Missing Wildlife - Lost Species That Re-Wilding Could Return to Britain's Hills

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.

The UK has some of the lowest biodiversity on earth. Most of our uplands are ecologically barren, but they don't have to be. So what animals are missing, and how might the landscape familiar to climbers and walkers change if they returned? Sarah Ryan looks at some key species, and the impact they could have on renewing lost habitats.

Read more

3
 Phil1919 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

What are we waiting for? Inspiring article.

1
 dread-i 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Don't neglect the impact on human activity. The reintroduction of wolves would have a positive impact on fell race times. The faster runners, running faster. The slower, more nutrient dense, runners being eliminated from race results, so improving the overall average time.

On a slightly more serious note.

If the moors are being farmed for grouse, there is little possibility of rewilding by animals that might dent their profit margin. Anything that that impacts farming, would also face massive pressure. See how we treat foxes and badgers. I don't know what the answer is, but it needs to come sooner rather than later.

2
 toad 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Our wildlife is depleted all the way down. The big, charismatic species are the popular ones, but it's just as important to consider species who don't win the beauty contest,like adder. Long persecuted and missing from many parts of England, many of the last records are depressing- "found beaten and decapitated"....

We're also immediately faced with a backlash as soon as species numbers increase - otters, eagles, even beavers being culled under licence when they have barely re-established

1
 Xharlie 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Honestly, one of the best reads I've enjoyed on this site, ever. Bravo. Sehr gut. Et cetera.

1
 Tony Buckley 20 Feb 2023
In reply to Phil1919:

You think?

I applaud the article for raising awareness and for including references at the end; but think about it a little more.

What are you willing to give up for this?  How many paths are you going to close, how many crags are you willing to declare off limits, how many Munros and Corbetts are going to become inaccessible for a generation or more?

I'm not saying that rewilding is a bad thing, far from it, but go into it with your eyes open.  The smaller steps along this road, reducing the impact of sheep, deer and grouse, protecting peat moorland, mitigating the effects of climate change are all controversial enough and progress is slow; but they need addressing first.

The bears and bison and the like might, eventually, make a difference but they won't be seen in my lifetime nor, I suspect, the lifetime of the youngest user of these forums.  If you think differently then I'd get those hills climbed as quickly as you're able.

In the meantime, let's start making faster progress with those small steps.

T.

Sorry to be a pain and all.

33
 toad 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Also worth looking at what Derek Gow has been saying for years. Experienced and knowledgeable land manager and environmentalist, but he doesn't mince his words!

Should add he's been instrumental in many beaver reintroductions

Post edited at 11:40
 Doug 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

For anyone interested in more about this topic I'd recomend some recent books by veteran conservationist Roy Dennis, eg 'Cottongrass Summer' or 'Restoring the Wild: Sixty Years of Rewilding our Skies, Woods and Waterways'.

Or see https://www.roydennis.org/  (includes details on the above books)

In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

We have a hell of a lot more diversity than we did 20,000 yeas ago, and we are not hungry, in fact the nation is overweight, excepting UKC correspondents of course.

Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 169, August 2017, pp. 148-172.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277379117302068?via%3Di...

DC

31
 LakesWinter 20 Feb 2023
In reply to Tony Buckley:

It's not like any mountains in the Italian alps are closed and they have plenty of wolves wandering around in them. I don't get your whole mountains closed argument. Could you expand on that please?

1
 Doug 20 Feb 2023
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

20 000 years most of Britain was under ice, but terrestrial Britain today has less species diversity (& for many species, lower abundance) compared to anytime after the ice melted & vegetation recolonised the land some 10 000 years ago. I suspect the same is true of the seas around Britain (see eg Callum Roberts' 'The Unnatural History of the Sea').

 Harry Jarvis 20 Feb 2023
In reply to Dave Cumberland:

> We have a hell of a lot more diversity than we did 20,000 yeas ago, and we are not hungry, in fact the nation is overweight, excepting UKC correspondents of course.

> Quaternary Science Reviews, vol. 169, August 2017, pp. 148-172.

Not remotely relevant. 

 wiwwim 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

I would personally support bring back wolves and bears.  The main reason being that without them, rock climbing is actually pretty pointless....

7
 Lankyman 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

For centuries the Highlands have been an ecological desert, mismanaged for deer and grouse for the sole benefit of a tiny, wealthy minority. The sooner we change this and reintroduce the haggis the better.

