Rewilding Britian - increasing biodiversity

  • Hey Guest, Early bird pricing on the Summer Moot (29th July - 10th August) available until April 6th, we'd love you to come. PLEASE CLICK HERE to early bird price and get more information.

Toddy

Mod
Mod
Jan 21, 2005
38,990
4,639
S. Lanarkshire
His argument is specious. It takes no account of the reality of the rest of the land….that the UK was full of meres, wetlands, water meadows, etc., and now we need those lands. Those uplands that he wants reforested were often the 'transhumance' area of the past wild animals not just our domesticated ones. Most of them never grew trees in the first place.
Until the past couple of hundred years most transport on our islands moved by water….there was a damned good reason for that, we have rather a lot of it for such a small land mass. Now we have road and railways and suburban sprawls.
His 're-wilding' is full of soundbites, but take them apart and there's no whole, and in the end the only way rewilding would work fully is to reduce our island population to somewhere under quarter of a million people.
I am in no notion to be culled to suit the whims of mouthy Guardian columnist, are you ?

M
 

Goatboy

Full Member
Jan 31, 2005
14,956
17
Scotland
Toddy is on the money there. Like was discussed in the last rewilding thread when we talked about the Mo(blot on the landscape) chap. (Sorry have forgotten his proper name but that's what comes to mind when I think of him.)
Yes we can preserve and promote a wild landscape but it's impossible to dial it back to true wilderness without culling of a rather large part of the population.

Sent via smoke-signal from a woodland in Scotland.
 

dewi

Full Member
May 26, 2015
2,647
12
Cheshire
Strong argument? Monbiot?

Nope.. discussed before, and the consensus was the bloke is an idiot who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

You want to introduce foreign species into Britain... so where do you put them? Scotland? Good luck with persuading the locals... but more importantly, where will you source your donor? Canada? Russia? You think they'll seamlessly integrate? And that is the problem... Monbiot doesn't consider, doesn't think, he spouts.

Monbiot is well known for his trips down fantasy lane... the guy is a journalist and strikes up debate about the environment in the same way that Hopkins discusses immigrants. To call it a strong argument is an insult to the people who live in the areas that Monbiot wants to infect with his disease of environmentalism.

There is a reason for 99.9% of all species that have ever existed being extinct. It's about time that cabbage-cuddling, bungling-typewriter-bashing idiots like Monbiot realised... the world has moved on, the landscape isn't his to fantasise about and despite his carrot-munching, cheese-paring, tweed-infested ideas, he doesn't speak for the majority.

Now, how about some grizzly bears in Liverpool? Or some wild hyenas in Chesterfield? Perhaps we could release some pregnant elephants onto Penny Lane?

When you're happy with wild animals that will do harm in your own backyard, back Monbiot in his London castle claiming that we should reintroduce wild animals.... just not in his back garden. After all, they may trample on the chap's ego... and that would devastate the London press to lose one of its darlings! If he does insist on getting close to wildlife, may I recommend someone sends the gent a rattle snake, or perhaps drops him off in the arctic so he can examine the polar bears he spews about so often just that little more closely. If he survives trial by fire, then we can go to the big guns and stick a herd of sheep in his lounge. Lets see him argue against sheep farming whilst he tries to munch on his cous cous with a ewe sat between him and his Apple Mac.
 

GGTBod

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Mar 28, 2014
3,209
26
1
In regards to rewilding i'd like to see them clone the woolly mammoth and sabre toothed tigers and bring them back, loose them on Dartmoor, in the Lake District and the highlands of Scotland :lmao:
 

Bowlander

Full Member
Nov 28, 2011
1,353
1
Forest of Bowland
I do agree with him about some aspects of upland farming. Go onto Magic and see how much farmers are receiving in payments. If they used the cash to farm a lot less intensively then both parties might be happier - farmers would get a better price for produce and we'd see marginal areas improve habitat wise.



Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk
 

boatman

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Feb 20, 2007
2,444
4
78
Cornwall
Ah!, waterways, yes they were the main highways and should be open to use. Most were never closed by act of Parliament and that, along with becoming unavigable, are the only reasons for stopping free use of them. The fishing/riparian argument was a misinterpretation of the law promulgated by vested interests and NEVER tested in court. Not tested because the riparian owner would lose. Even alleged damage by canoeists to spawning grounds has been dismissed.
 
