glasshouse
Member
- Location
- lothians
The rewilding con
- Thread starter glasshouse
- Start date
- Location
- Lincolnshire
Well said. Exactly right in my view.
Simon Chiles
DD Moderator
- Location
- Surrey/ Kent Border, UK
I also agree. There’s some land that I used to do the drilling on that is in the process of being re wilded. Every year it’s ploughed to see if any rare plants start to grow, the reality is it’s just got straggly thistles and ragwort growing. There’s signs up proclaiming how it’s so much better now for the environment than the previous intensive farming. I can’t help thinking that when it was farmed it regularly yielded 10 tonne/ha wheat and that rapidly growing crop would have sucked far more co2 out of the atmosphere than the weeds that grow there now.
- Location
- Devon
A great article, thanks for sharing.
Could you also share/credit the name of the publication please?
Could you also share/credit the name of the publication please?
- Location
- Somerset
Ploughed every year for rewilding? Does that not somewhat defeat the point?
Steevo
Member
- Location
- Gloucestershire
I will take a wild stab in the dark at…
Home. - Scottish Field
𝕏 Search Search LATEST POSTS Scottish Terriers fall out of favour with dog lovers as puppy numbers plummet News A recognisable mascot for some of the UK’s most iconic brands, it was once the most popular dog breed in the country. But now the… Ancient faces brought back to life at Perth Museum...
www.scottishfield.co.uk
- Location
- Owaka, New Zealand
Yes, rewilding in the British context seems to be about abandoning management, not altering it.
Such a shame because it could easily be just as, if not more productive in terms of what can be harvested per square mile.
Really it seems just another avenue to remove human liberties and rights, "govern me harder, big boy" sadism for a large fraction of proponents.
The closest they'll get to nature is via the TV in their room, poor b@stards.
That is the resultant poverty: people get so polarised that they miss half their lives to be right about the other half
Such a shame because it could easily be just as, if not more productive in terms of what can be harvested per square mile.
Really it seems just another avenue to remove human liberties and rights, "govern me harder, big boy" sadism for a large fraction of proponents.
The closest they'll get to nature is via the TV in their room, poor b@stards.
That is the resultant poverty: people get so polarised that they miss half their lives to be right about the other half
- Location
- Lincolnshire
I grow autumn sown cereals as do most of us. The more I consider it, the more I think it’s actually fairly optimum on a number of fronts if done in an environmentally sensitive way and yes there’s always room for tweeks and improvements there.
I usually direct drill and if I can make that work then it’s a low cost low carbon establishment method that leaves the soil protected all year round. By leaving the chopped straw in place I’m returning about 2 ton per acre organic matter and associated carbon every year and most importantly saving the need to import those cereals and all the carbon implications that go with that. I think that’s pretty good without having to resort to an ultra radical ecological rewilding project that as the article says might not actually sequester as much carbon, will suck in imports and destroy a fairly low footprint local employment model. As said in the article the kind of tourism that displaces farming is very high carbon indeed with the travel and generally luxurious facilities required.
Another aspect I’ve often thought about is food supply for “nature” for want of a better term. Most of the wildlife we have here actually benefits from the spin offs of productive farming rather than the very low output of natural regeneration. You get many more birds on our livestock pasture and cereal stubbles than you do on the rewilded area across the road. There’s simply more nutrition available here, in cereal chaff trails, agricultural weed seed, worms and insects in managed soils, whereas once the nitrogen based nutrients have washed out of the rewilded area there’s little available protein source in particular even if there’s a fair amount of carbon.
And I do like spring beans as a crop in the round. They might not pay very well stood alone, but the pollinator benefit, the under storey of weed seed that’s left on the stubbles in the following winter wheat crop, and the nitrogen fixed are all big side benefits. Yet they receive no support whatsoever. OK, I’m not a man that’s into that kind of interference using subs but it’s an observation.
So. I’ll carry on with a fairly traditional combinable crops rotation doing as little tillage as is reasonably practical. I might try lupins again as my break and reinstate the cattle to use the protein and add some magic to the straw as manure.
And I don’t think I’ll be far wrong at that.
The mouths to feed are still here. They aren’t going away any time soon and if we scale back production here it only needs to scaled up somewhere else. What’s the point in that?
I usually direct drill and if I can make that work then it’s a low cost low carbon establishment method that leaves the soil protected all year round. By leaving the chopped straw in place I’m returning about 2 ton per acre organic matter and associated carbon every year and most importantly saving the need to import those cereals and all the carbon implications that go with that. I think that’s pretty good without having to resort to an ultra radical ecological rewilding project that as the article says might not actually sequester as much carbon, will suck in imports and destroy a fairly low footprint local employment model. As said in the article the kind of tourism that displaces farming is very high carbon indeed with the travel and generally luxurious facilities required.