 Phil1919 20 Feb 2023
In reply to Tony Buckley:

The challenge is to be a bit bolder. I've watched a beaver family change a wood in the Lakes in an enclosure over the last 4 years. The shallow pond/lake they have created is transformational. If we don't start encouraging nature based solutions, our 'lifetimes' aren't going to be very long. Rewilding will make the great outdoors so more resilient.

Post edited at 15:53
 Dave Garnett 20 Feb 2023
In reply to toad:

> Our wildlife is depleted all the way down.

Especially the turtles.

 whitlew 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Loved this article and its sentiments. We've lost so many of our habitats that we're in danger of forgetting what's missing. 

I find it depressing that this issue doesn't receive greater political exposure. People often describe food security and nature restoration as mutually exclusive. Here in Scotland I see subsidised destruction in the form of grouse, sheep and deer moorland, none of which do anything to really feed or employ us.

How do we place more responsibility on these exceedingly wealthy caretakers of ours?

1
 toad 20 Feb 2023
In reply to Dave Garnett:

Very well done. My cap is doffed

 nastyned 20 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

The Rewilding Network are here: https://www.rewildingbritain.org.uk/rewilding-network

 LeeWood 21 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Inspiring article. But Britain hasn't got so much space for reforestation. The overall picture created is that of reforesting outside of our usual living spaces and thoroughfare.

Before consideration of the larger mammals it would be exciting to have roaming our hills, we should think of reforming the food chain bottom-up; ie. soil, insects, fish, reptiles and birds - which all the larger creatures depend upon. Farmland 'reforesting' would restore the maze of hedgerows and tree-lines.

The most basic step towards re-wilding is reform of agro-chemical usage: pestcides, herbicides and articifial fertlizers all wield a death dealing blow to life-forms at the base of the food chain pyramid.

 AlanLittle 21 Feb 2023
In reply to LeeWood:

> Britain hasn't got so much space for reforestation.

Except for all the upland areas that aren't naturally deserts created by deer or sheep farming monocultures.

1
 Harry Jarvis 21 Feb 2023
In reply to AlanLittle:

> > Britain hasn't got so much space for reforestation.

> Except for all the upland areas that aren't naturally deserts created by deer or sheep farming monocultures.

And making the transition from those monocultures to a more diverse environment is not a trivial exercise. There is so much more to rewilding than simply reintroducing a few iconic mammal species, and there are many vested interests to address. I would be interested to see an economic analysis of the costs and benefits of the required transitions. Like it or not, many landowners will not make the necessary changes to the ways they manage their land if they do not gain something in return, and for many landowners, I suspect this would need to be a financial incentive. 

1
 mrphilipoldham 21 Feb 2023
In reply to AlanLittle:

Indeed, we should be thinking more down the lines of fewer sheep for the food chain and reforesting their land before ‘farming’ or taking a crop of wild boar instead. It’s possible to produce meat from the forest, it doesn’t need to be fluffy sheep in barren fields. Perhaps not to the same density, but if we all need to eat less meat anyway then it seems an obvious and decent solution. Farmers then also have the option of taking a timber crop for further income.. they’re always being told to diversify Makes timber more available, cheaper, and greener to build with than concrete. 

Post edited at 09:18
1
 Howard J 21 Feb 2023
In reply to whitlew:

>Here in Scotland I see subsidised destruction in the form of grouse, sheep and deer moorland, none of which do anything to really feed or employ us.

The 2500 people employed in deer stalking might disagree.  It is estimated to bring £105m-a-year, most of which remains in the Scottish economy.  A similar number are employed in grouse shooting.

This is not to say that biodiversity cannot or should not be improved, but there are many aspects to consider.  Most land in the UK is in some form of economic use and generates income for all parts of society, not just the landowners.  Major rewilding of the sort the article envisages would require enormous economic and social changes, and these are probably the biggest challenge.

17
 Dave Garnett 21 Feb 2023
In reply to toad:

> Very well done. My cap is doffed

You're very welcome!

 Phil1919 21 Feb 2023
In reply to LeeWood:

Yes, good point about pesticides, herbicides and artificial fertilizers. Aren't there also too many farm animals. If we ate less meat as a nation wouldn't this free up large amounts of land to use less intensively. Going by train the length of the country shows me how land is given over to rye grass, sheep and cattle. 

3
 Dave Garnett 21 Feb 2023
In reply to toad:

> Our wildlife is depleted all the way down. The big, charismatic species are the popular ones, but it's just as important to consider species who don't win the beauty contest, like adder. Long persecuted and missing from many parts of England, many of the last records are depressing- "found beaten and decapitated"....

