Gosling ~All parts of the universe are there for me...... Crane could say the same

I predict a divide, if more shooting people do create models with no lead shot, no raptor persecution, walk up birds with the quality of outdoor experience being the selling point not numbers and repetitive shooting of driven birds (my perspective others enjoy it, it has own challenges and pleasures I suppose) with a more diverse vegetation structure, respect for wet peat, limits on fragmentation by tracks then reasons to object are reduced. At that point people like me will take a different view to those motivated by animal rights.

Lapwing, once a familiar sight, birds breeding in spring sown arable and wetlands. 1968 and 1996, UK area of spring-sown cereals fell from nearly 3 million ha (73% of total cereal area) to 0.5 million ha (around 16% of total cereal area). This led to a dramatic reduction in the area of winter stubbles, earlier harvesting dates and changes in crop structure.

I think a major problem with Britain and biodiversity/ecology is living here can feel like it is not an island and therefore island biogeography is a major factor. An archipelago with numerous islands the big island feels like a 'mainland' does not make it continental. I think people are also fixated with it being a relatively recent island, a real sense of it not being a 'proper' island, especially when they want to add a few species for their 'eye spy' tick list.

Having discussed battue pheasant shooting (if you don't know what that is ask I'll describe it for you) I realise much of the issue as regards some peoples response to my thread is a lack of understanding of estates, so if you want here is a thread. I'll warn you it is not a political analysis of class, wealth inequality and land ownership, we could discuss that, but a reality is humans seem to end up organising themselves into inequal societies, maybe it is a function of wealth and inheritance but that is not my thread.

Neither coppice or pollards are 'natural' both are a way of ensuring wood regrowth, pollards by cutting above the height of livestock allowing regrowth.

Coppice excluded livestock when regrowth is vulnerable by fencing or wood bank and hedge.

Sometimes regenerative agriculture and biological conservation is incompatable, plenty of farmers are happy to have some flowers on their farm, some farmland birds, some bees, but their focus is fertility and production, not just biomass but also “quality” for example dairy fodder is not just producing high production but also required market quality. This is understandable their business is a production one, their idea often of conservation is a productive Victorian High Farming system, intensive but largely “regenerative” aka organic

I suspect people even those who like nature don’t really get biogeography, don’t get that latitude, climate, topography / landform, geology, influences soil that while human management and even wild animals have an impact some species / habitats are rare and localised. Whatever you do your clay field will never have the special species of Lizard Serpentine, Teasdale Sugar Limestone, Mendip Limestone, Wessex Chalk. Maybe people are so used to gardening, deciding say to grow acid plants in unsuitable conditions, farmers so used to altering soils

Cost of supporting disability from Office of Budget Responsibility, this enables disabled people to afford help to cope with cost of disability. Disabled people may be in work, may have a business, they may be unable to do so. Work is going to continue to be a difficult politically weaponised issue, some disabled people are unable to work, some would love to but barriers prevent them. Many able people also have issues in finding work, we see capability issues, a job may exist but a person may not be

Struggling to find thug or bully plants, I can find competitive plants which are as valuable a part of a community as any other plant, some may have a particularly significant role, they are not thugs just successful in current conditions so we manage their abundance. I see no place for anthropomorphic language it does not aid understanding of underlying process and issues, it could tend to important plants being seen as negative, not the actual reality too dominant, covering to large an area of a site.

How is your ecological trap doing today? Mowed after no mow May? Tall grass and flowers attracted insects to it now cut it? Not cut it, great, now leave herb stems over winter so insects can egg lay and pupate, seeds be available longer. What not cut, the nutrient level increase will reduce number of flowers, you are favouring the competitive species, remember maximum nutrient removal is when grasses flowering probably June when best hay made, remember to rake up and remove cuttings. Confused, cut? don’t cut? Welcome to realities of grassland management!

People who deny over-populations extreme impacts are so wrong, it is just denial, who can deny impact of more billionaires, their children go on to use vastly more resources than other children will. The first place to worry about population is amongst 1%, other issues which can exist can hopefully transition with education, family planning, sustainable communities and economy.

Population baselines, land use change, predation, history, economics plenty to discuss, what we must remember is when predators in Britain (and other European countries) were persecuted into rarity in some species by battue game-bird shooting the human exploitation of waders was high and coincided with major land drainage which started in 1600s (earlier mediaeval major impacts) by 1800s was largely complete. High numbers of Ruff imported from Netherlands to London markets, netting and fowling, on coast and Fens.

@ecoevoenviro thinking on baselines, if we go beyond genetic variation and minimal populations for conservation across distribution (which likely has some natural fluctuation) what does too many or two few mean, well too many may mean claims of impacts (real or imagined) based on perception of different groups, hunters may want abundance of say deer, foresters and conservation land managers might want less browse impact with more regen, public might like abundant wildlife, or be angry at roses being browsed, farmers may be concerned by crop damage, maybe

I’ve seen Turtle Dove population crash in intensive agriculture with gamekeepers, seen Turtle Dove persist on nearby Nature Reserves with scrub, wild plant rich infertile open habitats, scrub, Magpies. I find it interesting how rather than changing land management, big thicket hedges, scrub, arable weeds some people will find any reason they can think of to kill things they hate like Magpies.

A meadow, pasture, what are these things? Our language has meaning but is also mutable, a word does not describe every aspect of a thing. Grassland is a plant community of mainly perennial plants, it may be an ancient community of wild plants or a monoculture which is ploughed and reseeded every few years we call that ley grassland. A grassland can be either pasture or meadow in different years, if grass “kept” and not grazed it can be cut when long and hay made, turning and drying hay in a field takes time and wet weather can ruin it that is part of

5th May 1789 French Revolution. 1791 House of Commons rejects motion by William Wilberforce to introduce a Slavery Abolition bill.

Nature positive 2030

A real target not waffle, give statutory legal protection to Local Wildlife Sites, what were called Sites of Nature Conservation Interest (SNCI).

jncc.gov.uk/our-role/the-u… Many of these sites should be SSSI but a quote exists by region, so if you have awesome chalk grassland in Dorset it might not be SSSI, awesome dunes by my home are not, in another region likely would be.

gov.uk/government/sta…

Not another planting and tubes tweet! plastic!

No that is not the tweet, tubes can be useful, planting can be. Why if it is a nature conservation project do we plant in lines? I get it in forestry management, I get it as regards growing spacing, thinning, but should we? Should we plant in clumps, groups, gaps?

I was rather disturbed to read the statement “he was an old school taxonomist who relied on morphological data” put forward to argue that a taxonomists viewpoint was not valid. I fully support taxonomy moving to a genomic phylogenic understanding.

barrett.eeb.utoronto.ca/publications/f… The danger is in popular blogs and opinion pieces the difficulties of DNA “magic” are not discussed, especially if a studies results appears to confirm an authors viewpoint. Traditional taxonomy was imperfect but serious workers using modern DNA techniques incorporate historic

I think understanding values and personality really matters, while some people may vote for financial benefit and change party as their circumstances change, others may vote as parents did or opposite! Many must search out something which fits their values. No party will entirely, maybe some people stay unaligned floating voters, likely some when attracted into an echo chamber become more extreme, more partisan. Just labelling people as bad or stupid achieves little.