Another aspect I’ve often thought about is food supply for “nature” for want of a better term. Most of the wildlife we have here actually benefits from the spin offs of productive farming rather than the very low output of natural regeneration. You get many more birds on our livestock pasture and cereal stubbles than you do on the rewilded area across the road. There’s simply more nutrition available here, in cereal chaff trails, agricultural weed seed, worms and insects in managed soils, whereas once the nitrogen based nutrients have washed out of the rewilded area there’s little available protein source in particular even if there’s a fair amount of carbon.
And I do like spring beans as a crop in the round. They might not pay very well stood alone, but the pollinator benefit, the under storey of weed seed that’s left on the stubbles in the following winter wheat crop, and the nitrogen fixed are all big side benefits. Yet they receive no support whatsoever. OK, I’m not a man that’s into that kind of interference using subs but it’s an observation.
So. I’ll carry on with a fairly traditional combinable crops rotation doing as little tillage as is reasonably practical. I might try lupins again as my break and reinstate the cattle to use the protein and add some magic to the straw as manure.
And I don’t think I’ll be far wrong at that.
The mouths to feed are still here. They aren’t going away any time soon and if we scale back production here it only needs to scaled up somewhere else. What’s the point in that?
FonterraFarmer
Member
- Location
- Waikato, New Zealand
Its kind of scary when you think many a person in their day to day life think its normal to be in the concrete jungle yet never hear birds chirping and flying , rabbits eating , pheasants at play to seeing vast area's of land that look the same today as 200,400,600,800 or 1000 years ago.
Where did it all go wrong???
- Location
- Lorette Manitoba
The human race got lazy. Easier to import food and ignore the fact it has to be grown somewhere by some one. It’s a foregone conclusion that most just buy their food. If the city folks had to grow half their food the f eckers would starve. As farmer we nurtured them into buying our goods so we I turn could get a living but the tide turned and we became their servants. Yes we for the most part live the lives we have chosen which is more than many can say but for what we few give to so many we get shafted. If anyone wants to rewild their land I say go ahead. For every acre that’s taken out of production give another farmer that’s willing to try and feed the world a better chance of making a good living. I’m just grateful not everyone wants to hear birds singing in spring or smell fresh cut grass Makes our little piece of paradise special for us.
i thought you were thinking of packing up growing crop's! plan's seem to change everyday to fit the agenda
You could not make it up
Google is refusing to bring it up in any searches.
- Location
- Owaka, New Zealand
Yes or taking heed of the opinions of someone with tussocks planted in their garden, and a grocery list, about "sustainability" in the context of a food system.
You'd need to eat a whole lotta cheese just before bedtime to come up with this sh!t
FonterraFarmer
Member
- Location
- Waikato, New Zealand
You'd be amazed how quick a kg block of cheese disappears here, nearly as quick as a half gallon of port!!!
- Location
- Lincolnshire
I was undecided but I’m reaching a decision. Just been laying out my thought processes on here. I’m not really saying there’s a right answer that applies to everybody, as everybody’s situation is different, but in my case I might as well carry on farming for the time being. I feel it necessary to justify it to myself not just in monetary terms but in moral terms.i thought you were thinking of packing up growing crop's! plan's seem to change everyday to fit the agenda
I’ll add one other thing.
I gave up the sugar beet and although on balance given my situation, soil types etc it was the right thing to do for a variety of practical reasons, it is not a good feeling to “shrink the business” and so the shrinkage stops here. Relinquishing human endeavour of centuries back to wilderness goes right against my grain.
Simon Chiles
DD Moderator
- Location
- Surrey/ Kent Border, UK
I agree, their logic though is that if they plough it they’re hoping to dig up seeds of rare plants that might be buried in the soil. I can sort of understand the thinking, however the only seeds I’ve seen growing are thistles and ragwort.
That’s not the bit that really annoys me though, it’s the pious notice telling the general public that it’s so much better now for the environment than the nasty farming that went before.
- Location
- Lincolnshire
As a nation I feel we’ve been selling off the family silver for most of my lifetime and living on capital. Instead of improving industries that are inherently messy or difficult we’ve simply abandoned them then turned to imports. That’s simply not right and for it to culminate in farming being turned from a wealth creating life supporting industry to one largely reliant on taxpayers money to produce nothing really tangible just seems entirely wrong to me.