaotically diverse system of a food forest, or even the more regimented philosophy of linear food forests. This is a system which supports modern farming practices, such as Controlled Traffic Farming (CTF), a system in which all farm machinery run in a pattern of fixed tramlines in order to reduce soil compaction, usually guided by GPS.

Whitehall Farm demonstrates that polyculture and sustainability can be an integral part of an arable system which would be familiar to any conventional arable farmer.

For Stephen it starts with a basic premise: “Our principal resource as farmers is sunlight”.

He points out that a golden cereal crop is not photosynthesising. As he puts it “the solar panels have been turned off”. Crop diversity keeps the solar panels on.

In addition, as crops and trees use water, light and nutrients from different spaces and levels at different times of the year, sharing the space has the effect of increasing the size of the farm by farming in three physical dimensions and in a temporal succession.

This all sounds very familiar. The main difference lies in planting ‘patterns’.2

Alley Cropping

Whereas The Woodland Orchard is intentionally chaotic, with scattered plantings of trees and understory, the agroforestry on the farm is based on a pattern usually called ‘Alley Cropping’.

The tree rows at Whitehall Farm are planted 27 metres apart, underplanted with a 3 metre wide strip of pollen rich ground cover. The main, arable crop is farmed in a 24 metre wide alley between the trees.

This layout allows the farm to follow conventional modern farming methods whilst embracing the regenerative aspects of agroforestry. The 24 metre alleys allow 12 metre tramlines which form the pattern for the Controlled Traffic Farming system. This is something that wouldn’t be possible in the chaotic, non-linear, woodland style of food forest design which does not lend itself to mechanisation.

In addition, there is a 24m edge at both ends of the rows to allow machinery to turn, and an additional 4m gap to the field margins to facilitate access to the land drains, which is a requirement of the local drainage board.

The ‘pattern’ here is laid out in a NE/SW orientation, running between or alongside the pre-existing open field drains.

The Tree Rows

At Whitehall Farm the tree rows consist of apple trees. A total of 4,500 apple trees to be precise, which began with an initial planting of 2,400 in 2009.

Spread across 125 acres this creates the largest commercial agroforestry system in the UK.

I was surprised to hear that the Apples are harvested manually. I would hazard a guess that mechanical harvesting may not be financially viable in a system of this size, but I would expect it to be an option on a larger acreage.

The apple varieties are varied, providing succession in the emergence of the blossom to minimise risk of crop loss from frosts. There are 13 varieties, a mix of heritage and modern, and the fruit is juiced to produce an organic apple juice which is sold in the farm shop and on-site café.3

It is an impressive system, both in its scale and on the positive impact it has on the rural landscape. This is a very attractive landscape feature, quite distinct from the featureless fields which would be typical of arable farming in this part of the UK.

Apples and Cereal Crops - Do They Co-Exist?

As you would expect the tree rows and the main crop interact at multiple levels.

Above ground the trees introduce shade and a certain amount of shelter.

I must admit that I thought the impact of the tree lines as wind breaks would be minimal, given that they are in a single row and don’t include a shrub layer to slow wind at the base of the trees. However, Stephen reports that high winds in 2019 resulted in a 20% reduction in grain production in the open fields on the farm, but only a 10% reduction in the agroforestry fields.

Below ground there is interaction with the soil and the crop roots. The tree roots improve drainage, which is an important factor on this land which relies on effective land drainage to be farmed.

Competition between the trees and the main crop is inevitable, of course, and this is managed in two ways. Above ground competition is managed by annually pruning the canopy of the trees, whilst below ground competition is handled by root pruning the trees on a 1 or 2 year cycle.

The frequency of the root prune means that it is mainly the young hair roots of the tree which are being pruned, and the trees are unaffected with no reduction in cropping recorded due to root pruning. It is thought that this action may also improve the levels of organic matter in the soil as roots die back, but Stephen points out that this is complex. He did note that soils have moved from being microbial to fungal dominated. I would assume that this change is within a strip centred on the tree row rather than the field overall, but nonetheless it is a beneficial change.

There is also a time based (temporal) interaction between actions needed to work the crops. Harvesting of the apples takes place after the cereal harvest is completed for example.

The farm is organic so potential interaction of spraying regimes for the trees and the crops isn’t relevant, but I wonder if this is something to be considered if the system was to be used in a conventional, non-organic farm.

A surprising variation in yield

The most surprising lesson from this farm also happens to be the most encouraging.

It is perfectly reasonable to expect the main crop yield to vary across the alley, in relation to the proximity of the trees. Logically, one would expect to see a normal main crop yield in the middle of the alley but have the yield reduce as we get closer to the tree rows, as the trees made their presence felt.

The surprise is that the reverse is true.

The highest yield is in the 8 to 10 metres margin around the tree row, with the lowest being in the centre of the aisle. This effect is so marked that Stephen reports having to tilt the table on the combine to account for increased yield adjacent to the tree rows.

Although the interaction between trees and the arable crop are complex there are a number of factors at play here, some of which will be specific to the context of this farm.

Firstly drainage. In common with huge areas of farmland in the East of the England, this land is low-lying and is dependent on good drainage. It is likely that the deeper, perennial root systems of the trees improve drainage, to the benefit of the arable crop.

The tree rows also create a microclimate around them. They have an effect as a windbreak, and the shade they introduce in the summer assists with water conservation around the tree rows. These effects, combined with the improvements in drainage, mitigate the extremes of weather that would have a much bigger impact on an open field system.

Thirdly, as mentioned earlier, the soil around the tree rows has moved from being microbial to fungal dominated.

Financial Viability

So far so good, but if we are to make real progress in the move to regenerative agriculture, the regenerative systems being introduced must be financially viable.

