River dredging

Bri963

Bri963

Well-known member
Interesting that in the main people Only want to re-introduce predators. We used to have no end of songbirds in the garden until the sparrow hawks moved in. I’d rather have a blackbird singing to me than a bloody sparrow hawk disembowelling a pigeon on my garden table. Protected species my backside.
 
V8Druid

V8Druid

do it as well as you can,but learn to do it better
Interesting that in the main people Only want to re-introduce predators. We used to have no end of songbirds in the garden until the sparrow hawks moved in. I’d rather have a blackbird singing to me than a bloody sparrow hawk disembowelling a pigeon on my garden table. Protected species my backside.
quite a few round here too ..... always taking birds around us .... have even seen 'em pursue sparrows into hawthorn thickets to get at 'em .. amazingly .. they must suffer damage doing it ...
 
V8Druid

V8Druid

do it as well as you can,but learn to do it better
Careful what you type in google about beaver watching 😂
is this the voice of experience talking Giles :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO: I seem to recall a famous quote from @Local diggers in CEF ref. beavers 😂😂
 
Bri963

Bri963

Well-known member
In the old house we had the budgie on a coffee table just inside the patio doors. A kestrel took a fancy to him, so came in at Mach 2 and clattered into the glass, ending up unconscious in a tub of flowers with his legs in the air. I thought The poor so-and-so had killed itself, but after a couple of minutes it sat up, shook itself, looked at the budgie and decided it wasn’t worth getting knocked out for half a meal.
 
Gunners

Gunners

Well-known member
What's the problem with the rewilding concept?
I'm not sure you guys understand it fully. Its not about making everything into woods again and going back to the stone ages, its about creating a sustainable way of land management that increases biodiversity, increases carbon capture, and aims to return to farming methods that work with the land and its regional quirks, rather than forcing it. Weather you like it or not, farmers have been embracing it for some time, realising that compaction, soil structure and natural fertilisers are worth more than they realised some decades ago - ploughing is now a last resort and min till has taken a lead.
Its clear we cant keep going as we are, bee's for example, are in trouble and without them we are screwed. But they are suffering as a result of many factors - not all solved by increasing hedgerows and setting aside odd areas of field for wildflowers. Its a huge issue and one which I don't pretend to understand fully, but I have learnt a lot from running my cattle on some conservation ground, and the work they have done over the last couple of years is starting to show. Its a tiny part of our green and pleasant land - but they have done a better job that I could have done with a flail, and biodiversity is thriving.
Take any concept to the max and it wont be acceptable to a majority of landowners, but that doesn't mean that there aren't some decent principals within it, and maybe we stand to learn something from it for the better? At least do some research on it guys, its not all bad!
 
Lancs Lad

Lancs Lad

Well-known member
What's the problem with the rewilding concept?
I'm not sure you guys understand it fully. Its not about making everything into woods again and going back to the stone ages, its about creating a sustainable way of land management that increases biodiversity, increases carbon capture, and aims to return to farming methods that work with the land and its regional quirks, rather than forcing it. Weather you like it or not, farmers have been embracing it for some time, realising that compaction, soil structure and natural fertilisers are worth more than they realised some decades ago - ploughing is now a last resort and min till has taken a lead.
Its clear we cant keep going as we are, bee's for example, are in trouble and without them we are screwed. But they are suffering as a result of many factors - not all solved by increasing hedgerows and setting aside odd areas of field for wildflowers. Its a huge issue and one which I don't pretend to understand fully, but I have learnt a lot from running my cattle on some conservation ground, and the work they have done over the last couple of years is starting to show. Its a tiny part of our green and pleasant land - but they have done a better job that I could have done with a flail, and biodiversity is thriving.
Take any concept to the max and it wont be acceptable to a majority of landowners, but that doesn't mean that there aren't some decent principals within it, and maybe we stand to learn something from it for the better? At least do some research on it guys, its not all bad!
No I get it 👍 ...it's just the whole eco let's let nice cute wolves roam free crowd that piss me off.
 
