Rewilding

[Kevtherev]

Remember a local historian telling me about a ‘land bridge’ basically the tops of hills and mountains that folk travelled along instead of the valley bottoms and hollows which would of been heavily occupied by wolves and bears going back in time.
Hence the word land bridge.
Tree less hill tops

 

[Dry Rot]

Two things occur on reading that, firstly that sea levels change; and secondly that if it were the case that salt prevented growth, there wouldn't be forests along the coasts mentioned, and others such as in Western Canada and the tip of South America, being at similar or more extreme latitudes.

The forestry guys had your second point covered. Some species, they say, are more tolerant of salt than others. My boss had planted a little experimental plot which came in for some derision. Apparently, all the statistics for forestry trees are published in the the scientific journals. I took great delight in telling my mainland friends that we'd just felled half the forestry. Now we just had the one tree! Don't shoot the messenger, take it up with the Forestry Commission!

 

[Dry Rot]

When I was reading up prior to deciding what I would plant, I remember seeing some trees that are known to be "salt hardy".

I don't remember which ones specifically as it didn't apply to me, however not long after I was talking to a man who had trees planted on family land about a mile in from the coast and all of several species had died in it, which was subsequently attributed to the salty air.

Yes, apparently the salt "spray" (I think they call it) can be blown for miles. Not surprising really as horizontal rain was normal!

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

I’ve always thought that rewilding shouldn’t need any human intervention, for it truly to be as described nature should be left to its own devices.
But you are right Kev, it should start with human intervention, removing all trace of human existence, probably even including things like hedges before letting nature take its own course.

Then again, I also think this whole rewilding malarkey is a load of Bollox.

Really what this rewilding malarkey is, is the removal of human intervention and nothing more. To properly rewild to before humans got here, would mean reintroduction of elephant, rhino and a whole host of nasty predators, of which the wolf would be one of the least scary.

The human urge to cut, burn and control is a very strong one which is difficult to resist; and when you think what might be lurking in a few bushes 20m away in a really wild situation, you can understand why.

 

[Kevtherev]

Really what this rewilding malarkey is, is the removal of human intervention and nothing more. To properly rewild to before humans got here, would mean reintroduction of elephant, rhino and a whole host of nasty predators, of which the wolf would be one of the least scary.

The human urge to cut, burn and control is a very strong one which is difficult to resist; and when you think what might be lurking in a few bushes 20m away in a really wild situation, you can understand why.

Usually @Tarw Coch picking damsons

 

[Cab-over Pete]

Let’s say a farm is being managed and farmed well under a contract or tenancy. That farm land has a value in line with its productive ability.

Then the landowner decides to rewild it. The contractor or tenant loses out, the local community and economy does too and the land, once reverted to whatever nature wants, is surely devalued.

Where is the sense in that for anybody, most of all the landowner?

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

Let’s say a farm is being managed and farmed well under a contract or tenancy. That farm land has a value in line with its productive ability.

Then the landowner decides to rewild it. The contractor or tenant loses out, the local community and economy does too and the land, once reverted to whatever nature wants, is surely devalued.

Where is the sense in that for anybody, most of all the landowner?

Financially? None, unless the public see fit to pay for an enhanced ecosystem.

But the landowner might prefer to live in or oversee a more natural environment compared to an agricultural one maybe?

 

[Tarw Coch]

Let’s say a farm is being managed and farmed well under a contract or tenancy. That farm land has a value in line with its productive ability.

Then the landowner decides to rewild it. The contractor or tenant loses out, the local community and economy does too and the land, once reverted to whatever nature wants, is surely devalued.

Where is the sense in that for anybody, most of all the landowner?

Did I not say earlier, it’s a load of bollox

 

[Bury the Trash]

Really what this rewilding malarkey is, is the removal of human intervention and nothing more. To properly rewild to before humans got here, would mean reintroduction of elephant, rhino and a whole host of nasty predators, of which the wolf would be one of the least scary.

The human urge to cut, burn and control is a very strong one which is difficult to resist; and when you think what might be lurking in a few bushes 20m away in a really wild situation, you can understand why.

exactly it Wouldnt need human intervention to remove human intervention
Different reasons for slash and burn i guess, ie the American Indians (if youre allowed to call them that thes days ) burnt the woods down to allow vegetation and ultimately grassland to come back so the Buffalo would thrive and they could hunt them as being their lifeline. They didnt have to buy grass seed either and the buffalo rotaionally mob grazed so it all fitted together nicely.

and People are part of the wild as well remember ,some wilder than others

 

[Ffermer Bach]

Let’s say a farm is being managed and farmed well under a contract or tenancy. That farm land has a value in line with its productive ability.