I completely agree.  I'm lucky enough to have a bit of land that I'm gradually rewilding but it's complicated.  In most areas I think we should focus more on saving the declining species we have, rather than spectacular reintroductions, which will probably require artificial exclusion of other species until they have established viable populations (we already have otters predating beaver kits, for instance).  I think the Forest of Dean wild boar are here to stay but that's an example of a species that can look after itself in the current environment given half a chance.  Even allowing red squirrels to expand their range (which should be a simple issue compared to reintroducing lynx!) is proving to be really difficult.  Maybe pine martens will be the answer - and would have predicted that?

There was a piece on R4 the other day about reintroducing wild cats on Dartmoor.  Aside from giving due consideration to the potential impact on other species already struggling, the big problem with wild cats is stopping them interbreeding with feral domestic cats.  Are we ready to exterminate these (and mandate the chipping and neutering of all domestic cats allowed to roam)?   

What worries me about the article is that it's selling a utopian dream of the widespread reintroduction of apex predators and huge herbivores, using Lithuania as an example:    

"Of course, there are important differences in history, geography, population… these are different countries after all. But being in this similar but very different landscape made me wonder what the British countryside might once have looked like."

So, it admits that this a dream of what Britain might have looked like, perhaps when it had a population comparable to that of Lithuania - less than 3 million.  It's about a quarter of the size of UK, but so the equivalent UK population would be about 17 million.  I know we're about to go through a demographic bulge and our population is likely to fall but if it gets to less than 20 million any time soon a lot of rewilding will take care of itself.    

In my own case, I was keen to plant a lot more trees, but while the land wasn't being grazed by sheep it developed into rough pasture, much of it very wet.  I dug a large pond, which was colonised almost immediately by frogs, toads, smooth and palmate newts, three species of dragonflies, great diving beetles... species that were already around but starved of habitat.  The icing on the cake is that we've had grass snakes for the last few years.  We also have tawny owls, barn owls, kestrels and buzzards regularly hunting and, recently, reed buntings, sky larks and grasshopper warblers. 

Now, if I plant too many trees, the grasshopper warblers will certainly stop nesting.  Even as it is, curlews (of which there are a lot locally) won't nest in this field precisely because it isn't sufficiently grazed.  We don't have badgers (oddly, but we don't) but there are foxes, which is bad news for ground nesting birds. 

To be clear - I'm in favour of a fundamental reprioritising of conservation in both our wild areas and our agricultural areas, but talk of bison, lynx and wolves will only harden the opposition to any significant change.  Let's give pine martens, sand lizards and smooth snakes a chance first. 

Post edited at 11:37
 whitlew 21 Feb 2023
In reply to Howard J:

The association of deer management groups disagrees (https://www.deer-management.co.uk/deer-management-scotland/value-to-the-sco...)

"There were 2,532 jobs in deer management of which 1,372 were known to be paid and 966 unpaid. The full-time equivalent is estimated at 845 FTEs."

I'm not advocating for banning it as an industry, but currently the amount of damage it causes grossly outweighs the limited economic benefits.

3
 LeeWood 21 Feb 2023
In reply to Dave Garnett:

> talk of bison, lynx and wolves

it's just a dream ! the apex predators in particular are extremely shy of humans - effectively they would need locking away in a reserve, which would sacrifice land access to walkers, paragliders and maybe mountaineers

6
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Great article and beautiful pictures. I'd love to be out and about knowing that a lynx might be hiding in the brambles!

Unfortunately when a (rubbish) zoo near me let a lynx escape a few years ago the farming lobby insisted that it was hunted down and slaughtered asap. The amount of resources thrown into the search would put your average MRT search for a despondent to shame. Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that unless there's a significant change in the laws surrounding land ownership and land management there won't be any chance of significant rewinding. It's interesting to think about the case of Scotland - large estates and land ownership didn't exist as we know them today until just a couple of hundred years ago. If we want large tracts of wild land with thriving ecologies we're going to need to take them back off shooting estates.

Post edited at 13:42
 Dave Garnett 21 Feb 2023
In reply to pancakeandchips:

> Unfortunately when a (rubbish) zoo near me let a lynx escape a few years ago the farming lobby insisted that it was hunted down and slaughtered asap. 

An overreaction for sure, but also because of how few vets are trained and qualified to dart potentially dangerous animals.  It's almost always quicker to get hold of a police firearms team. 