Although Stephen reports that the farm, as an organic operation, is producing 25% less than it did under conventional systems, the reduced inputs and the higher value of the crops mean that the farm is more profitable.4

In addition, when compared to an open field system, Stephen reports that the agroforestry system gives 20% to 40% more overall yield, including the main crop plus the tree crop.

However, viability is about more than pure yield.

It is important to highlight three ‘premiums’ which underpin the financial viability of this farm. The farm receives a premium for its organic status, a premium for its specialisation in gluten free oats, and the apple crop is given added value by processing it into apple juice rather than selling apples to the wholesale market. This provides a ‘triple premium’ to the value of the harvest.

Conversations with other arable farmers during the visit highlighted a concern that the system is viable because of these premiums, and I’d be very interested in seeing an agroforestry system installed in a conventional, non-organic operation producing commodity crops for the mass market.

Since the visit to Whitehall Farm I have visited another farm, this time non-organic, where regenerative practices are being introduced and where agroforestry is being considered. I’ll be writing about this visit in the near future.

Alternative ‘Patterns’

The mix of apples and arable works well at Whitehall Farm, but Stephen makes the point that the tree rows could include ‘any woody perennial’. For example, I can envisage one of my personal favourites, the Hazel (Corylus Avellana), fitting into such a system with a range of potential crops according to local market demand or the needs of the farm. A wood chip production element is just one obvious option.

It also occurs to me that the system could be modified to include linear food forests, in the style of Stefan Sobkowiak’s 'Permaculture Orchard’, and indeed could operate on a pick your own model as implemented by Stefan. This would increase the complexity of the design and there may be questions as to how scalable this option would be, but it is just one example of an alternative pattern which could be applied to an alley cropping system.

There are many factors at play. The time taken to get a return on investment is a crucial one, particularly if the farmer does not have security of tenure.

Trees Are A Long Term Investment

It is important to note that Whitehall Farm is a tenant farm, with a 15 year tenancy from the local council. This provided a long enough cropping cycle to deliver an economic return on the apple trees. In the UK land tenure is often very short term, typically 3 to 5 years, which is an enormous barrier for agroforestry.5

The tenancy also comes with restrictions. The tenant is not permitted livestock for example. Stephen said that he’d love to have sheep grazing the aisles as part of the alley crop rotation, but this isn’t allowed under the terms of the tenancy.

The tenancy also requires him to remove the tree rows at the end of the tenancy, although time will tell if the success of the current business model of the farm sees it continue as an agroforestry system in the future.

Tree systems are long term projects. Stephen made the point that the agroforestry system would not have been viable with a shorter tenancy.

Security of tenure is an issue at The Woodland Orchard too, where I have an uncertain future, and it’s an issue highlighted by the threat to Martin Crawford’s food forest on the Dartington Estate.

Planting a tree on land without security of tenure is as much an act of hope as it is a long term plan, and commercial operations require more than just hope.

Stacking Enterprises

I think the ‘no livestock’ restriction is a real pity, as it is widely recognised that livestock in a rotational, mixed species production system has enormous benefits, and there are opportunities for silvopasture systems which are denied under this restriction.

Stephen also said that he would love to see a ‘stacking of operators’ approach on the farm. He does currently work with a third party who runs a bee enterprise on the farm, but he highlighted the potential in a system where he perhaps runs the cereal enterprise, another person runs the fruit and and third runs a sheep enterprise. It’s an attractive vision, and one that I’ve heard mentioned by other farmers, particularly as a way of helping young people into farming.

The opportunities for agriculture using this shared land approach are immense.

Conclusion

I’m fascinated at the comparison between my own domestic scale, woodland style orchard, intentionally chaotically organised, and the neat lines of mechanisation-friendly professional farming.

This was an inspiring farm visit which renewed my hope for agroforestry systems in a commercial context. Yes, there are challenges, but the advantages are clear and, with the amount of real world experimentation and academic research being undertaken in this area, I have a feeling that more evidence will emerge and new business models and farming ‘patterns’ will emerge.

Although Stephen is coming to the end of his tenancy at Whitehall Farm, he will continue his work in agroforestry through Abacus Agriculture.6

I am sure he will continue to have an impact as a pioneer in these systems.

What Next?

As mentioned above, I’ve already made another farm visit and I’ll be reporting on that soon.

I have also booked my place at the 2025 Agroforestry Show (#AgroforestryShow), organised by The Soil Association and The Woodland Trust. This is taking place in September 2025 at Woodoaks Farm in Hertfordshire, UK.

«Edit: The first article on my reflections on the show is now available here.»

Meanwhile, at The Woodland Orchard, I’m taking these new influences into the next phase of development. I am in the middle of a project to open up the canopy, address some disease pressures that have gradually emerged in the last couple of years, and taken a step back to reconsider some of my past design decisions that may or may not have been correct.

All this work and learning will be shared here, and over on YouTube and Facebook, as time allows.

In the meantime, thank you for reading, and a big thank you for making it this far!

Keep in touch, I hope to see you again soon.

Best wishes, John.

Leave a comment

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth...

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

Thank you, John.

References

The lack of posting hasn’t been down to a shortage of good material. There has been much happening that would make good content:

• Clearing part of the established food forest and introducing new plantings as part of a cross-site re-design

• Planting a ‘Trio’ of apple trees

• Experimenting with a new concept for a modular growing system in the kitchen garden

• Developing a concept for a portable display to enable us to present ‘The Woodland Orchard’ at live events

There’s been routine work of course, such as propagation of annuals and the harvesting of some wonderful produce.

There have been some thought provoking failures, including some very unusual issues such as the beans that produced no pods, and the failure of a newly seeded ground cover.

