UKC

The Wildlife Trusts have developed a really powerful message and need as much support as they can get. I work with conservationists and farmers regularly and it's very sad to hear about the state of our biodiversity and wildlife -  put it this way, there is very little 'wild' left anywhere, and most of the population just carry on doing what they do. We need to put pressure on our politicians to take environmental matters seriously regardless of whether they are tearing themselves apart over Brexit. And we need to do what we can ourselves to make a difference.

Please share the video and do what you can -  youtube.com/watch?v=JZYcoeqzxVI&
 

Insect loss seems especially worrying to me.

I welcome the many re-wilding projects like Summit to Sea

https://www.rewildingbritain.org.uk/our-work/summit-to-sea-or-mynydd-ir-mor

Just need a few lynx to do it properly.

Wildness can be found even right on the doorstep if you know how to look for it.

I consider the best thing I can do is show wildness to my children and hopefully their natural curiosity will do the rest. But the virtual world is less muddy, stingy and prickly and provides stiff competition for their attention.

Its good to see the Trusts raising their profile. Their biggest strength is their local involvement- each county Trust knows its patch intimately and local issues, like planning and development threats are picked up very quickly.

But.....they dont always have the national profile or focus, and big boys like the RSPB will often cherry pick valuable projects or habitats- a bit like a County Lines operation run from Sandy, Beds.

They also dont help themselves. It took decades to move away from trustfornatureconservation to Wildlife Trust and some (like Norfolk) STILL wont use the same logo. Then there is nonsense like no reciprocal rights for members, and they wonder why people join NT Or Birdco plc.

But this is an excellent move. Shame you won't see it on the telly, only cinemas

They are very guarded about lynx reintroduction, good in principal but not many suitable areas in UK. 

Sea to Summit have some great ecologists on board, people I believe in to be pragmatic and sensible, but not all projects are as good. 

I'm interested in what you think is the difference between a good project and a bad project?

The idea is OK with regard to a natural predator for smaller deer, but faced with the choice of always-alert deer that can get away quickly or dopey sheep in a fenced enclosure, what’re they going to go for? Farmers won’t stand for that and the big moggy will soon end up as an ex-moggy. 

Yes if you try to introduce lynx to a denuded upland landscape containing mainly sheep as a source of food and little natural vegetation (woodland). I live in the Forest of Dean, it’s become a reintroduction hotspot. We have the wonderful boar running riot, beavers are tentatively present, pine marten are the latest project. If a larger predator were to be introduced it would do well without too much impact on commercial livestock because a) There are alternative sources of protein and b) because, if persecuted, it could retreat to cover, there is an awful lot of it here.

So the problem is not the lynx or the farmers or the vulnerable sheep, it’s the lack of forest.

We have another smaller rewilding project near the above, let's say certain aspects of it are cause for concern - a bit complicated and I don't want to go into it on a public forum. 

Powerful stuff.
Also worth looking/sharing this video:

youtube.com/watch?v=FnJQjtvngqA&

Yes, they recognise that and Wales probably isn't the place for them. They wouldn't be tolerated for long if they were introduced. This from their statement on lynx: "Secondly, we believe further analysis is needed on the potential impacts on 
livestock. The Eurasian lynx is an ambush predator that lives predominantly in 
woodland. It is reluctant to cross large areas of open ground. While a study 
undertaken by the Lynx UK Trust discounts the Norwegian figure of 18,924 sheep 
kills as being applicable to a potential British impact, and predicts that a more 
appropriate figure of their average consumption might be 0.4 sheep per lynx per 
annumvi, Britain has one of the largest national sheep flocks in Europe. In Britain the 
national sheep flock numbers 22 millionvii. Although lynx are ambush hunters, the 
presence of scattered small woodland and hedgerow systems throughout much of 
the British landscape means that a realistic interpretation of their impact on sheep 
farming is difficult to determine.

I take it you are a professional in this field and I’d really like your opinion on my post above about the Forest of Dean.

I’m a punter in this subject relying in gut feeling. My feeling is that professionals have had to let that gut feeling go?

The massive decline in the insect population is certainly the most worrying news we've had. They are the all-important base of countless food chains, as well as being responsible for pollination. The idea of wild lynx living again in Britain is a magnificent thought, but I'd rather see the resources which would be necessary to reintroduce them being used to combat insect disappearance.

The FoD doesn’t actually have that much continual dense woodland in it, there are a lot of open areas linking pockets of woodland together, with farms right up to the edge. Even looking at the main mass to the west of Cinderford, it’s broken up quite often. 

It’s without doubt that the boar population needs massively reducing, but I don’t agree that lynx would be an effective solution to that (unlike a more robust cull by the FC, which would be). 

Isn’t Kielder the main proposed area of introduction, not Wales? 