 Bob Kemp 21 Feb 2023
In reply to whitlew:

Also worth remembering that not all deer management jobs would disappear, and there would be new jobs arising from the rewilding itself. 

 simes303 21 Feb 2023
In reply to Xharlie:

> Honestly, one of the best reads I've enjoyed on this site, ever. Bravo. Sehr gut. Et cetera.

I agree, a great read.

Si.

 Robbie Blease 21 Feb 2023
In reply to Dave Garnett:

> I completely agree.  I'm lucky enough to have a bit of land that I'm gradually rewilding but it's complicated.  In most areas I think we should focus more on saving the declining species we have, rather than spectacular reintroductions, which will probably require artificial exclusion of other species until they have established viable populations (we already have otters predating beaver kits, for instance). 

So I can see where you're going with this kind of thinking but it's not necessarily the most efficient way of doing things and can actually be harmful in some instances. I think the point of reintroducing 'impressive' species is more the impact they have on the ecosystems they're in rather than just having them there to look good. Our ecosystems are evolved around different species to different extents. Big species often have big impacts. A lot of conventional conservation being done at the minute is often too focused on a few species, sometimes to the detriment of others. China for instance has had biodiversity drops in some areas managed only for the panda for example. 

This is a huge and complicated topic and ecology is very much about the bigger picture and you often can't predict what processes you are missing because of a certain species not being present. For example a reintroduction of wolves to yellowstone changed the shape of the rivers there: good documentary on youtube. 

youtube.com/watch?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q&

I think the Forest of Dean wild boar are here to stay but that's an example of a species that can look after itself in the current environment given half a chance.  Even allowing red squirrels to expand their range (which should be a simple issue compared to reintroducing lynx!) is proving to be really difficult.  Maybe pine martens will be the answer - and would have predicted that. 

You've kind of proved my point here. The conventional conservation methods and intense effort sometimes won't have anywhere near the success compared to the introduction of one or two key species. Bison are great but for the herbivores we don't really need to go that far. As the article has explained domestic cattle can do a pretty decent job and are a fair bit easier to come by. Predators are a very different story. We have no large predators here and ecologically that is a massive problem. 

BTW, wolves are expanding into many densely populates European countries. The only reason they've not got here yet is the channel... 

Good books demonstrating this effect(probably already listed) are rebirding (slightly misleading name) and Wilding

 Robbie Blease 21 Feb 2023
In reply to Dave Garnett:

Forgot to add. Great effort by the way with your land! We need more of this kind of thing just as much as larger scale projects. Best of luck! 

 benmoelwyn 21 Feb 2023
In reply to Tony Buckley:

Reintroducing these species would certainly change our experiences in the uplands, but look at the Alps or Eastern Europe - there are wolves, bears, chamois etc. but locals don't live in fear - rather they get to enjoy a much richer landscape.

 mountainbagger 21 Feb 2023
In reply to Robbie Blease:

> Good books demonstrating this effect(probably already listed) are rebirding (slightly misleading name) and Wilding

Wilding by (the aptly named) Isabella Tree? It's a great book and I was reminded of it when reading this fantastic article. It's definitely worth a read and does answer some of the questions people will undoubtedly have.

But I have to say again, what a wonderfully written article! Thanks Sarah and UKC!

1
 toad 22 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Meanwhile at the NFU conference, Therese Coffey doesn't sound like a fan.

 "Coffey managed to rouse one round of applause in her hour-long appearance, when she told farmers that the government is not prioritising species reintroductions of animals such as sea eagles, lynx and wolves."

In reply to toad:

This 'government' can't even look after the nature we already have. Or the humans. They lack any kind of ambition or vision for anything at all really, so it's hardly surprising that re-wilding isn't on their radar. I'm just hoping they're a soon-to-be-extinct species, then we can all move on.

 Phil1919 22 Feb 2023
In reply to toad:

I don't think a day in the hills would rouse much excitement in Ms Coffey. She just doesn't seem very passionate to me.

 Phil1919 22 Feb 2023
In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:

20 months or so is feeling like a long time to wait.......

 foxjerk 22 Feb 2023
In reply to wiwwim:

> I would personally support bring back wolves and bears.  The main reason being that without them, rock climbing is actually pretty pointless....

if you can't solo 5c to get away from a bear are you even a climber?

 Dave Garnett 22 Feb 2023
In reply to Phil1919:

> I don't think a day in the hills would rouse much excitement in Ms Coffey. She just doesn't seem very passionate to me.

I think anywhere much steeper than Suffolk would be more excitement than she could handle.

 izzznet 23 Feb 2023
In reply to Tony Buckley:

Also, this is all going to be off-limits anyway - if we allow it. So, good luck getting to the Munros when you're trapped in your 15 minute city  (https://unfccc.int/blog/the-15-minute-city).