I don't think he's trying to introduce any exotic species that are being spoken about here, that seems a bit facetious. From what he's discussing in this article the main objective of Rewilding Britain is to increase the percentage of tree cover by 4.5%. He doesn't seem to be asking for an alteration of the environment across the entirety Britain where culling of humans would be required. He doesn't even state that all mountain farming should be stopped; he seems to becoming from a zoning angle. Zoning happens every day within our countryside, the difference is simply what each zone is being managed for, whether it's recreational, ecological of for scientific study ect. Monbiot seems to be highlighting that Farming within the mountain environment is being substidised and has turned the mountain environment into a desert of biodiversity. He's calling for some areas to be less farmed and modified against the will of the Chelsea hunter.
Monbiot talks about having carnivores to produce a trophic cascade, I get that this could be contentious and has its implications upon livestock and could move from my back garden of Snowdonia into a more Urban environment; I wouldn't condone that. I believe the more important point he makes, from a humanistic point of view, is how the prevention of soil erosion and reduction of flooding would be of great benefit in our society. Flooding wouldn't miraculously vanish, but it would certainly be reduced. Recreation ecology would surly see an improvement, especially where footpath management, access and soil erosion are concerned.
 

Quixoticgeek

Full Member
Aug 4, 2013
2,483
23
Europe
Now, how about some grizzly bears in Liverpool? Or some wild hyenas in Chesterfield? Perhaps we could release some pregnant elephants onto Penny Lane?

Awesome idea... Livening London up with a small pack of Wolves, or a handful of bears... Can we also introduce the Lynx to Kent please? :p

J
 

Quixoticgeek

Full Member
Aug 4, 2013
2,483
23
Europe
In regards to rewilding i'd like to see them clone the woolly mammoth and sabre toothed tigers and bring them back, loose them on Dartmoor, in the Lake District and the highlands of Scotland :lmao:

Oh come now, everyone knows that the correct natural habitat for the reintroduction of sabre tooth tiger is the City of London. Ditto the Giant ground sloth...

J
 

Toddy

Mod
Mod
Jan 21, 2005
38,990
4,639
S. Lanarkshire
I don't think he's trying to introduce any exotic species that are being spoken about here, that seems a bit facetious. From what he's discussing in this article the main objective of Rewilding Britain is to increase the percentage of tree cover by 4.5%.Forestry commission has literally added millions of acres already He doesn't seem to be asking for an alteration of the environment across the entirety Britain where culling of humans would be required Remove people from the uplands and they don't 'recover', they become even more desertified, grazing deer move in and they breed very quickly. I've field walked the 'abandoned uplands. All it needs is 2degC rise in temperature and unproductive lands become arable. He's making no account of the climatic variation. He doesn't even state that all mountain farming should be stopped; he seems to becoming from a zoning angle. Zoning happens every day within our countryside, the difference is simply what each zone is being managed for, whether it's recreational, ecological of for scientific study ect. Monbiot seems to be highlighting that Farming within the mountain environment is being substidised and has turned the mountain environment into a desert of biodiversity. Again, he's not paying heed to fluctuating climatic temperatures, or the island, and in many areas, very restricted, nature of those uplands. He's calling for some areas to be less farmed and modified against the will of the Chelsea hunter. Who ? we're more inclined to talk of the small Hill farms here, and we have a heck of a lot of upland that already is neither farmed, grazed, or very much walked/skiied on.
Monbiot talks about having carnivores to produce a trophic cascade, I get that this could be contentious and has its implications upon livestock and could move from my back garden of Snowdonia into a more Urban environment; I wouldn't condone that. He's not taking account of our islands. Fauna, especially top carnivore fauna is always on a sticky wicket on islands. Genetic bottlenecks are the least of their worries. I believe the more important point he makes, from a humanistic point of view, is how the prevention of soil erosion and reduction of flooding would be of great benefit in our society. Flooding wouldn't miraculously vanish, but it would certainly be reduced. Would it ? All those trees the forestry commission planted, and every farmer in the land has access to planting grants, and a heck of a lot of them took them up. I know of at least ten who have planted a minimum of 3,000 trees each. They still run hillfarms though. Recreation ecology would surly see an improvement, especially where footpath management, access and soil erosion are concerned. These issues are already being addressed, and anyone who has walked any of the hills sees the constant efforts made to make them accessible and to reduce erosion.
Monbiot takes no account of the absolute certainty that our lands do flood. It is a known issue, we know that saturated land, whether tree covered or not, cannot hold water beyond a certain point. Any Geologist working in the UK knows that and will point out flood plains, water meadows, drainage routes, etc. The biggest issue isn't Monbiot's pet cause, but that humans now use those lands for homes, businesses and and stock. Left clear, and used as seasonal grazing/cropping, the natural system works. Whether we like it or not, people are here in huge numbers, the climate fluctuates, and sea levels, erosion and land uplifting are all part of the reality of life on the British Isles.