Lynx don't need continual forest. I've seen them cross fields, roads, even a remote garden, but what they dislike are people. They are extremely reclusive and will do their best to avoid people at all. That doesn't mean they wouldn't stalk along a hedge after a sheep once they'd eaten the deer. 

You seem pretty well informed, so I am interested if you can perhaps shed some light on the economics of sheep farming these days.  Is it subsidised and if so, by whom?  What do we do with all these sheep products, and are there some numbers attributed to the environmental costs of over-grazing in upland areas?  I would imagine that it is pretty easy for those in favour of lynx introduction to make the case that while a lynx might kill a few sheep, the sheep are doing a fair amount of environmental damage themselves.  Do we keep grazing sheep because we have always done so, or is it beneficial to the economy, environment, or just simply to provide an income for a proportion of the population in rural areas?  I know people in these areas have to earn a living, but is this a prime example of where we should be funding training to allow those involved to generate income from other sources?  

Tim Jones(sheep farmer) might pop along, but in short; upland farmers are subsidised to a greater level than low level, margins are still very tight because it's competing on a global market, lots of lamb is exported as Brits are fussy eaters now and want lean chicken fillets etc. Alternatives, require investment initially and have a lead in period such as forestry. Or a switch to cattle, with vastly lower stocking densities. Both will require taxpayer support and change of view by the public.  

I'm no professional, simply a punter with an opinion on things - like most on here

I'm involved in the mid wales red squirrel conservation scheme (as volunteer local co-ordinator) and several personnel are also involved with S to S (and other conservation projects) so local stuff that might impact on us comes up at meetings. 

I only know your forest of D from driving through it, but you can't miss the impact of the wild boar even from a car. Used to fish at Huntsham bridge below Yat rock, often saw boar there when  walking the bank in the early hours and wild boar trotting out of the asparagus fields after their breakfast, it was fairly obvious there would be conflict and numbers need controling on an annual basis - same as deer. 

Despite living next to a sheep farmer and many friends in village being hill farmers i don't know the subsidies involved, there are  different schemes they may sign up to that work in different ways, but all seem dependant on the cash to some extent. Certainly subsidies seem to push more for conservation considerations  and have moved away from simply paying on headage.

Overgrazing on uplands (and husbandry) is not as intense as 30 years ago, it may not be perfect but our landscape has been shaped by 800 years of sheep industry and we can't turn that round overnight. We also need a vision of what alternative we want, why and how it is self sustaining and provide some work and income for families that live there. 

I think the change will come slowly, probably as meat eating and lamb demand reduce overall. What will happen I don't know, but I fear most landowners would sell up to commercial forestry, another subsidised industry, plus massive windfarms over all the uplands.

Sorry, I am rather pessimistic!

Loss of biodiversity, climate change, don't see how anything less than a fundamental shift in the way humanity lives can make bring about a sustainable way of collectively living together. When we finally do get it right we may possibly be on to a whole new level learning how to live together, the road to get there though some kind of significant catastrophic wake-up call seem almost inevitable now, just my take on things.

Really the only conflict is with lawn and sports field owners. But without predation their numbers will get out of hand. Their effect on the Forest understory is mostly positive I think.

Culling and the production of excellent sausages seems a good compromise.

Incidentally I had a close encounter with a massive boar sow and litter today while out for an explore in the woods. I backed off quietly and very quickly.

If we can't get a grip on what is best to do with sheep farming etc and, for example, help the farmers re-skill and invest so that they can find profitable alternatives, what hope do we have of handling the huge technological disruption to the job market that may happen in the next 40-50 years?  I think to not re-introduce lynx or other large predators out of concerns for a heavily-subsidised sheep farming industry shows a real lack of long term or strategic thinking..but again...that's just my initial idea and I am prepared to be educated otherwise by people who are involved directly.

Unless you plan to eat IT engineers, robot designers etc.. future civilisation will still need farmers.

 > I think to not re-introduce lynx or other large predators out of concerns for a heavily-subsidised sheep farming industry shows a real lack of long term or strategic 

People need to eat, the UK will be fine without lynx. Lynx, boar, beavers, pandas, tigers etc. Aren't that critical to biodiversity. They are cute species that make good campaign poster child's to fund raise, then people become attached to them as a solution.

In numbers, totalled up, around a few million globally. arguably the same number of insects in a one or two diverse square km. Absolute bottom of the predator food chain but that's why diversity starts. 

So if we don't scavenge forest floors of all wood for pointless stoves, cover gardens in paving and decking, promote over grazing of rough land, mono culture pastures in valleys, accept a few bugs on lettuce etc.. bottom level diversity will thrive. The apex predators will come as natural progression. 

Telling a farmer they have to learn python and releasing a few cats won't change anything. 

Ps. I am against over grazing etc but what's needed is a bottom up approach and a total change in subsidy and national park policy would be a reasonable start.