People need to realise that the environmental agenda (and I'm all for clean, unpolluted and wild environments) has been hijacked and repackaged under "climate goals" and "sustainability" to mean something radically alien to what most people think it means. 

If anyone doubts what's I'm talking about I would suggest: 

UN-Backed Banker Alliance Announces “Green” Plan to Transform the Global Financial System
https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/11/investigative-reports/un-backed-banker...

And this:
Who is really developing and implementing the policies currently being marketed as “sustainable development”:  https://rokfin.com/post/100648

What we need in this country is a genuine green revolution in farming (away from the industrial and toward proper soil management, and high density yield permaculture etc ...) and within that context I'm all for re-wilding.  What I'm concerned about is the attempt to make nature off-limits to the plebs while bankers commodify every living thing on planet earth.

UKH should take this seriously, as they won't exist in the ESG world currently being sold to us. 

25
 Harry Jarvis 23 Feb 2023
In reply to izzznet:

> Also, this is all going to be off-limits anyway - if we allow it. So, good luck getting to the Munros when you're trapped in your 15 minute city  (https://unfccc.int/blog/the-15-minute-city).

I couldn't find anything in this link that suggests travel beyond 15 minutes is not going to be permitted. I may have missed it - could you point me to the relevant text? 

 Ramblin dave 23 Feb 2023
In reply to izzznet:

Nice first post! I'm glad that you, a genuine climbing enthusiast and definitely not a bot, decided to join UKC in order to post weirdo conspirabollocks in a basically unrelated thread.

 deepsoup 23 Feb 2023
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

It's conspiracy theory bunkum.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/22/are-15-minute-cities-...
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/feb/16/15-minute-city-planni...

I think izzznet is just our regular serial sock-puppeteer burning a 'sleeper' account to take a slightly different tack to his usual anti-vax malarky.  He'll be gone soon I expect, just give the mods a minute to catch up..

Post edited at 10:28
1
 Ramblin dave 23 Feb 2023
In reply to deepsoup:

> I think izzznet is just our regular serial sock-puppeteer burning a 'sleeper' account to take a slightly different tack to his usual anti-vax malarky.  He'll be gone soon I expect, just give the mods a minute to catch up..

It seems to be the new evolution of anti-vax malarky, to be honest. It's become pretty obvious that the permanent lockdowns and social credit systems that the conspiracy loons were insisting were an inevitable consequence of anti-covid measures haven't actually happened, and rather than pause to reflect on this they've all moved on to insisting that permanent lockdowns and social credit systems are an inevitable consequence of some traffic calming measures in Oxford.

1
In reply to Dan Bailey - UKHillwalking.com:

> This 'government' can't even look after the nature we already have. Or the humans. They lack any kind of ambition or vision for anything at all really, so it's hardly surprising that re-wilding isn't on their radar. I'm just hoping they're a soon-to-be-extinct species, then we can all move on.

Sadly I think that re-wilding is firmly on their radar as a wedge issue similar to migration or trans rights. They don't give a toss, they just see something which can be used as a populist tool to garner support from farmers and countryside alliance types. In mid Wales re-wilding has become a dirty word for many people, partly because of missteps by local organizations, and that comment from Coffey seems to confirm that the Tories have recognised this and want to use it.

 Howard J 23 Feb 2023
In reply to benmoelwyn:

> Reintroducing these species would certainly change our experiences in the uplands, but look at the Alps or Eastern Europe - there are wolves, bears, chamois etc. but locals don't live in fear - rather they get to enjoy a much richer landscape.

I'm not sure that's entirely true:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50473443

The Alps and Eastern Europe are a very different environment to the UK, with larger areas of remote wilderness where it is easy for these animals to avoid the comparatively few recreational visitors.  Even so, there are conflicts where they seek easy pickings around humans or livestock.  Anyone who has walked or climbed in the US knows that bears there are a serious threat - read Bill Bryson's A Walk in the Woods for a perspective on this.

The UK has small pockets of open country, most of which is in some form of economic use and with humans and livestock nearby. I can envisage that a few areas in the more remote parts of the Scottish Highlands could perhaps be restocked with some of these larger animals, but they would probably have to be fenced in and it would be no more than a token gesture. Bears or wolves in the Lake District or Peak? Not a chance.

The British landscape is the result of thousands of years of human occupation.  Rewilding to the extent proposed by this article would require huge social, economic and cultural changes. Some will argue that we need to make these changes to survive, but it will not be easy.

