Climate fear is big business? That sounds like a knee jerk reaction.
Of course, people are profiting from pretending to be green. But that does not mean climate change isn't a real significant problem, does it? You've seen the movie Don't Look Up, right? Hint: it's not actually about meteors.
You said very few people are trying to protect wildlife apart from shootists, I said that’s clearly bollocks, which it is, then you said that wildlife fans could buy/rent land and I showed that they do, now you say it’s not enough! Your argument is based on sand.
So lots of people are doing it but just doing it badly?
There’s 2 million hectares managed for shooting. Nothing ‘green-lead’ comes close. Even the RSPB only have 130,000 hectares.
Are all those 2 million hectares wonderful biodiverse landscapes or is some of it grouse desert?
🥱 Read Mary Colwels book and decide about the Grouse Desert thing.
Even though not A1 habitat for them- most of our waders would be extinct without them.
Maybe that’s why the green lobby hate them- they’re proof of the lie they need to peddle to exist 🤣🤣
That's one type of land, mostly in the uplands, very cheap to buy the RSPB and wildlife trusts will obviously not focus on a habitat that is not in danger. You are arguing round in circles.
First you said it wasn't done, then you said it's not done enough, now you say someone else does more. All this shows is that you were wrong but do not have the good grace to admit it.
Wildlife trusts are better but the staff woeful. We joined the boy up when he was about 5. The guy asked him what an animal was on the poster. Boy tells him it’s a stoat. Guy says he’d love to see one one day 🤦🏻♂️ We didn’t bother renewing the following year 🤣🤣
How can you exist in the UK and not have seen a stoat. I see about 3 a week crossing the road 🤣🤣
Very few if any people are doing the ‘direct rent to land owner’ model I’m describing. Happy to be proved wrong.
(And yes- the folk joining the RSPB would be able to achieve so much more by clubbing together and renting 5 acres of land for a set of bird hides on their local wheat prairie or silage monoculture. )
From:
I keep hearing ‘biodiversity loss’ mentioned as a critical symptom of ‘climate change. Yet there are very few people outside the shooting community doing anything practical about it.
To:
Very few if any people are doing the ‘direct rent to land owner’ model I’m describing
How can you exist in the UK and not have seen a stoat
Is this a serious question? If so it shows a disconnect with the real world and society that is utterly flabbergasting.
You said people don’t own land- I said they could rent some like what shooterists do innit 🤷🏻♂️ 🤣
Yes? Excluding what I see around the estate, I see at least three stoats and maybe one or two weasels when I’m riding my motorbike or driving other places 🤷🏻♂️
(Saw one yesterday on what I guess is the Fosseway when riding the TET)
People are too busy listening to Radio 4 or Newsbeat telling them the earth is boiling to notice what’s around them 🤣🤣
And yes- the folk joining the RSPB would be able to achieve so much more by clubbing together and renting 5 acres of land for a set of bird hides on their local wheat prairie or silage monoculture. )
5acres would cost what £20 000 to rent a year? RSPB membership is £5 a month.....
No!!! We rented 11 extra acres last year at £100 an acre.
That bag of mix seemed to be mostly phacilea 🤦🏻♂️🤣
Was buzzing with….
Blah blah insect Armageddon blah blah 🥱🥱🙄🙄
Excluding what I see around the estate, I see at least three stoats and maybe one or two weasels when I’m riding my motorbike or driving other places
You do realise most people in the UK are not able to visit shooting estates don't you? Many don't have cars or motorbikes and live in cities.
Even at 10mph on a bicycle- you can get somewhere to see nature on a day out.
But then London for example is more biodiverse than most non-shot arable farms 🤣🤣
14,000 species of wildlife IN LONDON 🤷🏻♂️😀
My old boss rents a 2000 acre estate in Hampshire WITH rent for two cottages and farm buildings for £50,000 a year so no- that’s not an accurate reflection of what a few keen birders would need to pay a farmer to grow some wild bird plots….
That’s talking about renting the farm to run an agricultural business….
That bag of mix seemed to be mostly phacilea
Probably more to do with soil nutrient level than the composition of the seed mix
Possibly and maybe it was better suited to last years drought?