GazCro

GazCro

Well-known member
What's the problem with the rewilding concept?
I'm not sure you guys understand it fully. Its not about making everything into woods again and going back to the stone ages, its about creating a sustainable way of land management that increases biodiversity, increases carbon capture, and aims to return to farming methods that work with the land and its regional quirks, rather than forcing it. Weather you like it or not, farmers have been embracing it for some time, realising that compaction, soil structure and natural fertilisers are worth more than they realised some decades ago - ploughing is now a last resort and min till has taken a lead.
Its clear we cant keep going as we are, bee's for example, are in trouble and without them we are screwed. But they are suffering as a result of many factors - not all solved by increasing hedgerows and setting aside odd areas of field for wildflowers. Its a huge issue and one which I don't pretend to understand fully, but I have learnt a lot from running my cattle on some conservation ground, and the work they have done over the last couple of years is starting to show. Its a tiny part of our green and pleasant land - but they have done a better job that I could have done with a flail, and biodiversity is thriving.
Take any concept to the max and it wont be acceptable to a majority of landowners, but that doesn't mean that there aren't some decent principals within it, and maybe we stand to learn something from it for the better? At least do some research on it guys, its not all bad!
I fully understand the concept and do see benefits to much of it. I can't speak for other areas of the country re flooding but have a pretty good idea about it near me. 6 million spent on flood defences in keswick following 09 floods which they were told would make it worse. Que 2015 and storm Desmond and violas that's what we got. But it was blamed on rainfall above anything seen before, which btw is complete bo**ocks we've seen it before and we will again. They've since spent another 2 mill on another project which won't solve the issue. Re wilding and upland storage is touted as the answer but it will only make v minimal difference if at all here. The bit they can't get in their head is its never 1 days rain alone that floods us here, it's 2,3,4 weeks rain followed by a BIG days rain. Everything is full and over capacity before the big deluge. There is a simple solution which would cost peanuts and may not entirely solve the flooding but it would certainly massively reduce it but they won't hear tell of it.
 
Lancs Lad

Lancs Lad

Well-known member
I fully understand the concept and do see benefits to much of it. I can't speak for other areas of the country re flooding but have a pretty good idea about it near me. 6 million spent on flood defences in keswick following 09 floods which they were told would make it worse. Que 2015 and storm Desmond and violas that's what we got. But it was blamed on rainfall above anything seen before, which btw is complete bo**ocks we've seen it before and we will again. They've since spent another 2 mill on another project which won't solve the issue. Re wilding and upland storage is touted as the answer but it will only make v minimal difference if at all here. The bit they can't get in their head is its never 1 days rain alone that floods us here, it's 2,3,4 weeks rain followed by a BIG days rain. Everything is full and over capacity before the big deluge. There is a simple solution which would cost peanuts and may not entirely solve the flooding but it would certainly massively reduce it but they won't hear tell of it.
Watching the Kendal scheme with interest.🙄
 
S

Smiffy

Well-known member
What's the problem with the rewilding concept?
I'm not sure you guys understand it fully. Its not about making everything into woods again and going back to the stone ages, its about creating a sustainable way of land management that increases biodiversity, increases carbon capture, and aims to return to farming methods that work with the land and its regional quirks, rather than forcing it. Weather you like it or not, farmers have been embracing it for some time, realising that compaction, soil structure and natural fertilisers are worth more than they realised some decades ago - ploughing is now a last resort and min till has taken a lead.
Its clear we cant keep going as we are, bee's for example, are in trouble and without them we are screwed. But they are suffering as a result of many factors - not all solved by increasing hedgerows and setting aside odd areas of field for wildflowers. Its a huge issue and one which I don't pretend to understand fully, but I have learnt a lot from running my cattle on some conservation ground, and the work they have done over the last couple of years is starting to show. Its a tiny part of our green and pleasant land - but they have done a better job that I could have done with a flail, and biodiversity is thriving.
Take any concept to the max and it wont be acceptable to a majority of landowners, but that doesn't mean that there aren't some decent principals within it, and maybe we stand to learn something from it for the better? At least do some research on it guys, its not all bad!


What you describe sounds like traditional land management which I am all for
Managed English woodlands are not only beautiful but highly productive
And again well managed park and farm land can have a mass of biodiversity.
But around here rewilding does not mean look after anything
It means leave it abandon it to become a complete mess unproductive and overrun by bracken or brambles.
And people look at it and think it's amazing as they don't understand proper land management especially woodland management.
If you are really interested in this sort of thing read Oliver rackams books.
I think they should be compulsory reading before joining any of the government agencies so they can understand A. How beneficial traditional management is to everyone humans and animals and B. How much intervention the countryside has had from humans to look like it is, to the point stopping the management has a greater affect on wildlife than correct management techniques

