Studland MCZ decision coming soon

[FlyingGoose]

Yes, a major error by the conservationists as they didn't expect them to multiply to the extent that they have. They are also decimating the smaller bird populations.

OH decimating is such a word used to frequently to describe mass extinctions
You do realise that Red Kites are natural to the Eco system of this country and were hunted to extinction and that if they are multiplying it means that there is plenty of food around and therefore a good healthy ecosystem, if you do not have top down predation you end up with an unbalanced ecosystem :encouragement:
these Birds are not decimating anything but keeping natural selection in check therefore not allowing a dominant species to take over , and in hard winters or lack of food these birds will suffer , it is the natural order of things .
This is why large predators are fewer in number than the predated .

 

[rotrax]

OH decimating is such a word used to frequently to describe mass extinctions
You do realise that Red Kites are natural to the Eco system of this country and were hunted to extinction and that if they are multiplying it means that there is plenty of food around and therefore a good healthy ecosystem, if you do not have top down predation you end up with an unbalanced ecosystem :encouragement:
these Birds are not decimating anything but keeping natural selection in check therefore not allowing a dominant species to take over , and in hard winters or lack of food these birds will suffer , it is the natural order of things .
This is why large predators are fewer in number than the predated .

But Flying Goose, round 'ere the Kestrels have all but vanished as well as the Buzzards.

The Kites have driven them off.

They are almost to Northampton to the North, well past Swindon to the West, into London to the East and as far as Winchester to the South.

In my town they require management. Impressive bird as they are there are far too many.

 

[FlyingGoose]

But Flying Goose, round 'ere the Kestrels have all but vanished as well as the Buzzards.

The Kites have driven them off.

They are almost to Northampton to the North, well past Swindon to the West, into London to the East and as far as Winchester to the South.

In my town they require management. Impressive bird as they are there are far too many.

fair point problem is how to control humanly

 

[DJE]

Beavers in Scotland create habitat by creating natural wetlands which increases biodiversity of the Wild , a sterile land in no good for anyone but the Sheep.

But they don't stay there. They breed and move onto agricultural land where their dams interfere with drainage and damage crops.

 

[rotrax]

We have a great tradition of managing wildlife in the UK.
The reason wildlife here is so much more prolific than in most European countries is because a great deal of our countyside is managed sympatheticaly.

The large increase of Magpies, Red Kites, Badgers, Foxes and certain species of non native Deer in the area I am fortunate enough to live in shows me quite clearly that a policy of control and management would be of benifit to wildlife in general.

The surfit of magpies around here means very few songbirds bring their young to fledging-the Magpies clear the eggs and young birds like a production line going down a hedgerow. Foxes around here are Urban creatures as well as wood and field dwellers. I told you earlier that the Kites have seen the Kestrels and Buzzards off, the Badgers are doing the same with the Hedgehogs. I have not seen a roadkill Hedgehog for a while, but within a five mile stretch of the A34 near here there are five roadkill Badgers.

Five years ago such a sight was remarkable-not now, they are becoming a pest.

These are purely observations by a retired stalker and naturalist who keeps his eyes open.

Balance, IMHO, will require human intervention.

 

[FlyingGoose]

But they don't stay there. They breed and move onto agricultural land where their dams interfere with drainage and damage crops.

Beavers stay near flowing rivers were they Dam the flow with shrubs and trees , and very little land gets flooded , and if it does flood it generally is land not used for agriculture as it is at river edges and forest land
European Beaver, Golden Eagles , Red Kites and Ospreys are all native to Scotland, remarkably the Red deer is not and is one of the biggest destroyers of habitat loss in Scotland , but we maintain large flocks to entertain rich people to shoot them:ambivalence:
The vast majority of Scots do not benefit from such activities were as Wildlife Tourism and eco tourism is a market leader and benefits all including rich Arab land owners of estates
I am always biased Im a conservationist what do you expect

 

[DJE]

I am always biased Im a conservationist what do you expect

Me, I just follow the news. I first heard it on the BBC but then there are:-

https://www.scottishfield.co.uk/outdoors/wildlifeandconservation/tales-riverbank-beavers-pose-questions-land-owners/

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/18/farmers-warning-beaver-damage-new-report-praises-water-engineers/

https://www.devonwildlifetrust.org/sites/default/files/2018-01/ROBT%20-%20Beaver%20Management%20Strategy%20-%20Published%20January%202016.pdf

and many more I'm sure.

 

[rotrax]

European Beaver, Golden Eagles , Red Kites and Ospreys are all native to Scotland, remarkably the Red deer is not and is one of the biggest destroyers of habitat loss in Scotland .

That is a strange comment from a career conservationist.

Wiki says quite clearly Red Deer are indiginous to Scotland.

Which is what I have always known.

It also says the French population is doing very well, expanding rapidly.