There have also been visits to other sites. I’ve been seeking out inspiration and learning from a diverse range of sources, from community projects to regenerative horticulture and broad scale agriculture, including the UK’s largest silvoarable agroforestry system at Whitehall Farm.

It has all been documented with photos and videos, and I intend to feature all of this on Substack and YouTube in the future.

Getting certified

I’ve also committed a large portion of my time to studying.

In the last year I’ve completed Geoff Lawton’s Permaculture Design Course 2.0 and acted as a study assistant for my partner Jeanette, as she worked towards her RHS Level 2 Certificate in the Principles and Practices of Horticulture.

Although I’ve been studying permaculture and regeneration informally, and practicing in this area for many years, it was good to get the chance to dot the i’s and cross the t’s by getting a Permaculture Design Certificate. It was also very beneficial to shadow Jeanette’s RHS training, enabling me to compare and contrast two diverse views on horticultural sustainability and regeneration.

In many ways the worlds of the RHS, the Royal Horticultural Society, and permaculture seem diametrically opposed. Yet, surprisingly, there is a lot of common ground.

Similarly, although permaculturists are often quick to direct criticism at broad scale farming businesses, visits to working farms have opened my eyes to the outstanding progress being made in regenerative, broad scale agriculture. Lessons learnt in these commercial enterprises are not only improving the food system, they offer lessons that can be applied at a domestic scale.

You could say I’ve been applying two of the twelve principles of permaculture. ‘Use and Value Diversity’ and ‘Use Edges and Value the Marginal’. Looking at such a wide range of applications, from back yard permaculture to broad scale regenerative agriculture provides a diversity of viewpoints which I think is essential to support resilient and productive learning.

Avoiding getting caught in a permaculture bubble means working at the edge of that bubble, recognising that this interface, the interface between permaculture and other regenerative systems, could be permaculture’s most productive edge.

So, why no content?

It would be easy to say that all this activity left me with no time to write, film and edit content, but there’s a deeper reason.

I don’t want my life to be controlled by an algorithm.

I have been very fortunate to have been able to support myself in a self employed capacity for the bulk of my working life. The core motivation for that has been clear, I don’t like being told what to do or how to spend my time.

It’s particularly unpleasant to have my use of time dictated by an algorithm, and in reality the current iteration of on-line media means that the opportunity to communicate with large numbers of people is largely dependent on being willing to obey the dictats of the algorithm. YouTube, in particular, imposes a content publishing schedule that can be quite punishing. The mental health impacts of this strict regime has been highlighted many times by established, successful YouTubers, and many have decided to leave the platform entirely.

So, I have taken some time to review how I am progressing ‘The Woodland Orchard’ as a project, including why I am creating content.

The primary conclusion is that I want to post content that has value. The YouTube algorithm may demand the posting of one or two videos a week for example, but I’d much rather post when I feel I have something of value to say or show. If that takes a few months or weeks to prepare to an appropriate quality level then so be it.

I have to accept that the algorithm probably will not be kind, that the frequency of posting will not satisfy the digital boss, but so be it. If it helps someone, if it helps me keep track of my actions and motivates me to learn more and produce a better yield, then that’s fine, and far more important than the numbers of clicks and views.

Of course, I hope that if something has value it will find an audience organically, if not algorithmically.

Going Live - In The Real World.

I’ve spent the best part of 40 years working in live events both working back stage and on stage, including training courses, conferences, live music and theatre.

I feel incredibly uncomfortable in front of a camera, something I’m working on solving, yet absolutely at home on stage in front of 200 people. I really miss live events.

Which is why, along with Jeanette, I’m developing a mobile display for ‘The Woodland Orchard’, and why I am now developing a series of short talks about food forestry and agroforestry in general, and about ‘The Woodland Orchard’ specifically.

The first event at the ‘Riverlight Festival’ in Sleaford, Lincolnshire, UK recently was a great success and very enjoyable.

For our second event, I will be at the ‘Wildlife Day’ at Waters’ Edge Country Park in Barton-upon-Humber, on the banks of the Humber on Sunday July 27th.

I’m looking forward to more face to face conversations, without the algorithm policing who I get to meet. Old school communication.

What’s next for Substack and YouTube?

In the next few weeks I’ll start putting a video together on the food forest redesign. I’ve really opened up the canopy to improve light levels, and there’s already been quite a change. New plantings and a mixed ground cover have been introduced, with varying results. The lessons learnt will feed into the project in the future, and will hopefully help others,

I hope that each Substack article will have a companion video on YouTube, and vice versa. Two pieces of content which strengthen and support each other, enabling a more in-depth exploration of a topic with the objective of bringing value to YouTube and Substack subscribers alike.

This will take time. It’s unlikely that I’ll ever be able to upload this kind of content every week. It will be uploaded when I feel it is ready.

I’ll be honest, that is partly because I really value my time working on the land and don’t want to break off from that to stare at a laptop screen. I work on my own, I don’t have a team of people working with me, so it’s just me with the support of my partner Jeanette.

Of course the algorithm, particularly the YouTube algorithm, will put me at a disadvantage. So I’d be really grateful if you could subscribe if you haven’t already done so, because otherwise I can’t guarantee that you’ll see me again in your feed.

I’m hoping you’ll be a little patient with me, but I certainly hope that you’ll find value in the content when I do post something.

Finally, if you are in the area of any of my live events please do come and have a chat, and if you know of a group or association with an interest in these topics get in touch to see if we can arrange a talk of some kind.

See you soon,

John.

Subscribe now

Leave a comment

Share

However a recent, quite shocking event has bumped another topic up the priority list.

I have planned a series of articles on projects and people that have influenced my thinking here at The Woodland Orchard. These include community, commercial and research projects encompassing a wide range of philosophies and techniques.