 
Grahams

Grahams

Don't complain - suggest what's better
This was in the Telegraph today. Looks like they have left it a while then gradually backing down. If he had the permissions and they admit he did why did it take over two months to investigate and how much did that cost us?
I guess the others will probably follow in due course.
A farmer who bulldozed a beauty spot to protect local homes from flooding has been cleared of wrongdoing by the Forestry Commission.
John Price had used a 16-ton digger to dredge a section of the River Lugg near Leominster in Herefordshire and stripped a mile-long stretch of the bank of trees and bushes.
The environmental destruction wrought by the potato and cattle farmer provoked widespread condemnation from wildlife charities and conservationists.
Helen Stace, CEO of the Herefordshire Wildlife Trust, described Mr Price's actions as a "crime against the environment".
The trust said his actions would have a devastating impact on the animal life along the river, including otters, kingfishers, salmon and trout.
Monty Don, host of BBC Gardeners' World, had expressed his shock at the "complete obliteration" of a site of Special Scientific Interest.
However, The Forestry Commission has announced this week that no further action will be taken against Mr Price.
But Mr Price still remains under investigation by Natural England and the Environmental Agency into the work carried out on the Lugg riverbank last year.
Mr Price had justified his actions in December 2020 by saying he was protecting those living in the nearby hamlet whose homes were devastated in the 2019 floods.
He said he was not worried by the investigation as he had obtained as many permits and licenses as he could before carrying out the work on the river.
Mr Price told the Telegraph: "I got the license off Natural England, which you have to have to chop trees on a SSI river."
"I know the condition, I know the law, I could not have gotten any more licenses or permits to be 'more legal'.
"I have not done any damage to the wildlife because it was better than what it was. It's cleaner, we cleaned all the rubbish out and to be honest we've got more wildlife here now than [what] I did have in December."
Mr Price said that his efforts to reduce flooding in the river had bolstered and safeguarded the population of fish in the river.
"I have definitely helped the wildlife because it's the cleanest stretch of river now. I know there are more fish here than there have been because you can tell by the [number of] cormorants and we have got more otters than ever."
Emma Johnson, of Natural England, said: "Natural England and the Environment Agency are currently investigating the full circumstances of this significant incident on the river Lugg.
"This is a live investigation, which may lead to legal action and as such further details cannot be shared at this time."
A Forestry Commission spokesman said : "Following an investigation we can confirm that the felling operations were undertaken with the authority of an approved conditional felling licence and no further action is to be taken in respect of the felling at this time.
"The licence did not authorise any works beyond the felling of the trees.
"The conditions of the licence do, however, require re-stocking of the felled area no later than June 30, 2026.
"Failure to comply with these conditions may result in the Forestry Commission taking enforcement action in the future."
 
K

Keif

Well-known member
It's wetter here than its even been. As a kid/teenager every summer I could walk "bridge to bridge" along about 2miles of dry creek bed. I can't remember the last time the creek/stream was dry.
 
Giles

Giles

Well-known member
This was in the Telegraph today. Looks like they have left it a while then gradually backing down. If he had the permissions and they admit he did why did it take over two months to investigate and how much did that cost us?
I guess the others will probably follow in due course.
A farmer who bulldozed a beauty spot to protect local homes from flooding has been cleared of wrongdoing by the Forestry Commission.
John Price had used a 16-ton digger to dredge a section of the River Lugg near Leominster in Herefordshire and stripped a mile-long stretch of the bank of trees and bushes.
The environmental destruction wrought by the potato and cattle farmer provoked widespread condemnation from wildlife charities and conservationists.
Helen Stace, CEO of the Herefordshire Wildlife Trust, described Mr Price's actions as a "crime against the environment".
The trust said his actions would have a devastating impact on the animal life along the river, including otters, kingfishers, salmon and trout.
Monty Don, host of BBC Gardeners' World, had expressed his shock at the "complete obliteration" of a site of Special Scientific Interest.
However, The Forestry Commission has announced this week that no further action will be taken against Mr Price.
But Mr Price still remains under investigation by Natural England and the Environmental Agency into the work carried out on the Lugg riverbank last year.
Mr Price had justified his actions in December 2020 by saying he was protecting those living in the nearby hamlet whose homes were devastated in the 2019 floods.
He said he was not worried by the investigation as he had obtained as many permits and licenses as he could before carrying out the work on the river.
Mr Price told the Telegraph: "I got the license off Natural England, which you have to have to chop trees on a SSI river."
"I know the condition, I know the law, I could not have gotten any more licenses or permits to be 'more legal'.
"I have not done any damage to the wildlife because it was better than what it was. It's cleaner, we cleaned all the rubbish out and to be honest we've got more wildlife here now than [what] I did have in December."
Mr Price said that his efforts to reduce flooding in the river had bolstered and safeguarded the population of fish in the river.
"I have definitely helped the wildlife because it's the cleanest stretch of river now. I know there are more fish here than there have been because you can tell by the [number of] cormorants and we have got more otters than ever."
Emma Johnson, of Natural England, said: "Natural England and the Environment Agency are currently investigating the full circumstances of this significant incident on the river Lugg.
"This is a live investigation, which may lead to legal action and as such further details cannot be shared at this time."
A Forestry Commission spokesman said : "Following an investigation we can confirm that the felling operations were undertaken with the authority of an approved conditional felling licence and no further action is to be taken in respect of the felling at this time.
"The licence did not authorise any works beyond the felling of the trees.
"The conditions of the licence do, however, require re-stocking of the felled area no later than June 30, 2026.
"Failure to comply with these conditions may result in the Forestry Commission taking enforcement action in the future."
That’ll only be in relation to the number of trees he took down not the affect his actions have on flooding and wildlife. Least important agency in that saga
 
Top