AFAIK, red deer only cause severe damage to habitat when food is scarce during hard winters when they tend to ring bark trees-eating the bark within reach.

Which is why, in our exellently managed forests, food is supplied to deer in hard times to stop this happening.

I have been closely involved with deer management and I can assure Flying Goose that on estates where no paying punters shoot, the Deer are managed to ensure their wellbeing and health. Control of numbers can be important here, to ensure the natural food supply is adequate and there are not too many stroppy bucks fighting and injuring themselves during the rut.

Bucks and old doe's past their prime are also culled in the interest of a healthy population.

And, of course, a well hung haunch of Venison is a culinary delight!

 

[oldharry]

I think you need to look more closely at Beavers before you get too enthusiastic Flying Goose: BBC's Countryfile reports:

"Evidence from North America and Germany shows the considerable risk to infrastructure – including flood defence assets, roads and railways – from allowing beavers to become established in high risk and populated areas. An adult beaver can bring down a 10 inch wide tree in under an hour, and a single beaver family will fell up to 300 trees a year. In the upper Danube region of Germany, beavers have caused £5 million of damage. How will riverside residents feel when the only tree in their garden is gnawed down overnight? Or a beaver dam floods a housing estate that has never before flooded? The problem with beavers is that they are very secretive and mainly nocturnal, and they don’t stay put, so they will spread from rural areas to villages and the edges of towns and cities."

Yes that report does list a number of benefits from allowing their return, but those benefits are largely to the Beavers and their locality, and as above can have disasterous wider consequences both to man and beast. As Rotrax points out with his Red Kites, they have acted as an entirely invasive species, ousting and eliminating other species and having a thoroughly detrimental effect.

We are re-introducing a species capable of substantially and rapidly modifying the countryside, and which was originally eradicated as a pest. Modern countryside is totally different to the Middle Ages when it was last present, and as far as I am aware nobody has tried to assess what happens when Beaver populations expand. Clearly Countryfile has serious misgivings about their effect on modern intensively used countryside and sub-urban communities. Natural England have allowed them to be re-established, but with a number of strict caveats which include the above, and the risk of them spreading disease.

There is clearly the possibility that, although they were indigenous 400 years ago, they would now come into the category of 'invasive species' capable of doing a great deal of damage to the eco systems of modern countryside. I am as much a conservationist as you are, but I have grave misgivings about altering the present balance of things without much more careful examination of the possible consequences.

Studland is just such a case: The essential eelgrass and its inhabitants have evolved to what they are today alongside intensive long term human use. Our own limited investigation shows it to be in slightly above average condition compared to neighbouring locations. Removing that substantial influence from the Bay might have entirely unforseen effects. Nobody has made any viable study of what has developed or why. the only truly objective report concluded that it could find no correlation between anchoring and eelgrass health in this location, yet the main objective of creating an MCZ is to stop people anchoring. This report makes it clear this will make little or no difference to the wildlife, though it will be a major loss to the leisure boating community and the Touristy industry.

Anthropomorphic influences have a major part in the way eco-systems such as this have developed. It is not wise to remove such a strong influence without first understanding a great deal more clearly just how the systems work. Conservation history is littered with the disastrous results of well intentioned but under-researched changes which were supposed to help.

 

[rotrax]

I have a wonderful book in my extensive library called "Three against the Wilderness" by Eric Collier.

The Canadian land he settled on was changing from well watered, well wooded and grassed parure to dusty desert. Beef cattle, a valuable scource of income for the hardworking ranchers and farmers, and the extensive native wildlife, were suffering big time.

After speaking with Native Canadian Indians the problem was thought to be fast water runaway from the land.

Beaver were re-introduced and very quickly the dams they built held the water back, restoring the land to its former quality.

BUT-and a big, big BUT-the sparsely populated Canadian wilderness is a totally different kettle of fish to heavily populated and highly developed Europe.

Horses for courses.

Red Kites and Badgers, in South Oxfordshire are in abundance, to the extent that, IMHO, they need managing.

 

[FlyingGoose]

Oh Goose for Dinner
Please remember this is from a Scottish view and I have no real knowledge of English Law or Conservation Issues :encouragement:

Wild deer, particularly red deer on the open hill, range freely over wide areas. There are no
effective natural predators of deer in Scotland.
If deer numbers are not controlled by man, they will expand until they reach the carrying capacity of the available habitat. Increasing deer
numbers can lead to change in plant species composition and loss of habitats that are sensitive
to grazing.
I also do not like to name Drop but my Wife works for SEPA as a Dr Environmental scientist and her Postgraduate Supervisor working out of Stirling University also controls the Beaver experiment in Knapsadale when these creatures were introduced and she has followed this and is friends with the Scientists involved in this study
So I appreciate newspapers , Wikipedia and the rest will come up with their own conclusion to Beaver habitat destruction but I have seen the Raw data and talked to the people actually on the ground day in day out following the beavers activity, this is why and this is Important this is why the Scottish Government has now allowed these animals back into the Fauna of Scotland and are now protected ,

