The woke judges were having a laugh at our expense here; this view can be seen in a corner of any allotment in Britain. It must have been the poohsticks that did it. This is not rewilding, it is total neglect, why would anyone actually want this view from the kitchen window?
As with so much today, every week has items that contradict what was said last week.
Much is the result of total chaos in the world today and incompetent governments and this is just one example.
Rewilding is every green's wet dream. Who could not want wildflower meadows at the bottom of the road as portrayed in the statements about rewilding. The fact that motorways have been re-wilding with very mixed results for decades now has conveniently been forgotten.
I pick on wild flower meadows as I know a bit about them. They are extremely difficult to start up and maintain: as with the motorway seeding and some farm efforts, after the first year usually one species, the strongest remains, all others die out or are subsumed.
So what do they mean by rewilding? Is it a pre-homo sapiens world of wolves, dark forests, swamps, impenetrable scrubland, beaver-dammed rivers, and locals in bear skins foraging for berries?
The
web site of Rewilding Britain is not that explicit about what the overall effect of all this might be, or the purpose. It conveys an image of long lost species coming back or being introduced into areas that don’t really want the experience. Golden Eagles being introduced as they have in some places, means farmers have to factor in 10% losses of lambs which naturally increases prices; RB consider such moves as beneficial and we should take the hit as we benefit from the rewilding, or so they would have us believe.
What benefits the average person gets from all this is moot. It is rather like the movement to get black people into the countryside because it is 'too white', yet all over the world black people are leaving the countryside for the cities - why anyone should think it will be different here is a mystery.
The site shows an award-winning Chelsea flower show garden in the city (see above) This has nothing to do with rewilding, it is a trendy image portrayed in many ‘award’ winning gardens of late: the shabby allotment look.
Cattle of various long lost pedigrees are shown as being re-introduced, such as Bison. This rather flies in the face of the green movement that would have all cattle culled as they fart and are killing the atmosphere; if you believe that you will believe anything, nonetheless the gullible are beginning to believe this stuff and the vegan shelves are bulging with overpriced vegetable-based items, and manufacturers are rubbing their corporate hands with delight at being able to charge more for an item that has had the expensive ingredients left out.
 |
| No wonder he is smiling! |
There can be no doubt in my mind that the green lobby/movement is advancing its ideals on all fronts at the same time, with climate change the driver behind it all.
It is no coincidence that drive to so-called sustainable is leading a push to change the way we live. Once again a minority is attempting to shape the future for the majority using scare tactics that proved so successful during and after the pandemic. The old adage ‘if you tell a lie often enough people will believe it’ has never been more true.
A good example this week is the announcement by Cambridge University that it is set to drop beef and lamb from its menu as a part of its 'sustainable' food plan. They credit the plan with with causing a 33% drop in carbon emissions for food in the university. Other colleges are putting meat and even fish at the bottom of the menu and only on certain days and are blatantly putting a surcharge on it if you have the gall to order.
They claim the move is being driven by the students. I wonder what all students actually think and not just the activists. There are currently around 600,000+ vegans in the country; that is a small albeit growing part of the population but again the protest groups are getting their way, and please don’t tell me it makes a meaningful difference.
The change to organic food production has not been the success they told us it would be,:premium prices in a time of spiralling inflation for a dubious gain……..
This one is good, they equate a financial success with changing from uneconomic farming to a camp site as a triumph for rewilding. The loss of food production is ignored: you can’t eat tents. They also use giving up almost everything we enjoy and buying crappy land with as a way forward; let them lead the way.
At a time of rising populations worldwide, rewilding of productive land will cause shortages of foodstuffs, in the same way that we have neglected to build the infrastructure to ensure energy reliance on the back of our own resources.
These green lobbyists can’t have it all. In an advanced world populations are not going to take a step backwards and live in yurts and take up smallholdings. It is not a practical solution, unless you are a celeb who can afford to go off grid; for the other 99% it is nonsense.
The current financial crisis should pull the plug on this nonsense, yet governments still cave to the minority pressure groups at a time when they should be looking after the majority. Somehow the latter sort of government has flown the coop; we are now run by governments who only want to stay in power; the people (see Brexit) are at best a nuisance and worse, are totally ignored.
In Holland the government has already taken a step too far in this direction. The results were inevitable in a country that has such a huge agricultural base. No-one is listening to the majority there, either.
As with the rest of the western world they have convinced themselves that farm animals are the enemy of the environment.
As is anything else that goes against the agenda, even making money for people has risks now.
Rewild, go green, at your peril!