Smaller changes are possible, especially where they can show economic benefits which can have a monetary value put on them.  The introduction of beavers for example has not only improved habitat but has improved hydrology and reduced the risk of flooding, which has a tangible economic value.

2
 Myr 23 Feb 2023
In reply to Howard J:

Hardly any of the Alps or Eastern Europe has population densities as low as in the uplands of the UK (https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/figures/population-density-2). Every country in Europe except for the UK and Ireland has wolves, and they inhabit areas with population densities similar to lowland England.

The issue isn't population density per se, it is how successfully conflicts with livestock farming are managed. This is likely to be more of an issue for wolf than for lynx and bear, which are shy forest-dwellers and therefore less likely to come into contact with farm animals. 

 timjones 23 Feb 2023
In reply to pancakeandchips:

I listened to a podcast with an American conservationist earlier this week.

His view was that we focus on re-introducing "mega fauna" far too much in the UK when we should look at protecting what we have such as the wildcat which is one of the rarest cat species in the world.

The underlying principles of the proposed new ELMS schemes are probably correct in most respects, sadly the delivery is as woefully slow.

 Harry Jarvis 23 Feb 2023
In reply to timjones:

> The underlying principles of the proposed new ELMS schemes are probably correct in most respects, sadly the delivery is as woefully slow.

If I recall correctly, you're a farmer yourself. Can I ask what changes you might be making to your current framing practices, and how that might affect the viability of your farm? This isn't a confrontational challenge - I'm interested to know the views of someone at the sharp end. We hear lots of theory, but less practice. 

 profitofdoom 23 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Bring back dinosaurs. I'd love to see them rampaging through Canary Wharf. Just see JURASSIC PARK for how to do it 

In reply to timjones:

What was the podcast called? I'd be interested to listen to it.

 Myr 23 Feb 2023
In reply to timjones:

> I listened to a podcast with an American conservationist earlier this week.

> His view was that we focus on re-introducing "mega fauna" far too much in the UK when we should look at protecting what we have such as the wildcat which is one of the rarest cat species in the world.

It doesn't need to be either or; there is already plenty of wildcat conservation work going on both in the UK and on the continent. Unfortunately that body of work probably started a few decades too late in Scotland.

 Doug 23 Feb 2023
In reply to Howard J:

There are wolves within a 100 km of Paris, there was a story in the French press recently of one being killed by a vehicle near Fontainebleau. They are also in parts of Belgium.

 Jordan-L 23 Feb 2023
In reply to profitofdoom:

Not quite dinosaurs but they are actually planning to reintroduce the mammoth in parts of Siberia using Jurassic Park style techniques. 

Apparently, they have found mammoth DNA in the melting permafrost that is good enough to use to create an embryo. They used an Asian elephant to fill in the gaps missing in the DNA then have used an Asian elephant surrogate to carry the mammoth. If I recall correctly they've already done this and the there is an elephant somewhere that is pregnant with a mammoth right now. 

They explained that having mega fauna such as mammoths helps conserve the permafrost by compacting the ground or something like that. 

Listen to this podcast if you want it explained better than I have: https://open.spotify.com/episode/13qqtOVLeqIw5yyGRyPAq0?si=QvRXM7K6SJy_D4Cq...

In reply to Myr:

It's also worth noting that an ecosystem which is healthy enough to support mega fauna would also be far richer than what we have currently in the UK. If the environment in the Highlands could support populations of lynx or wolves then wildcat populations would likely benefit as well.

 izzznet 23 Feb 2023
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

With regard to 15-minute cities (and CBDCs for that matter) and liberties lost, past, present and future:

---------

1933 : April 25
The Law against Overcrowding in Schools and Universities limits the number of Jewish students in public schools.

1933 forum comment:  "I don't see where it says they'll take our property"

1939 : February 21
The Decree concerning the Surrender of Precious Metals and Stones in Jewish Ownership requires Jews to turn in gold, silver, diamonds, and other valuables to the state without compensation.

---------

It's called incrementalism.  Like "two weeks to flatten the curve", or "95% effective" or "extremely rare" (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X22010283 : an avg or 12.5 per 10,000 = 1 in 800)

That kind of thing. But I'm sure you're correct and Larry Fink at Black Rock and Mark Carney et al have truly embraced environmentalism and have our best interests (and our ability to wander and enjoy their great outdoors) at heart.

