BRFR Cake Stop 'breaking news' miscellany

[briantrumpet]

But the problem is that people *have* come along, and putting the genie back in the bottle isn't easy. We now have invasive species of flora and fauna which, without management would just destroy "natural" woodland, so we need to manage it. To pull back the damaging knotweed, ivy, and other plants, or to cull animals such as deer which would have an out of control population, destroy woodlands and have far more disease and suffering without human management.

Another example would be grey squirrels coming over on small boats. I'd suggest it's not enough to screw it up by throwing our borders open and then saying "Tough, suck it up!" to the patriotic British Squirrels and their legitimte concerns.

And remember, red squirrels are much safer on the roads, because they drive slowly.

 

[Ian H]

I'm not so sure about that. Nature seemed to manage quite fine in "undiscovered" areas before people came along.
Managing it to be how we'd like it is another issue.

There is no landscape in the UK that isn't to a large extent manmade. All interventions, whether they're called 'rewilding' or whatever, are implicitly to preserve the world in a state that's fit for humankind.

 

[First Aspect]

Over on the other thread, one forum expert is arguing that the US produces enough oil for itself, so a world wide shortage will have no impact. Of course, everyone will dismiss this argument for the trolling it is, because the price of the commodity still increases in the US. That's a better analogy for you.

No, that's a way of explaining the current state of affairs. But thanks.

 

[briantrumpet]

There is no landscape in the UK that isn't to a large extent manmade. All interventions, whether they're called 'rewilding' or whatever, are implicitly to preserve the world in a state that's fit for humankind.

It's remarkable how quickly even what appear to be 'wild landscapes' are heavily managed and the result of human activity. Dartmoor is in fact a post industrial (C18/19) and post deforested human habitation c.3000BCE area, which is now preserved as what people think is 'wild' and natural, but is anything but wild and natural (albeit fairly hostile for humans these days). It would quickly turn into pretty impenetrable scrub if left to its own devices, which might be good for certain species of plants & animals (including non-native ones that might crowd out less aggressive native species), and though there will be never ending arguments about what kind of balance might be encouraged, using the area to home a diverse range of plant and animal life doesn't seem too bad an option, given the detrimental impact human activity has had and continues to have.

 

[Pblakeney]

There is no landscape in the UK that isn't to a large extent manmade. All interventions, whether they're called 'rewilding' or whatever, are implicitly to preserve the world in a state that's fit for humankind.

That is kind of my point. We are shaping the World the way we think it should be. It is a god complex mixed in with an extremely high level of arrogance. The planet will exist after we have gone, and will arguably be much better long after we've gone.

 

[Pinno718]

It's remarkable how quickly even what appear to be 'wild landscapes' are heavily managed and the result of human activity. Dartmoor is in fact a post industrial (C18/19) and post deforested human habitation c.3000BCE area, which is now preserved as what people think is 'wild' and natural, but is anything but wild and natural (albeit fairly hostile for humans these days). It would quickly turn into pretty impenetrable scrub if left to its own devices, which might be good for certain species of plants & animals (including non-native ones that might crowd out less aggressive native species), and though there will be never ending arguments about what kind of balance might be encouraged, using the area to home a diverse range of plant and animal life doesn't seem too bad an option, given the detrimental impact human activity has had and continues to have.

Given the difficulties, I think the ethic should be fostering maximum bio-diversity and constraining np-native invasive species.

 

[briantrumpet]

That is kind of my point. We are shaping the World the way we think it should be. It is a god complex mixed in with an extremely high level of arrogance. The planet will exist after we have gone, and will arguably be much better long after we've gone.

But while we're here, isn't there an argument for making up for the damage we've done (see my Dartmoor post)? Your argument seems to be absolving humans of responsibility for the chaos they've brought about.

 

[Pinno718]

But while we're here, isn't there an argument for making up for the damage we've done (see my Dartmoor post)? Your argument seems to be absolving humans of responsibility for the chaos they've brought about.

Objection your honour.
Blakey did not say that.

I think the court should have a recess whilst the accuser gets some sleep.

 

[Pblakeney]

But while we're here, isn't there an argument for making up for the damage we've done (see my Dartmoor post)? Your argument seems to be absolving humans of responsibility for the chaos they've brought about.

I don't absolve humans in any way. The most parasitic species on the planet is human beings.
Those trying to fix it a wee-ing in the wind.

 

[briantrumpet]

Given the difficulties, I think the ethic should be fostering maximum bio-diversity and constraining np-native invasive species.

I think that's generally where things are moving, albeit slowly. 'Rewilding' is part of that, as is changing farming practices, and changing people's understandings and expectations. As ever, the general population is deeply uninformed and hypocritical about what they want from the countryside and how they think that's going to happen.

 

[briantrumpet]

Objection your honour.
Blakey did not say that.

I think the court should have a recess whilst the accuser gets some sleep.

Well, he seems to be saying to just walk away and let whatever we've ended up with now be our starting point. Walking away from (say) Dartmoor would be rash, as pretty much everything about it - apart from the actually underlying topography - is manmade, and not a good starting point if you want a biodiverse environment.

 

[briantrumpet]

I don't absolve humans in any way. The most parasitic species on the planet is human beings.
Those trying to fix it a wee-ing in the wind.

"It's hard and slow to improve" doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do our best as long as we share this planet with other organisms that were here before us and will be here after us (lichens and funguses, if nothing else).

 

[Pinno718]

I don't absolve humans in any way. The most parasitic species on the planet is human beings.
Those trying to fix it a wee-ing in the wind.

There's a lot of stuff out there that might change your mind, like this:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TU39jN0WEZg

 

[Pinno718]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DpL9znMzIY

 

[Ian H]

That is kind of my point. We are shaping the World the way we think it should be. It is a god complex mixed in with an extremely high level of arrogance. The planet will exist after we have gone, and will arguably be much better long after we've gone.

Better for what? We're just one of the millions of various kinds of fauna, albeit a dominant one. We don't exist outside nature. If we 'overgraze' we'll go extinct, like other animals before us.