M
 
Monbiot takes no account of the absolute certainty that our lands do flood. It is a known issue, we know that saturated land, whether tree covered or not, cannot hold water beyond a certain point. Any Geologist working in the UK knows that and will point out flood plains, water meadows, drainage routes, etc. The biggest issue isn't Monbiot's pet cause, but that humans now use those lands for homes, businesses and and stock. Left clear, and used as seasonal grazing/cropping, the natural system works. Whether we like it or not, people are here in huge numbers, the climate fluctuates, and sea levels, erosion and land uplifting are all part of the reality of life on the British Isles.

M

The upland environment isn't a floodplain, it's the lowlands. The prevention of upland soil erosion would create a thicker land mass to sponge water and hold it higher up,slowing its release into the lowlands. Recently Geomorphologists have acknowledged the potential of water retention and slow release systems as opposed to channeling water as fast as possible towards the sea; which often contributes towards the flooding issues we see today, of course- along with surface runoff and building on flood plains.
 
He's also not asking for people to be removed from the environment, he'd be creating more access in the long term.

Maybe the Lynx could be the solution to keep the deer population healthy and therefore look after our woodlands. Especially since a Lynx takes a Lamb every 2 years or so on average.

The issues of soil erosion being 'addressed' seems to be a constant battle with the most erosive element win nature. They will be relaying paths and rebuilding mountain sides and watching the soil wash away until there is no more soil left.
 

dewi

Full Member
May 26, 2015
2,647
12
Cheshire
Monbiot talks about having carnivores to produce a trophic cascade

And that is why he's an idiot.

As discussed in the previous thread about Monbiot's magic roundabout, there were lessons learned from meddling with nature at Yellowstone Park... or at least lessons should have been learned. Monbiot however, with his strange bed-fellow Chris Packham, seem to think reintroducing species that are long extinct into an island is somehow going to give the environment a boost, but without really arguing why that is. Packham went a stage further than Monbiot by suggesting that we could 'handle' a few maulings and a few human deaths for the sake of reintroducing these creatures, but this pair of nimby numpties seem to forget that the people who live where they want their great experiment do not want it to happen.

Forgive me though, I fail to see how wolves and bears could be classed as exotic, as they did live on this island many moons ago. Wolves are the primary carnivores being recommended by Monbiot and Packham... if the pair of them thought they could make a case for it, no doubt bears would be thrown into the mix for them to coo over, but as I said previously, perhaps if we stuck some wild animals in your back garden... took the Packham attitude of a few maulings and human deaths should be acceptable for the greater good... we'd get a more sensible argument.
 

Uilleachan

Full Member
Aug 14, 2013
585
5
Northwest Scotland
The upland environment isn't a floodplain, it's the lowlands. The prevention of upland soil erosion would create a thicker land mass to sponge water and hold it higher up,slowing its release into the lowlands. Recently Geomorphologists have acknowledged the potential of water retention and slow release systems as opposed to channeling water as fast as possible towards the sea; which often contributes towards the flooding issues we see today, of course- along with surface runoff and building on flood plains.

I live in one of the wettest places in Britain and the reason we have few floods here, on the west coast, isn't due to the slow release from "thick upland mosses" (or bottomless bogs as it actually is), it's due to the relatively short run off from the western watershed, geography and building infrastructure to cope with exceptional wet weather events, the propensity for which is a fact not lost on the local population.

As a keen fisher river water levels is something I keep a close eye on. During prolonged dry periods the vast bogs do dry out, a bit. Sometimes it can take a good deluge to get them filling to the point that river levels rise, so there is some retention capability in the bogs, that has at times; caused me much frustration.

However, whilst conceding that there is some water retention in our local bogs, it must be stressed, there's rain and there's rain and the kind of rain experienced during the worst phase of storm Desmond, 14" in 24 hours (that wasn't the total, just the measure for the heaviest 24 hour period) in upland Cumbria (thats almost west highland proportions ;)) would still need somewhere to go, almost all of it falling on already saturated ground.

One of the most memorable exceptional weather events I remember was during the late 80's when commuting to the A82 on loch ness side daily for work. A sudden thaw in the snow bound hills, a network of hydro lochs being a little too full and 9" or 10" of rain, caused loch ness to rise by 4 foot in a single afternoon, loch ness is the largest volume of standing water in the UK containing twice the standing water of all England and Wales combined. It's some 30k long and 1.5k wide, steep sided and 700 foot in depth.

So when you have something as brim full and on a serious geographical scale, as that, there's no stopping it. The river ness burst it's banks flooding the centre of town and washing away the 100+ year old ness rail bridge. As well as causing lots of flooding around it's shores, I had to help evacuate people from sheltered housing in Fort Augustus having been redeployed from my regular job, such was the emergency.

As others have said, in this country we have a lot of rain. The reason we have issues with flooding is that we drain land and build on it and under invest on drainage capacity.