Will take some pics of this years in a minute. They’re insane 🤣🤣🤣
My old boss rents a 2000 acre estate in Hampshire WITH rent for two cottages and farm buildings for £50,000
That's a lot of £5 a month
Maybe that’s why the green lobby hate them- they’re proof of the lie they need to peddle to exist
Umm so you think EVERYTHING the green lobby says is a lie? See, it's fine to debate certain points and identify where things are being manipulated for certain interests - that's really important. But when you claim it's all a lie, that's where you destroy your credibility.
Firstly, there is no one single green lobby...
Blah blah insect Armageddon blah blah
Whaaat? Scientists are actually studying insects all over the world and reporing serious decline, but you think that your one field that has buzzing noises overturns all that study? Seriously?
My local woods also buzz, but I understand that a) that's just one local wood and b) I have no idea what's making that buzzing sound and what sort of diversity that represents. You're no better than the idiots on the green side, by the look of it.
We were talking about 5 Acres with no buildings or cottages 😉
🤩 🤩
Th point is a simple one of logic Molgrips that I’ve stated lots of times. If, where habitat is restored, insect (or any other species of plant or animal) numbers return to healthy numbers- it’s clearly a land use problem not a climate one.
Still going to be a lot of £5 a month especially when the cost of management is added and that's before we discuss the likelihood of a farmer allowing one of his fields to be rented out and be completely altered.
I did think about starting it as a business. I’ll find the plots, do the work and build the hides.
You’d probably find a few acres on most farms for free. I have a 2ac plot of self seeded wheat here that has had literally zero establishment costs this year. You could plant five acres by hand with volunteers.
Back to Dr Woods’ channel for inspiration…
Isn’t the conservation expression “build it and they will come”?
Like at Knepp:
https://knepp.co.uk/rewilding/wildlife-successes/
But if Cljmate Change was at fault, this wouldn’t happen 🤷🏻♂️
funkmasterp
We need to worry about other species though. We’re losing life at an alarming rate. Lots of these creatures are a part of much wider, delicate systems. We have a duty of care as the supposed intelligent species. Look what happened when vultures started dying off in India. Replaced by feral dogs that started attacking people. Nothing worse than a vacuum in nature.
So do you think this is worse than climate change and how do you personally define worse?
Maybe you could explain how many human deaths from climate change are acceptable to save the vulture? (just to the nearest 100 million I'm not asking for an exact number)
Th point is a simple one of logic Molgrips that I’ve stated lots of times. If, where habitat is restored, insect (or any other species of plant or animal) numbers return to healthy numbers- it’s clearly a land use problem not a climate one.
LOCALLY, for sure. But there are ALSO global climate related issues. Biodiversity and habitat loss is MUCH bigger than your field in the UK somewhere. You can restore a lot of species, but can you restore them all? Is something going to be missing, because a plant it depends on is now much rarer than it was, because the climate is hotter or wetter or whatever? This is the kind of thing scientists are interested in, not just 'look, insects'.
Listen. To. Scientists. They know their stuff, that's the whole point.
Molgrips
Climate fear is big business? That sounds like a knee jerk reaction.
Of course, people are profiting from pretending to be green. But that does not mean climate change isn’t a real significant problem, does it? You’ve seen the movie Don’t Look Up, right? Hint: it’s not actually about meteors.
Once again you are mixing something most people don't give a crap about with climate change.
Possibly, but a lot of anti-green comment is also driven by knee-jerk ‘it’s all bollocks’ type reactions
Erm that's because it's all bollox due to conflation like you you did above ^^^
The anti-green sentiment is driven by lies and conflation of something that people are genuinely worried about (climate change) and things they perhaps should in an ideal world care about but don't give a crap.
Every lie just makes more people either switch off to both or do something they think helps climate change but doesn't.
Nature is in constant flux. We can recreate whatever we like (assuming it’s not extinct). It’s more about the cost… 💰
Arrrrgghhhhhhh GGRRRRRRRRRR ssssss
This thread is driving me to distraction the crap circular pronostications and dodgy utube clips.
The use of Wickpeadia as evidence.
The whole thing has got completely pointless.
Sorry rant over I will go back to sleep.
So do you think this is worse than climate change and how do you personally define worse?
Maybe you could explain how many human deaths from climate change are acceptable to save the vulture? (just to the nearest 100 million I’m not asking for an exact number)
it is part and parcel of climate change. It’s not a one or the other choice. The vulture decline was used as an example of what can happen when a vacuum is created in nature. It was actually caused by humans giving drugs to cattle. I think all life should be protected where possible. We could do that if there was the will to do so, but there isn’t so we’re likely ****ed and have ****ed a lot of other species in the process.
