More bug huggery

[Bru]

Coastal property is always going to sell at a premium. There are only two ways round this. Firstly, to nationalise property and distribute it 'fairly', which would of course mean following Mugabe's example. Secondly, there is Tomahawk's method, which is simply to allow desirable places to be despoiled so that they lost their attraction, and the undeserving rich would have to put up with it or go abroad.

I see a lot of people out on the water and enjoying the coast from the land. The percentage that is wealthy is minuscule. If the poorest people from cities were to be relocated to the coast, they would find no work available for them.

Jaywick

 

[johnalison]

Jaywick

My thought too, but I was too polite to say it.

 

[Kukri]

Known to the mother of my children as “Little Philippines”. The land of her birth is not innocent of all planning controls and attempts to conserve natural flora and fauna; it’s just that a modest sprinkling of cash gets round all of them, to the point where the only stretch of virgin forest in the country was the US Jungle Warfare Training Ground at Subic Bay. And that’s gone , now...

 

[Tomahawk]

There is a lot of poverty in coastal towns, Harwich, Folkestone, Ramsgate, Margate, Dover, Sheppy, Jaywick, Lowestoft, Hastings, Rye, Newhaven. The problem for them is the inadequate transport system whereby they are all at the end of the road before you get your feet wet.

Such towns need a coastal road to connect them to each other and allow trade. But such things are never built because people say it will spoil the artifical and man made environment leaving hundreds of thousands in poverty.

 

[Tomahawk]

Parks, open spaces (Greater London has more of both than any other city apparently), holidays at the seaside etc. etc.

And that's just the direct benefits

Any chance of you addressing the questions you've been asked by the way hmm?

Parks are natural environment?
Seaside towns are a natural environment?
That's new to me.

Perhaps you can explain how a teenager caught up in a drug gang culture in London gets to enjoy the open spaces of the Walton Backwaters?

 

[Bru]

Parks are natural environment?
Seaside towns are a natural environment?
That's new to me. [/QUOTE

You are deliberately being obtuse

As you rightly pointed out, there are no "natural" (as in unchanged by the activities of man) environments in England

Parks, green spaces, green belts, etc. etc. all need protection otherwise there are those who would cheerfully build on them to make a fast buck

QUOTE=Tomahawk;6975920]Perhaps you can explain how a teenager caught up in a drug gang culture in London gets to enjoy the open spaces of the Walton Backwaters?

He / she probably doesn't enjoy the Walton Backwaters but what on earth has that got to do with it?

Are you truly trying to claim that because inner city kids in deprived areas don't enjoy the countryside protection of same should be reduced or terminated? What a bizarre notion!

And that leads to the inevitable question which you are STILL avoiding answering ...

Would YOU be happy with unrestricted development of the rivers and coast that we enjoy as part of our hobby?

 

[Tomahawk]

I never said anything about promoting unrestricted development. Like many people you are trying to put words into my mouth. Which TBH is rather below you. I have only said that I consider the present land use patterns is not good when 90% of the population are crammed into 10% of the space .so that the 90% do not get any benefit from the space. Remember that all those nature reserves are supposed to be for the benefit of everyone, uet you accespt that people in large cities do not have any practical means of accessing them or benefiting from them.

As an asside this RAMS. document will mean inflationary pressure on the marine leisure industry. which may well force you out of your hobby. There is huge development pressure all round Essex at present. All those people will be wanting leisure space somewhere. Some will,have the good taaste to want to become boat owners. But the approach of this document is to preotect animals first and foremost above the needs of people. Obviously there can be no more marine leisure failities as that will mean more boats disturning wildlife.... hence price inflation when a fixed supply is met by rising demand.

Whe you are forced off the water in favour of a bird watcher, remember it is for thhe benefit of everyone.

One

 

[Bru]

Still ducking the question Chris

 

[Tomahawk]

Interesting viewpoint

And yet ...

Are you happy then if the Crouch and Orwell end up resembling the River Hamble? If more people have the opportinity to live in a lovely location where they can actually enjoy the sight of the river, not at all

Would you be happy to see the environment needed by the seals and the birds etc and so on destroyed by commercial exploitation?Tis an odd thing, but judging by the amount of bird shit I constantly have to clean off, the local birds seem to find my boat to their likning. Notwithstanding that, no one is poroposing to build on the tital sandbanks... apart fromwindfarms which are being built on sea to appeals the NIMBYs

Can you live with Hamford Water being turned into a leisure theme park? It is a leisure theme park. .the theme is bug huggery to the exclusion of all non bug huggers

I;m not sure where you get the link between this document and a single pressure group anyway, I think that is in your mind (and I share your dislike of the RSPB!)

Not do I see any proposals to significantly restrict or impact upon our current level of activities (although I concede that some restrictions may become, indeed may already, be necessary)This SPD will increase pressure to prevent more leisure boating facilities being allowed

Without protection, the coastal environment we love and enjoy will ultimately cease to be the coastal environment we love and enjoy Sorry, but you get me there. How will the interface between land and sea stop being the coast? What is the part of the coastal environment that you so much enjoy? is it the sea, or the tideline?

And as the population inevitably grows, the pressure on such environments grows too. Leave it to market forces, fail to protect our environment and heritage, and next thing you know it will be gone

Does the leisure and pleasure of a relatively modest number of people take precedence over preserving and maintaining the environment and heritage of the British Isles. That’s the thing, at present the leisure interest of, a small number of individuals is taking precidence over. The small number of individuals being the bug hugging lobby. By area of land and sea dedicated to their hobby, the bug huggers have appropriated every foot of the coast except that which is already developed. Their objective is to stop any further access by non bug huggers.

 

[PilotWolf]

There is a lot of poverty in coastal towns, Harwich, Folkestone, Ramsgate, Margate, Dover, Sheppy, Jaywick, Lowestoft, Hastings, Rye, Newhaven. The problem for them is the inadequate transport system whereby they are all at the end of the road before you get your feet wet.

Such towns need a coastal road to connect them to each other and allow trade. But such things are never built because people say it will spoil the artifical and man made environment leaving hundreds of thousands in poverty.

I grew up near and worked out of Newhaven. Whilst it was always a ferry port it suffered so badly from poor road and rail links. As far as I understand nothing has changed but political people and those with an agenda blame it on everything else...

PW