1) for the last 60 years, we've been funding a campaign to exterminate Europe's wildlife. through the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), hundreds of billions of euros of public money have been funnelled into destroying wildlife-rich meadows, woods, wetlands and rivers
2) while the precise formula has varied over the years, CAP essentially requires farmers to wreck nature in order to receive larger subsidies. agricultural intensification - responsible for so much pollution and wildlife loss - is one of CAP's core aims
3) CAP also favours larger farms over small ones, which twinned with intensification has driven down the number of people actually working the land.
in 1973 Ireland had around 263000 farm workers versus only ~85000 today (iiea.com/wp-content/upl…)
4) in recent years, there have been some (large ineffective and unsuccessful) attempts to fix the huge problems caused by CAP. it hasn't been enough: water quality continues to decline, drained peats are still haemorrhaging carbon and wildlife remains collapsed
5) this Wednesday (21st Oct), the EU parliament will vote on new rules for CAP that will determine how over *€400 billion* of public money will be spent over the next 7 years. this money *NEEDS* to be spent on restoring damaged habitats and sustaining small farmers
6) but instead, what's being proposed by 3 main EU party groups is:
-LIMITS on habitat restoration spending
-further intensification, meaning water pollution is likely to get even worse, and remaining wildlife scraps will be pushed out
-payments to continue to favour larger farms
7) if this passes, we'll be paying for another 7 years of destruction. every single EU tax payer will involuntarily contribute to polluting their own water and further sterilising the countryside. more small farms will be swallowed up by larger ones, more wildlife will be lost
8) this cannot go under the radar. we need politicians to be accountable to us, not vested interests and industrial agricultural lobbyists. please make noise about this. please let your MEPs know that you're watching @EPPGroup@RenewEurope@TheProgressives
9) if you want more details about what's being proposed, check out this detailed thread:
large herbivores, trees and flowers: an Irish and Scottish perspective 🐂🌳🌼(thread, a bit detailed).
outside of cities, our surroundings are massively shaped by the actions of large herbivores - cattle, horses, sheep and deer - alongside our efforts to manage or exploit them
in the lowlands, our efforts to exploit cattle primarily determines how the landscape looks (intensively managed grass fields), except in surviving woods, wetlands and meadows.
in the uplands the actions of the herbivores themselves are more important (the focus of this thread)
large herbivores mainly influence vegetation by feeding. when they eat trees and other woody plants we call this browsing, and when they eat grasses, wildflowers and other non-woody plants we call this grazing.
the rate of browsing/grazing is how much they eat over time
western Ireland and Britain are among a handful of places on Earth where temperate rainforest can form. this thread is a mini guide to some of the things you can find there:
1) trees drenched in mosses and ferns. hyperhumid conditions mean that plants don't need to rely on soil for moisture, releasing them to carpet leaning tree trunks and snakey branches
2) lichens- lots and lots of lichens, a few of which are found nowhere else in the world. some of the big leafy ones turn nitrogen from the air into fertiliser for their host trees
enough is enough: Ireland is NOT planting trees to combat climate change @HuffPost. 70% of trees planted will be non-native commercial conifers destined for clearfell. they threaten wildlife and will not reduce atmospheric carbon in the long run (thread)
Sitka spruce from the pacific NW is the main forestry tree in Ireland. it is densely planted and usually harvested after 40 years. i've done some carbon calculations to test lobbyist claims that new spruce plantations will act as carbon sinks...
...Sitka spruce are planted on marginal agricultural land, which often means species rich meadows. these can be home to rare and declining species, like the marsh fritillary butterfly. these meadows store a lot of carbon in their soils...
1) green fields are sterile and simple. each was created through the destruction of a complex wood, bog or meadow that came before. their simplicity is maintained with herbicide and by overloading the soil with nitrates and phosphates
2) they exist for animal agriculture, mainly dairy and beef. the idea is to maximise grass production, which in turn maximises milk or beef production. this model has been pushed for decades, and now most of our countryside looks like this:
3) the nitrates and phosphates that are applied (either as slurry or artificial fertilisers) to green fields seep into groundwater and wash into rivers. this pollution has driven precipitous declines in freshwater life and wetland health