I just take freedoms and rights seriously and regard many of the pretexts for restricting them as dangerous. Clearly not everyone feels the same way. But that's okay - it's ostensibly a free country. 

16
 Myr 23 Feb 2023
In reply to pancakeandchips:

> It's also worth noting that an ecosystem which is healthy enough to support mega fauna would also be far richer than what we have currently in the UK. If the environment in the Highlands could support populations of lynx or wolves then wildcat populations would likely benefit as well.

Indeed, and wildcat like at least some woodland in their territories, so woodland regeneration is likely to expand the area of suitable wildcat habitat.

 Harry Jarvis 23 Feb 2023
In reply to izzznet:

So nothing in your previous link says anything about restricting movement? A simple yes or no will suffice. 

 Tobes 23 Feb 2023
In reply to UKC/UKH Articles:

Any mention of Burbot? Freshwater fish related to the cod. Last recorded catch/sighting in the 70’s, susceptible to pollution….

 mrjonathanr 23 Feb 2023
In reply to izzznet:

> The Law against Overcrowding in Schools and Universities limits the number of Jewish students in public schools.

> 1933 forum comment:  "I don't see where it says they'll take our property"

Interesting quote. Which forum was that, then? Facebook?

 timjones 23 Feb 2023
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

In our case we farm livetsock at low stocking rates on permanent pastures with a wide range of species based on the assessment of a botanist that has been visiting over the last year it would probably be unwise to make many changes.

For us the problem is that they are already phasing out the old BPS payments and it looks likely that the new schemes will force us to make chamges for little or no ecological or environmental gains. There appears to be no option  to reward those that maintain what is already there.

Interestingly I was at the conference when Therese Coffey spoke yesterday, the next session was a very well received panel session with 5 farmers who are already adopting more holistic practices to benefit both wildlife and their own businesses.  Sadly that is not as newsworthy as a politician getting their foot in their mouth and offending the audience.

 timjones 23 Feb 2023
In reply to pancakeandchips:

> What was the podcast called? I'd be interested to listen to it.

I'm afraid that my phone has just died so I can't check at present but it was  a Cicerone podcast featuring someone who was working on an environmental education project in Yosemite.  Hopefully that will alow you you to search it out.

 Harry Jarvis 23 Feb 2023
In reply to timjones:

> In our case we farm livetsock at low stocking rates on permanent pastures with a wide range of species based on the assessment of a botanist that has been visiting over the last year it would probably be unwise to make many changes.

> For us the problem is that they are already phasing out the old BPS payments and it looks likely that the new schemes will force us to make chamges for little or no ecological or environmental gains. There appears to be no option  to reward those that maintain what is already there.

> Interestingly I was at the conference when Therese Coffey spoke yesterday, the next session was a very well received panel session with 5 farmers who are already adopting more holistic practices to benefit both wildlife and their own businesses.  Sadly that is not as newsworthy as a politician getting their foot in their mouth and offending the audience.

Thank you for that. It does seem that the Government hasn't quite worked things out very well. One further question if I may? How would food security be affected if the more holistic practices you refer to were adopted across the whole farming industry? One of the responses I have seen made to counter the benefits of improved environmental stewardship is the issue of reduced yields and outputs. Presumably this varies according to the type of farming? 

 mondite 23 Feb 2023
In reply to timjones:

> His view was that we focus on re-introducing "mega fauna" far too much in the UK when we should look at protecting what we have such as the wildcat which is one of the rarest cat species in the world.

Wildcats have the problem of mixing with domestic cats. Be very hard to reintroduce them and not have them as hybrids shortly after.

There is also plenty of focus on protecting other species but that doesnt tend to get the headlines. Something ongoing at the moment is protecting and reintroducing pine martins to some areas not least since they would help control grey squrriels.

Personally I would have doubts about wolves and bears.

I think some targeted use of bisons and the like in wildlife reserves (to replace the current highland cattle) but it is limited.

Lynx though would be low risk since most of our sheep are on open ground which lynx aint fond of and could help address the deer problem.

Beavers could have clear benefits for flood management.

 Toz 24 Feb 2023
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

Take a look at the 'Feeding Britain' report published by the Sustainable Food Trust. It aims to answer exactly this question and has shown that we can easily match current levels of self-sufficiency under a switch to regenerative (i.e. more sustainable) farming practices, providing that we make certain dietary changes.