However one of those projects, and a key one at that, is now under threat and I feel the need to publish at least a short article on it now.

Agroforestry Research Trust Given Notice To Quit

On Friday 14th March 2025, the Agroforestry Research Trust (ART) posted the following announcement on their Facebook page:

“We’ve been given notice on our 31-year old forest garden by landlords Dartington Hall Trust.

This shocking decision made in the name of money is a clear case of ecological vandalism.”

I am sure that very few people with an interest in permaculture and/or food forests will need an introduction to the work of the ART and ART’s founder and Director Martin Crawford. The influence of this project has been globally significant.

Speaking personally, discovering the Dartington project was the key moment that lead me to begin the transition of my orchard to a food forest. Like thousands of others, this site was the catalyst for my transition to an agroforestry-inspired redesign of my growing space.

Although Martin’s work did not establish the first food forest in the UK, that honour is generally given to Robert Hart’s forest garden in Shropshire in the 1970s, Martin has developed what can be legitimately described as the “best example in the temperate world”.

Established over a 31-year period, this 2-acre forest garden is a crucial demonstration and research site. It has spawned 1,000s of food forests across the world, particularly in temperate zones. It has experimented with novel species and demonstrated the role of forest gardening in carbon capture, food security and landscape restoration. It’s influence has brought food forests into the mainstream influencing organisations such as the RHS and the National Trust.

As Martin says:

the Dartington Forest Garden “inspired the Royal Horticultural Society to diversify their plantings at Wisley, and the National Trust to start its first forest garden at Shugborough.”

Ironically, the influence of the ART forest garden also extends to the Dartington Trust itself.

The Dartington Trusts’ own website holds up the ART forest garden as a key component of the operations on their estate.

The Dartington Trust website states:

“Agroforestry increases the overall resilience of our estate. It can provide us with fruit, nuts, timber, biomass and animal fodder in the same space as other crops, increasing the overall yield from the land, and fosters biodiversity through the creation of habitats and food sources. It also builds the economic resilience of farms, as they’re able to farm their land vertically as well as horizontally.”

They themselves acknowledge the importance of the ART project:

“Our estate has played host to The Agroforestry Research Trust for some years, and encouraging a wider uptake of agroforestry on the estate became one of our priorities”

Surely it is astonishing to see that, while acknowledging ART’s influence on it’s own operations, and specifically stating that “encouraging a wider uptake of agroforestry on the estate” is “one of our priorities”, it now seeks to end that relationship, particularly as there has been no statement on what the future might hold for the forest garden itself.

Whilst I would hope that the Agroforestry Research Trust itself can continue. The Dartington forest garden is not the only ART project, but it is vital to understand that the Darlington forest garden is of crucial importance.

A glance at the timeline of the other projects helps to illustrate why:

• Littlehempston forest gardens and nursery, a 11 acre site which is home to three forest gardens:

  • a small garden started in 2012

  • a medium sized garden, started in 2013

  • a forest garden designed to maximise carbon storage, started in 2019/20

  • a forest garden greenhouse, home to a subtropical forest garden, started in 2016

  • experimental coppice

  • a nursery

• Trials site

  • an 8 acre site, also on the Dartington estate, started in 1997

As you can see, the main Dartington site is the most established project. It has been developed into a self-sustaining diverse and resilient ecosystem which makes it a key demonstration site for what a future based on agroforestry could look like.

The Dartington forest garden is a maturing ecological asset. The lessons to be learned from it are not over. Where else would you find a temperate forest garden/agroforestry site, at this level of maturity, to assist our understanding of sustainable, regenerative food production integrated with landscape restoration?

The notice period on the lease is 1-year. This gives us time to campaign to save the Dartington Hall food forest.

You can find out how you can help via the following link:

https://www.agroforestry.co.uk/save-dartington-forest-garden/

Leave a comment

Share

I also highlighted a statement that is commonly applied to permaculture, but which I’ve started to feel uncomfortable with. Specifically, “Permaculture does not seek to control nature”.

It may be controversial to say this, but I’ve come to the view that permaculture does indeed try to control nature.

This will seem like heresy but let me explain my reasoning, and be reassured that I’ll suggest an alternative statement which may be even more powerful.

Working With Nature

It is clear that permaculture turns away from the idea, central to much of conventional thinking, that we should maximise short term yields without regard to long term sustainability.

Killing pests and diseases in an attempt to remove them from the system is probably the most obvious example of conventional approaches.

In bending the world to our will and placing the human as the sole beneficiary of our actions, conventional systems don’t merely seek to control, they try to dominate.

Permaculture on the other hand seeks a harmonious relationship with nature, but does that mean that there are no controls?

Permaculture co-creator David Holmgren, in an interview by Naomi Riddle for guernicamag.com [1] was asked:

“A lot of people have the impression that permaculture is trying to become part of nature or remove the human figure from nature. Is the aim of permaculture to reduce this human influence as much as possible, in order to let the systems of nature take over, or does there still need to be a level of human control?”

To which David Holmgren replied: 

“Permaculture was really focused on reducing the amount of control and manipulation that comes with rampant industrialization.

“But when compared with the lifestyle of modern couch potatoes, permaculture still requires engaged, physical hard work and manipulation in order to keep a system in a particular state. Yes, the idea was that it would develop a greater degree of self-regulation with positive and negative feedback loops, but humans are still a part of that system.

“It’s more about the manipulation and modification being modest in scale and scope, using the design rules that apply in nature. The whole principle of having to work with nature, rather than fight against it, is not just an ethical restraint. It’s also about realizing you’re not the one in control. Nature is not only a nurturer but also a great destroyer.”

I would summarise this by saying that we aim to moderate our interventions by reducing but not totally removing controls, whilst simultaneously accepting that we are not in control.