Re-wilding? The guy wants to get a grip. Where I live (in the middle of bits being earmarked as "wild" land) it's not re-winding we need, it's reoccupying that interests us. If you want wild go to Canada or Russia, the UK is a pastoral environment shaped by 5 or 6000 years + of livestock husbandry. I believe the highlands should be covered in grazing cows, it's the missing cows (that were on the ground for thousands of years before deforestation the clearances (the husbanders) and then) intense over grazing by less environmentally friendly beasts such as sheep and deer that is largely responsible for the degraded state UK upland areas finds themselves in today, particularly so the Highlands.
 
Last edited:
Nov 29, 2004
7,808
22
Scotland
"...Oh come now, everyone knows that the correct natural habitat for the reintroduction of sabre tooth tiger is the City of London. Ditto the Giant ground sloth..."

I'd only get behind that idea of the City of London was fenced off first, a big fence, to keep the tigers and their prey in there. :)
 

GGTBod

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Mar 28, 2014
3,209
26
1
I have never enjoyed camping as much as lying under my tarp hearing wolf packs howling to each other and knowing bears and cougars were out there somewhere in the dark but I can't see how it would work if we had wildlife like that here
 

SCOMAN

Life Member
Dec 31, 2005
2,585
452
54
Perthshire
Especially since a Lynx takes a Lamb every 2 years or so on average.

Where did you get that statistic? I'm guessing it's irrelevant because we don't have lynx in our environment and manage our sheep farming differently from other countries. I'm no farmer, there wasn't many wild things in North Belfast in the 70's and 80's but I am married into sheep folk and have listened to them discuss re-wilding. We are a small nation with a lot of people and we farm intensively even the hill farms are intensive. The lynx may go after deer but hey how fast does a deer run compared to a lamb or in fact a fully fledged tup? On which do you think the lynx is likely to expend it's calories? I am a city boy born and bred, I love the outdoors and I live in a very nice part of rural Perthshire but even I know that re-wilding is all a pipe dream. Introduce this species, breed this species, one guy want's to introduce wolves into Scotland. I watched a report on it I think it was Landward and in my opinion he wanted to introduce wolves so he could then fence an area off and deny the right of access to his land. I think it would be very interesting to see what the land was like before the population exploded as did technology but we cannot reverse the clock.
 

Toddy

Mod
Mod
Jan 21, 2005
38,990
4,639
S. Lanarkshire
The upland environment isn't a floodplain, it's the lowlands. The prevention of upland soil erosion would create a thicker land mass to sponge water and hold it higher up,slowing its release into the lowlands. Recently Geomorphologists have acknowledged the potential of water retention and slow release systems as opposed to channeling water as fast as possible towards the sea; which often contributes towards the flooding issues we see today, of course- along with surface runoff and building on flood plains.

You have walked our upland moors ? Really ? I've spent months walking them from the Lake District to the Southern Uplands…they are sploongin' wet. They are the source of the waters that form our major rivers.
The hills are already acting like major sponges, and there's an awful lot of them where tree growth is impossible. Monbiot is full of soundbites. The problem is that those who don't know any more information believe him, and they then shift the 'blame' for the flooding onto the shoulders of any of those who live and work in the uplands, instead of seeing that the issue is much wider than that, that it actually needs a whole ecosystem revival, and an acceptance that we do live in a sodden wet bit of the world, which at times cannot hold the waters back from the heavens.

The flood plains and the seasonally inundated floodplains are compromised beyond most repair. The Norfolk broads is a classic example of nearly a millenia of dykes, channels, and drainage works as the people tried to deal with the waters.
They still flood.

Monbiot isn't thinking widely enough…..that's wide not wild.

M
 

ged

Bushcrafter (boy, I've got a lot to say!)
Jul 16, 2009
4,980
14
In the woods if possible.
... Monbiot isn't thinking widely enough…..that's wide not wild.

Well apart from being surprised by the vitriol in some of the posts here I have to say that this Monbiot bloke raises some interesting points and they do seem to me to, er, cover some ground.

This one seems, er, on the money:

"When essential public services are being cut, giving €55 billion a year from the public purse across the EU to landowners, while helping to destroy both human communities and ecological resilience is surely as unsustainable politically as it is environmentally."

That's over a hundred quid a year for each and every man, woman and child in the EU. Monbiot might couch his arguments in provocative terms, but we can all see the habitat destruction that contemporary farming practices have caused and continue to cause, and we can all hear the whining from the NFU mouthpieces every time farmers' interests are so much as examined, never mind in any way threatened. Anyway this might be a bit too political for BCUK so I guess it will have to stop.

There are indisputably too many of us on the planet, but I don't think Monbiot was advocating a cull of humans. On the other hand we really do need to reduce the population.
 

BCUK Shop

We have a a number of knives, T-Shirts and other items for sale.

SHOP HERE