For example, a massive reduction in consumption of chicken is recommended due to the associated demand for grain-feed (which takes a lot of space to grow and is high-input in terms of artificial fertilizers/pesticides), and an increase in pulse production/consumption owing to their role in building soil fertility. Consumption of beef (grass-fed) would remain relatively similar, based on the importance of ruminants within low-input rotational farming systems (a lot of the 'cow-bashing' within the media is so wide of the mark, and is based on data from practices far less sustainable than the pasture-based systems of the UK, which, when done right, can support incredible biodiversity).

For full transparency: I work with SFT and am from an organic beef farming background!

Post edited at 07:57
 Harry Jarvis 24 Feb 2023
In reply to Toz:

Thank you for that. I have to admit the first thing that leapt out at me was the statement 'providing that we make certain dietary changes'. Given the current hoo-hah about the lack of certain non-seasonal vegetables, basing a policy on nationwide voluntary dietary changes seems a little optimistic.

That's not to say it's not the right thing to aspire to, but in a world where consumers have high expectations with regard to availability, there is a lot of work needed in order to make the necessary change in direction. 

 timjones 24 Feb 2023
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

I think the most honest answer to how such a change would impact on food security or self sufficiency must be I don't know because there are so many variables.

The impact would probably be less severe with changes in consumer preferences, another interesting fact from an earlier session was that our sugar production equates to ten times the RDA for our entire population.

 Harry Jarvis 24 Feb 2023
In reply to timjones:

> I think the most honest answer to how such a change would impact on food security or self sufficiency must be I don't know because there are so many variables.

A very fair answer. 

> The impact would probably be less severe with changes in consumer preferences, another interesting fact from an earlier session was that our sugar production equates to ten times the RDA for our entire population.

Do we export a lot of sugar? 

 timjones 24 Feb 2023
In reply to mondite:

> I think some targeted use of bisons and the like in wildlife reserves (to replace the current highland cattle) but it is limited.

That could be a really tricky mix with the public when it comes to access!

> Lynx though would be low risk since most of our sheep are on open ground which lynx aint fond of and could help address the deer problem.

That is where human efforts to influence get tricky, deer are not always a problem.  In our area roe deer and hares are becoming more common to the delight of most local farmers, we really need to allow such populations to stabilise before considering the reintroduction of new predators.

 jimtitt 24 Feb 2023
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

> Do we export a lot of sugar? 

Apart from the obvious production of ethanol sugar is used industrially in some wierd stuff, it's mixed into concrete as a setting-retarder for example.

 Harry Jarvis 24 Feb 2023
In reply to jimtitt:

> Apart from the obvious production of ethanol sugar is used industrially in some wierd stuff, it's mixed into concrete as a setting-retarder for example.

Good grief, I never knew that! Thank you - you learn something every day. 

 timjones 24 Feb 2023
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

> Do we export a lot of sugar? 

I suspect that we eat an awful lot of it.

 Toz 24 Feb 2023
In reply to Harry Jarvis:

Yes, those questions around shifting diets and consumer preferences are perennially thorny issues. I don't know the answer. Although the preferences of the average person doing their weekly supermarket shop are perhaps more dictated by top-down influence that is initially apparent.

To clarify (in case my framing of the topic was misleading), the proposal I mention isn’t to show that we can feed ourselves entirely from UK produce, or to suggest that as something to which we should aspire. Rather, it's to illustrate that switching to more sustainable farming methods does not have to equate to a reduction in our existing levels of self-sufficiency/greater reliance on imports, a point of debate often central within land-sparing vs. land-sharing debates between conservationists and farmers.

 mondite 26 Feb 2023
In reply to timjones:

> That could be a really tricky mix with the public when it comes to access!

I did say limited.  Used to live in Canterbury and rode regularly through the woods where they have introduced the bison.  Several pretty large woodlands close to each other and once you got past the carparks/easy access often didnt see anyone. So can see how it works there but yes it would end up being very limited access.

Although that said considering how many of the local reserves are used for dog latrines might not be a bad idea extending it out.

> That is where human efforts to influence get tricky, deer are not always a problem. 

True but thats one advantage of using predators. If there isnt the prey then the predators move or die. Which is why I think wolves and the like have very limited potential for reintroduction due to potential for conflict, Lynx though basically pose zero threat unless someone managed to find a den and annoy a mother.

 timjones 27 Feb 2023
In reply to mondite:

> True but thats one advantage of using predators. If there isnt the prey then the predators move or die. Which is why I think wolves and the like have very limited potential for reintroduction due to potential for conflict, Lynx though basically pose zero threat unless someone managed to find a den and annoy a mother.

Is it smart to wipe out recovering hare or roe deer populations as long as no humans are hurt?

2

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...