However, controls are needed if we are to “keep a system in a particular state”, a state that is defined by the human element.

Getting the balance right, understanding where to draw the line, is something I’ve been striving to understand for a while, but I’ve benefited from important lessons thanks to the unlikely line up of ants, dandelions, Ivy and ladybirds.

The Ants & The Dandelions

I’ve learnt so much from permaculturists over the last 20 odd years. Yet as much as I value their teaching, sometimes the most powerful lessons have come from nature itself.

As a gardening newbie I was learning from what I saw around me. Conventional lawns, orchards and veg plots were pretty common in this semi-rural area so there were many examples to draw on, and no shortage of advice.

I soon fell into some conventional modes of thinking.

During my first Summer with the Orchard, in 2005, I was horrified to see the (relatively) pristine lawn, which I had inherited from the previous owner, burst into colour. In particular the invasion of the yellow peril, the sworn enemy of so many conventional gardeners, had begun. I, as an inexperienced urbanite, decided something had to be done.

I had already started to buy into the idea that ‘chemicals are bad’, so a narrow trowel was chosen as my trusty sword in the ‘Dandelion Wars’. Day after hot summer day I went in search of tap roots to be severed. Buoyed with temporary success, I would return to take on the next wave, then the next, and the next, ultimately returning to the re-emergent first wave as their initial defeat turned out to be only a set back to their growth.

Of course this exercise was not only utterly futile, but demonstrated just how much I had yet to learn.

It was the same with the ants.

In particular the black ant, which appeared to be on a mission to turn this flat, featureless field into a low altitude representation of the Alps. Mowing the grass became impossible in some areas, with the mower being stopped in it’s tracks by the ant mounds, and these irritating little insects made their presence felt running over feet, legs and arms often biting the attacker (me).

Again, I felt compelled to go onto a war footing. Putting pots on top of the mounds to ‘draw the queen’ closer to the surface. Digging out the nests. Pouring boiling water into the mounds.

The summer dragged on as the ‘Dandelion Wars’ gave way to the ‘Ant Wars’ with no apparent signs of success. Disillusioned, I gave up.

Walking away from ‘the wars’ could be described as an act of rewilding, but that wasn’t a term I had yet encountered and certainly wasn’t my goal. I’d just had enough.

And Then, Without Warning: “Victory”

I wish I had kept detailed records back in those days because, if I had, I would be able to tell you when the tides began to turn.

Initially the marching armies of dandelions and ants made good progress. Work as a tour manager/sound engineer took me away from the orchard for extended periods of time, removing any possibility of me restarting the wars. This was lucky, because what happened next was fascinating and educational.

One day I walked into the orchard and realised that the number of ant nests had reduced.

Similarly, one Spring, I noticed that there were very few dandelions.

In fact, if we fast forward to today the number of ant nests are at an all time low, and the majority of them seem to belong to red ants rather than the black. I’m even feeling disappointed at the lack of dandelions and sometimes get frustrated when I can’t get them to spread. I’ve gone from frantically digging them up, to collecting the seed from those that I do have and casting this seed where I would like dandelions to grow, usually without success.

Something had put the system into balance, and that something was not me.

The ants and the dandelions reinforced the message that nature can achieve balance if only we let it. The failure of my attempts at control, and the success of accepting that nature is the one in control reinforced the information I was getting that nature should be given it's freedom.

However, the neglectful approach hasn’t been a complete success.

Brambles, Ivy and Couch Grass have started to run rampant, and regular interventions are going to be needed to keep them under control.

Scab, Brown Rot, Ash Dieback, Plum Moth, Codling Moth, Cankers, and more have become established and are getting worse year on year.

It’s time to put in place some controls, albeit controls with a ‘light touch’.

Ivy and The Ladybirds

For me, one of the most important principles behind the management of The Woodland Orchard is ‘slow change’. The wildlife that inhabit and depend on this space are damaged by sudden change. The felling of the conifer hedging to the East of the orchard taught me that. Something that seems to us like an efficient execution of a job, to a bird or insect seems like a sudden shock. A cataclysmic, life changing event, even when that job is done with care.

I need to control the Ivy, just as I needed to remove the conifer hedging. The Ivy is now spreading voraciously, across grass, up tree trunks and on buildings.

It’s not difficult to remove, of course, but I’m being cautious and thoughtful about it’s removal. Ivy provides valuable habitat, and in The Woodland Orchard it is particularly important for overwintering insects, notably Ladybirds. So my ‘light touch’ control respects that by pruning at the right time and in the right way.

Slow change means just that. A gradual transformation which gives my co-inhabitants of this space the chance to adapt and adjust. Removing Ivy by stripping it off a wall is a sudden, cataclysmic event. Cutting the Ivy at the base, at the right time of the year, introduces a slowly evolving process of change, which gives insects the time to adapt to their new circumstances.

The Ivy will slowly die back. As the inhabitants realise this they can move, and of course replacement Ivy will already be regrowing, replacing the habitat over the next few years before the next cut of the main stem restarts the process.

Cutting at the right time is crucial. I wouldn’t do this at the start of Winter, but at the start of Spring, when overwintering insects are emerging and are likely to already be moving to other locations. I have also provided alternative habitat, such as dead hedges, which can be guaranteed to be stable and undisturbed for extended periods of time.

This year I am going to monitor the progress of the die back, so that I can make better informed decisions as to the timing of future interventions.

So I am controlling the habitat, but I am not dominating the habitat. Slow change, based on considered observations.

It is control, but it is not being in control. A controlling force, but not a dominating force and, by being mindful of my decisions and actions, conscious of how my decisions and actions effect other elements in the system, I can become a beneficial influence on this space.