We can recreate whatever we like
No we can't, traditional hay meadow vegetation for examples cannot be recreated in its entirety just something similar but but not the same
It was actually caused by humans giving drugs to cattle.
Ie. Land use not climate change.
Nothing to do with land use. It was religion.
No we can’t, traditional hay meadow vegetation for examples cannot be recreated in its entirety just something similar but but not the same
Hay meadows were created once before right?
They didn’t always exist.
Of course you won’t have the site specific genetic purity but then I don’t hear rewilders telling me their imported beavers can’t still cut down a UK tree??
There’s a kind of liberal self loathing that puts our ancestors methods above our own.
Farmers once destroyed an existing habitat (probably scrubland) to create a hay meadow….
Nothing to do with land use. It was religion.
They were wild cows were they?
Nope, but the meat isn’t consumed for religious reasons and the corpses are left to rot. The drug used kills the vultures that feed on the meat. Feral dogs replaced the vultures and began attacking people and disease also spread. So no, not land use. I would give you a link but it’s to the Guardian so clearly lies and part of the biodiversity agenda or something
Surely anything a human does to use the land to their advantage (whether that be religious, food, mountain biking or whatever) is ‘land use’?
Any idea how my not taking a flight to Greece will help the problem too?
Every lie
Do you realise that going on about lies all the time makes you sound paranoid and completely obscures any point you are trying to make? I have no idea what you are talking about, even though I am actually trying to understand.
We can recreate whatever we like
Ok, so let's do it.
Ok, so let’s do it.
It's just a matter of funding isn't it. We've already discussed three models- paying to go shooting, joining a conservation org or private intervention (this can be remarkably small scale- we used to have a keen birder who used to come and keep the puddles filled for the swallows and feed a few hedgerows through the winter for taking photos of song birds).
Another one is subsidy of course- the land owner here gets paid by the Tax Payer for growing plots identical to our 'shooting funded' ones.
But how much tax are you willing to give rich land-inheriting toffs to leave some weeds and grow a few seeds?
Natural England seem keener to splash the cash on Sea Eagles (that could fly to the Isle of White from Scotland if they were that bothered about living there) and Beavers.
funkmasterp
It’s not a one or the other choice.
Except for most people it is.
it is part and parcel of climate change.
No it isn't... it may well be one of the consequences of climate change but it isn't a cause.
When it is a consequence then mitigating the root cause (climate change from greenhouse gas) will partially restore it anyway
You still didn't answer the question... and this is fundamental to getting honest support for climate change.
It also provides a measure how serious you think climate change is for humans.
The absolute best case scenario right now is probably tens of millions of human deaths... and that's if we do EVERYTHING
As far as I'm concerned it's a valid response to say "I don't care, the more humans die the better" but equally you can't expect 7+ billion people to agree. This is the stated reason Patrick Moor left Greenpeace because in his words they just don't care about humans. I don't agree with his stance on climate change is actually good etc. but I do agree that Greenpeace is demonstrating that it doesn't care about human deaths or is just ignoring them.
The thing is though we aren't going to do EVERYTHING ... if you care how many people die then we need to do as much as we can and the things make the biggest difference. If you don't care about human deaths just say so and be honest.
So do you think this is worse than climate change and how do you personally define worse?
Maybe you could explain how many human deaths from climate change are acceptable to save the vulture? (just to the nearest 100 million I’m not asking for an exact number)
Molgrips
Do you realise that going on about lies all the time makes you sound paranoid and completely obscures any point you are trying to make? I have no idea what you are talking about, even though I am actually trying to understand.
Simple question - do you believe Boris Johnson lied about parties and breaking Covid? [edit - added one word] laws
Hay meadows were created once before right?
They didn’t always exist.
Yes, they were created from woodland understory vegetation, the plant community you create from management depends on what you are applying that management to. If the vegetation that hay meadows were created from doesn't exist you cannot create the meadow vegetation.
Not sure what this has to do with beavers. But it has nothing to do with being liberal or something, it's just science.
But all the net result is, from an ecological perspective, is an interacting set of plant and animal species.
Recreate that set and you will get the same ecological effect.
Presumably the consultants selling ‘hay meadow restoration’ advice are liars?
A hay meadow wouldn’t exist if left unmanaged anyhow- it would revert to wildwood. Therefore is always a human construct 🤷🏻♂️