Then the landowner decides to rewild it. The contractor or tenant loses out, the local community and economy does too and the land, once reverted to whatever nature wants, is surely devalued.

Where is the sense in that for anybody, most of all the landowner?

I think that is what happened to @CopperBeech and I believe the landowner is not short of a bob or two, so devaluing the land is not an issue I guess.

 

[Ffermer Bach]

Financially? None, unless the public see fit to pay for an enhanced ecosystem.

But the landowner might prefer to live in or oversee a more natural environment compared to an agricultural one maybe?

or mix in the set with the likes of Ben Goldsmith!

 

[steveR]

Remember a local historian telling me about a ‘land bridge’ basically the tops of hills and mountains that folk travelled along instead of the valley bottoms and hollows which would of been heavily occupied by wolves and bears going back in time.
Hence the word land bridge.
Tree less hill tops

A perfect example not far from you Kev.

The Kerry Ridgeway. Used for centuries as a drove route, but as part of an ancient communication network, it will pre-date the droving. Where I lived as a young Lad in the 70's*, there was a similiar route running across the top of the hill, coming out of Wales.



Near Onibury.

 

[steveR]

I think that is what happened to @CopperBeech and I believe the landowner is not short of a bob or two, so devaluing the land is not an issue I guess.

Will all depend on how the HMRC look in the future, on derelict land that is not being farmed.

 

[Tarw Coch]

But the landowner might prefer to live in or oversee a more natural environment compared to an agricultural one maybe?

Rich man’s prerogative , but we live in a country that is nowhere near self sufficient in food, every productive acre taken out of production for the rich man’s pleasure will have to have the food it produced replaced from elsewhere on the planet which may not have as high environmental farming standards as we do here………..despite how bad some think we are

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

Let’s say a farm is being managed and farmed well under a contract or tenancy. That farm land has a value in line with its productive ability.

Then the landowner decides to rewild it. The contractor or tenant loses out, the local community and economy does too and the land, once reverted to whatever nature wants, is surely devalued.

Where is the sense in that for anybody, most of all the landowner?

Let me ask you the same question in a different context.

Do you think it's a good idea to cut down and burn the Amazon and other rainforests to create farmland?

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

Rich man’s prerogative , but we live in a country that is nowhere near self sufficient in food, every productive acre taken out of production for the rich man’s pleasure will have to have the food it produced replaced from elsewhere on the planet which may not have as high environmental farming standards as we do here………..despite how bad some think we are

I would say that the biggest reason for land being taken out of production is lack of profitability in the farming sector.

If there was a real demand for the food and commodities we produce, or at least a functional market, I doubt abandonment (which is really what we're discussing) would be such a thing.

And I don't think you can apply that argument to large areas of upland grazing when so much of UK sheep meat is consumed abroad.

 

[Ffermer Bach]

I would say that the biggest reason for land being taken out of production is lack of profitability in the farming sector.

If there was a real demand for the food and commodities we produce, or at least a functional market, I doubt abandonment (which is really what we're discussing) would be such a thing.

And I don't think you can apply that argument to large areas of upland grazing when so much of UK sheep meat is consumed abroad.

so a lot of meat is exported and our population eats lots of carbs instead, and the diabetes increases we are seeing are the result of this! Madness!

 

[Humble Village Farmer]

so a lot of meat is exported and our population eats lots of carbs instead, and the diabetes increases we are seeing are the result of this! Madness!

We should eat some of the 800,000 horses.

 

[Kevtherev]

A perfect example not far from you Kev.

The Kerry Ridgeway. Used for centuries as a drove route, but as part of an ancient communication network, it will pre-date the droving. Where I lived as a young Lad in the 70's*, there was a similiar route running across the top of the hill, coming out of Wales.



Near Onibury.

Yes a very good example
@Cab-over Pete tells me not to walk down into them there wooded valleys as wolves can rip the arse out of your trousers.

 

[Kevtherev]

Rich man’s prerogative , but we live in a country that is nowhere near self sufficient in food, every productive acre taken out of production for the rich man’s pleasure will have to have the food it produced replaced from elsewhere on the planet which may not have as high environmental farming standards as we do here………..despite how bad some think we are

Not only land lost to rewilding projects etc but all the acres lost to new housing and retail parks.