The Starfish Effect - Acknowledging Our Role as a Keystone Species

The term ‘Keystone Species’ was created by ecologist Robert Paine who in the 1960s discovered that the removal of starfish from the rocky, intertidal ecosystems in Washington State led to a reduction in biodiversity.

He defined the starfish as a keystone species because it has a disproportionately large effect on their ecosystem.

"Its importance," says Paine, "is that it convinced managers and conservationists alike that the ecological impact of single species matters. That is, in order to manage, understand, and restore ecological assemblages, the roles of individual species have to be understood and considered.” [2]

We see this concept applied in rewilding projects, with the introduction or re-introduction of species such as Beavers or Wolves as a means of regenerating a landscape.

In The Woodland Orchard, the human is a keystone species. However, unlike the Beaver or the Wolf, humans can be conscious of that role. We can understand how we fit into the complex interconnections of this space, and we can consciously make the decision to dominate, abandon or control this space. We can assess the impact that our interventions have and decide on the scale, speed and timing of those interventions to ensure that we are a beneficial element.

It is not that we ‘do not seek to control nature’, it’s that we ‘seek to be a beneficial, keystone species’.

That change in emphasis has been hugely beneficial for me, and has transformed the way in which I make interventions in the orchard, and elsewhere.

I hope you’ve found value in this series of articles. It’s helped me to focus my thoughts on these topics and, if nothing else, I now have some potential band names if I ever want to go back to my old job as a tour manager/sound engineer.

What do you think? ‘The Ants and The Dandelions’, ‘Ivy and The Ladybirds’, or ‘The Starfish Effect’? I think the last one sounds very prog rock.

Assuming I don’t hit the road again, I’ll be writing a new series of articles which will look at the development of my permaculture Zone 1, and how and why I intend to become more intentional about growing my own food. This will include some trials I’ve been undertaking on a new concept for a modular growing system in the kitchen garden.

In the mean time, I have published an article explaining why my content creation may be a little inconsistent in terms of timing of posts, and highlighting some of the topics I hope to be writing about in the future. You can find that here.

Thanks again for reading, and for the ever valuable comments, likes and re-stacks. It is all very much appreciated.

See you next time.

Best wishes, John.

References

[1] David Holmgren: A Matter of Scale, Guernica November 22, 2016
https://www.guernicamag.com/a-matter-of-scale/

[2] Office of Research, University of Washington https://web.archive.org/web/20101202030922/http://www.washington.edu/research/pathbreakers/1969g.html

Other Resources

Dead hedging at The Woodland Orchard:

Leave a comment

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth...

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

Thank you, John.

As 2005 transitioned into 2006, Version 1.0 of the orchard settled into its main function. It became my teacher.

The site had evolved over just a few weeks without any overarching vision or design. I had used conventional planting patterns, creating separate, disconnected sections. A coppice, soft fruit area, orchard, and veg plot, with only the location of the coppice hinting at any analysis of energy flows through the site.

To be fair to myself, I was in a rural area where home grown food had been common in the past. The few houses which had retained a home growing space tended to place their veg plots and fruit orchards at a similar location in their properties, at some distance from the house. I was following conventional practice.

It seems to me that, with the exception of the ‘Dig for Victory’ campaign of World War II in which British households were encouraged to turn their lawns into food producing gardens, the convention has been to keep food as far from the home as possible. Flowers and lawns by the door and the aesthetically unpleasing food grown out of sight, either at the bottom of the garden or even on a different site altogether such as an allotment.

However, this land was going to teach me a lesson.

I had created a 55 metre walk from the nearest water tap to the veg plot, and a walk of up to 77m to the furthest of the newly planted fruit trees. The land was about to give me a lesson on energy flow, and the weather would make sure of it. The UK summer of 2006 was the hottest on record. 

At the time I didn’t make a note of how far I walked with water, but today I estimate that I was walking 10 miles a day, including 5 miles with two full watering cans weighing 20 Kg.

A grand total of 10 miles a day, 70 miles per week, 300 miles per month.

It was cheaper than going to a gym, but it was even less fun.

I do recognise that farmers, market gardeners and many others walk further and work harder than 300 miles a month, and regularly carry more than 20 Kg, but this was unnecessary work which I had unintentionally designed into the layout of the site.

Most importantly, the time it consumed was time that could have been given to other, more productive activities.

If you need evidence that the ‘Water Map’ is an essential part of a permaculture design, this is it. In other words, get the water sorted before the planting.

Admittedly hand watering the trees was something that I could have lived with in the short term as this was only really needed in their first season, and the hot weather was just a bit of bad luck.

However, the veg plot was going to be on on-going issue so it wasn’t long before I started an irrigation project, with the aim of moving water from the house into the orchard with minimal effort from me. My routine on those hot summer days became a mix of carrying water and digging trenches.

As time went on the irrigation system ended up getting way more complex and I’ll come back to irrigation in more detail in the future, but for now let’s take a step back.

This was an early lesson on the importance of interconnections between elements. The interconnection between a tap, or other source of water, and a veg plot is obvious, but it clearly didn’t occur to me on day one. I was still in my early permaculture learning stages at this point but these issues lead me to understand that in permaculture the interconnections between elements are far more important than the elements themselves.

In part 1 I mentioned a poll I’d seen on-line, which asked:

• ‘Which permaculture techniques are you using?’

The response options were:

• Water Harvesting (with a photo of a domestic water butt)

• Polycultures/companion planting

• Soil building practices

• Food forest

It is true that I can’t think of any land-based permaculture project that would not include some kind of water harvesting, but I argue that a water butt is not a ‘permaculture technique’.

It is true that water harvesting is a common feature of permaculture projects but, it’s not the water harvesting itself that is permaculture. Rather, it’s how this element fits into the design as a whole and how it interacts with the other elements in the design.

I’ll say more later about how permaculture is rooted in the analysis of water, access and structure, as well as the concepts of zones and sectors. For now I’m going to simply present the idea that permaculture exists in the decision on where the veg plot and the water system are placed within a system of interconnected elements. This is where permaculture happens.

I revisited my experiences of the summer of 2006 during my Final Design Exercise (FDE) on my Permaculture Design Course (PDC). On a site with gradients, unlike my flat land here, I not only took into account the distances for common moves across the site but also the gradient on those routes. Movement between tool shed and the veg beds, movement of chickens from one area to another, movement of compost from the composting area to veg beds. These are all examples of regular and repeated movement which form part of the energy flow across the site.

Distance, gradient, frequency, weights, vehicles, equipment. These are all factors influencing where an element is to be placed and how it interacts with other elements, including the human element.

The emphasis isn’t on the element, it’s on the decision as to where the element fits.

Which is why I argue that there’s no such thing as a ‘permaculture technique’, but there are ‘permaculture decisions’.

Over the years the irrigation system has morphed into a different structure and purpose, and the veg growing has moved into a yard close to the house.

So what was the ultimate fate of the original veg plot?

Ironically, and perhaps symbolically, it became a pond.

In part 4, I’ll take a look at the second quote that inspired this series of articles.

“Permaculture does not seek to control nature”

Thank you for reading this far, and thank you for the brilliant comments that have contributed so much, adding immense value to the series.

A big thanks also to everyone who has restacked posts. This is very much appreciated. Thank you.

See you next time.

Leave a comment

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth...

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

Thank you, John.

One recent on-line poll caused me particular concern. The poll asked the question:

‘Which permaculture techniques are you using?’

The response options were:

• Water Harvesting (with a photo of a domestic water butt)

• Polycultures/companion planting

• Soil building practices

• Food forest

I think there is a real danger that these options mischaracterise permaculture. They certainly reflect a very specific context. I accept that this poll was aimed mostly at the home gardener, but the same question could equally be accompanied by the following options:

• JCB digger

• Tractor

• Road grader

• Concrete mixer

The first list of options reinforces the popular idea that permaculture is simply an ‘earth friendly’ approach to growing food, particularly applied to a domestic setting.

The second list might come as a surprise unless the bigger permaculture picture is understood. The broad scale regeneration of a depleted landscape is a very different context to a small scale food growing system, perhaps implemented in already favourable conditions. A broad landscape in need of regeneration, on the other hand, may need significant earthworks which introduce a ‘shock’ to the existing ecological setting, drawing on significant fossil fuel energy in the short term, but establishing a new foundation from which an accelerated recovery can start.

The key is to recognise that no technique or element exists in isolation, disconnected from the context of the project and the other elements of the system. That is why I don’t believe any technique can be described as ‘a permaculture technique’, even if it is commonly applied in permaculture projects.

The mischaracterisation of techniques in this way is not a new problem. For years I’ve been seeing folks installing a herb spiral or a swale because ‘we’re doing permaculture’ and, as I said in part 1, I can speak with confidence on this because this is the kind of mistake I made myself in my own early learning.

In 2005, when I first walked onto the site of ‘The Woodland Orchard’, I had no experience of gardening let alone permaculture.

The process that I followed over the next few years was one of trial and error, learning as I went.

There wasn’t much in the way of forward planning. The field was simply a flat, grassed area with conifer hedging on three boundaries, a Birch tree in one corner and a neighbour’s Sycamore which overhung part of the site.

On the first day of planting I literally walked into the field with a spade in one hand and an apple tree in the other. I glanced around me, wondered where it should go, looked down at my feet and thought ‘why not here?’.

Over the next few weeks more trees were bought and these were planted with only one ‘rule’ in mind: ‘try not to make straight lines’.

I knew I didn’t want the uniform pattern of a conventional orchard, but a more scattered, ‘natural’ pattern. Single tree by single tree a domestic orchard emerged over several weeks.

(A - Apple, Apr - Apricot, C - Cherry, D - Damson, G - Gage, Pl - Plum, Pr - Pear)

Once the fruit trees were planted, two other key decisions were made.

The first, the location of the coppice, could be described as my first conscious planning decision.

The second, the creation of a vegetable bed, was the first major mistake.

The coppice was a solution to a problem. Due to the height and positioning of the conifer hedging, the South West corner of the field was in full shade for most of the year. This had been the first test of my emerging observational skills which, although clearly limited at this stage, had lead me to see, and feel, a distinct difference in this corner. The air was damper and cooler, and the light levels clearly didn’t lend themselves to highly productive fruit trees.

I hadn’t known anything about gardening before starting the project but, even after a short period of a few weeks, I had started to acquire a real interest in trees. I’d discovered the concept of coppicing, and I realised that the conditions in this corner were perfect for growing tall, straight Hazel rods and Ash poles.

As a former urbanite I was learning to observe and take direction from the land, although it’s a pity the same observation wasn’t applied to the location of the vegetable plot, of which more later.

With the locations of the coppice and the veg bed decided, this left the South East corner of the field empty and, for no other reason than there was a space to be filled, this became the ‘soft fruit area’ with raspberries, gooseberries and currants.

Taking a step back at this point, you can see the influence of conventional growing patterns. The field is split into sections. A coppice, soft fruit area, orchard, veg plot.

Not much to see in the way of stacked functions or guilds. No zoning. No connections. No permaculture inspiration on display, yet.

Or was there?

Perhaps there were hints of permaculture thinking creeping into my unconscious. I had started to use YouTube as my search engine, seeking out advice on tree planting. I had begun to stumble onto the right path. The location of the coppice was certainly influenced by reading my first Bill Mollison quote: ‘The problem is the solution’.

You could perhaps describe this as my first ‘permaculture decision’, and it is no coincidence that this remains the only decision that I am happy to live with some 20 years later.

In part 3: I begin to realise the importance of interconnections between elements. The disaster of the veg bed becomes clear and I’ll say why, although I think there are no ‘permaculture techniques’, I do think there are ‘permaculture decisions’.

Thanks for reading this far, and I hope to see you again in part 3.

Leave a comment

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth...

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

Thank you, John.

As someone with a long term interest in permaculture I should be encouraged. Yet, I find myself feeling very uneasy.

My unease stems from a sense that the core meaning and importance of permaculture is being unintentionally overlooked, as coverage instead focusses on collections of cherry picked and largely disconnected ideas drawn from the permaculture toolkit.

Let’s take two recent examples from experienced garden journalists:

• “Which permaculture techniques are you using?”

• “Permaculture does not seek to control nature”

Spoiler alert - in my opinion:

• there is no such thing as a ‘permaculture technique’

• permaculture does indeed seek ‘to control nature’

I’ll obviously expand on these opinions later but it’s only fair to point out that, at first sight, permaculture can look like a confusing collection of ideas. It’s easy to miss the important, foundational concepts without which permaculture is nothing more than, well, a confusing collection of ideas.

The danger is that if these core foundational concepts are not grasped, and they are not particularly difficult to grasp by the way, it is very easy to lose your way.

I can speak with confidence because this is precisely the mistake I made in my early learning, and the consequences can still be seen 20 years later at ‘The Woodland Orchard’.

Nailing jelly to the ceiling

Defining permaculture can be like trying to nail a jelly to a ceiling.

Even experienced practitioners can struggle to find a short, accurate description, an ‘elevator pitch’ if you like, for permaculture and it could be said that if you ask three permaculturists to define permaculture you will get at least four different answers.

Is this important? Yes, I think it is. As I said earlier, without a sound understanding of the foundational concepts, permaculture becomes a basket of confusing ideas. Focus can be lost and the results, whilst not necessarily damaging, can fall far short of permaculture’s full potential. And let’s be clear. Permaculture has huge potential.

So is there an “official” definition?

The short answer is no. It’s an issue that is addressed in Geoff Lawton’s PDC v2.0, the latest version of the Permaculture Design Course certified by the Permaculture Research Institute.

Perhaps surprisingly even this course struggles to define a single, unifying definition and the course notes themselves include several different versions. It’s particularly revealing that students on the course when asked for a definition respond with a broad range of responses, as illustrated by the following word cloud analysis:

There are clues in the cloud however, and as this series of articles continue I’ll explore those, as well as explaining the mistakes I made (so others don’t have to repeat them) in my early attempts at establishing “The Woodland Orchard” as a permaculture project.

I’ll also address the thorny issue of nature, controlled or uncontrolled.

Thanks for reading this far. See you again in part 2.

Leave a comment

Share

Pay What You Think It Is Worth...

You can drop a donation into the tip jar via Pay Pal by clicking here.

I publish content when I have something that may be of value to others.

My content is free to all but if it has value to you, and you can afford it, I’d be thankful for a contribution to the tip jar.

Thank you, John.

The Woodland Orchard is far from being the most exposed site in the UK but the lack of structures close to the orchard, combined with a slightly elevated location, mean that the primary forces of wind and sun make their presence felt.

With wind warnings yesterday it was no surprise to wake to the sound of the house being rattled by gusts of around 50mph.

Wind is starting to become a problem here. So to add more protection, the design of the site is being modified to add an additional shelter belt to the East and thicken the planting for the woodland area (Permaculture Zone 5) to the North. The tree nursery has a stock of Birch and Rowan which will be planted out this Autumn/Winter to implement that change.

Earlier this year we saw large swings from soaked soils with surface pooling, something that used to be rare on this well drained site, through to bone dry conditions and baking sun which challenged the current irrigation and water storage systems. This highlighted the need to adapt the kitchen garden (Permaculture Zone 1) with increased but variable shade. I’ll revisit the options for implementing this in a future post.

I’m constantly reviewing the design of the site. In transitioning from a conventional domestic orchard to a woodland-like design based on food forest principles, constant observation is key.

Observe. Learn. React.

Thanks for reading.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

My name is John Robinson.

Twenty years ago I began planting an orchard. I walked into a bare field carrying a spade, an apple tree, and a heavy load of ‘haven’t got a clue’. Nervously, I picked a spot, and put the spade into the ground.

Failure came quickly. Unknowingly, I had chosen a difficult piece of land and, with no experience to draw upon, it took me too many years to realise it. It was initially dispiriting and frustrating. I almost gave up, but my instinctive stubbornness soon took over. I was going to learn why.

Why were trees failing? Why were the survivors growing so slowly? Why were they producing bitter tasting fruit?

Was it me? My lack of knowledge? It turned out that, yes, this was part of the problem, but the core of the issue was the soil.

I needed to learn about soil.

I soon stumbled across something called ‘Permaculture’, and a broad landscape of fascintating, overlapping worlds such as ‘Food Forests’ and ‘Regenerative Agriculture’.

I began the transition from my conventional domestic orchard into a regenerative project I called ‘The Woodland Orchard’.

For the past six months I’ve been documenting the progress of this project on YouTube. I’m loving the videography and the editing but I feel the need to produce content more frequently, and without the time-sapping activity of video editing.

I also miss writing. My first paid work came as a school child, working as a freelance journalist. I have an urge to write.

So here I am, writing.

If the idea of The Woodland Orchard appeals, and the written word is your thing, please do consider subscribing.

If you’re also interested in watching progress on video, please do pop over to see The Woodland Orchard on YouTube.

Thank you for reading.

John Robinson
Food Forester