As to Red Deer they were brought over by the Romans and hence we assume they are Native because they were introduced so far back in time , therefore creating the argument in which how far back do you go before an animal or plant becomes native , or extinct then reintroduced, these are the Questions unanswered.
A prime example being the Grey Squirrel been here for hundreds of years but is expressed as a non native species
The reason that Buzzards are less because of the Red Kites is that the Buzzards were breeding out of control and know a balance has returned there is no law , that says a robin or a blue tit has more right to live than a Magpie , this is a human concept and human interference with the cycle of life as soon as you try and tinker within a top down predation or a food web you create a cascade effect that like a spiders Web will affect a string further along
I am a pragmatic conservationist and understand a balance is needed I have 2 dogs a cat 10 fish and a Gecko called fizzy I like to enjoy the outdoors like everyone , but as I live in Scotland I also like to see wildlife and enjoy my Sailing , that is why I believe Scotland is a leading force in the UK for Conservation and access laws and I believe England needs to follow:encouragement:

https://www.parliament.scot/ResearchBriefingsAndFactsheets/S4/SB_13-74.pdfazing

 

[rotrax]

Oh Goose for Dinner
Please remember this is from a Scottish view and I have no real knowledge of English Law or Conservation Issues :encouragement:

Wild deer, particularly red deer on the open hill, range freely over wide areas. There are no
effective natural predators of deer in Scotland.
If deer numbers are not controlled by man, they will expand until they reach the carrying capacity of the available habitat. Increasing deer
numbers can lead to change in plant species composition and loss of habitats that are sensitive
to grazing.
I also do not like to name Drop but my Wife works for SEPA as a Dr Environmental scientist and her Postgraduate Supervisor working out of Stirling University also controls the Beaver experiment in Knapsadale when these creatures were introduced and she has followed this and is friends with the Scientists involved in this study
So I appreciate newspapers , Wikipedia and the rest will come up with their own conclusion to Beaver habitat destruction but I have seen the Raw data and talked to the people actually on the ground day in day out following the beavers activity, this is why and this is Important this is why the Scottish Government has now allowed these animals back into the Fauna of Scotland and are now protected ,

As to Red Deer they were brought over by the Romans and hence we assume they are Native because they were introduced so far back in time , therefore creating the argument in which how far back do you go before an animal or plant becomes native , or extinct then reintroduced, these are the Questions unanswered.
A prime example being the Grey Squirrel been here for hundreds of years but is expressed as a non native species
The reason that Buzzards are less because of the Red Kites is that the Buzzards were breeding out of control and know a balance has returned there is no law , that says a robin or a blue tit has more right to live than a Magpie , this is a human concept and human interference with the cycle of life as soon as you try and tinker within a top down predation or a food web you create a cascade effect that like a spiders Web will affect a string further along
I am a pragmatic conservationist and understand a balance is needed I have 2 dogs a cat 10 fish and a Gecko called fizzy I like to enjoy the outdoors like everyone , but as I live in Scotland I also like to see wildlife and enjoy my Sailing , that is why I believe Scotland is a leading force in the UK for Conservation and access laws and I believe England needs to follow:encouragement:

https://www.parliament.scot/ResearchBriefingsAndFactsheets/S4/SB_13-74.pdfazing

Totaly missing the point.

Buzzards were never breeding out of control in the 47 years I have lived in South Oxfordshire.

Red Kites are now breeding out of control.

If you take account of other reports of those who rely on the land for a living-and to supply food-Beaver are becoming intrusive in some places.

Some time ago I stated, and it has not been challenged, that we are good at managing wildlife in the UK. Management is also conservation-or do you disagree?

There has been predation by humans, for money, of raptor chicks and eggs. One of my customers, a retired army officer, and a very tough guy-he was a 'Rupert' with the Regiment-would take his Royal Enfield motorbike and rudimentary camping gear and protect Golden Eagle nests in the Highlands. He kept the birds safe. Two guy's from Newcastle upon Tyne 'fell off the rocks' and were injured after meeting him and suggesting he Foxtrot Oscar while they robbed the nest.

All we are suggesting is balance. Around here, at this time, there is unbalance.

The question is, how do we address it? Guy's like you want unrestricted breeding when perhaps, as we are seeing in my area with Kite and Badgers, it is becoming a problem.

Surely structured management is one answer.

You say you understand balance is required, human management must be accepted as a suitable method as no predators exist now.

 

[robertj]

Packham and the BBC allowed themselves to be taken in by the ' Seahorse Trust ' - all one of him who takes public donations to further a lifestyle living on what happens to be the nicest sandy beach in England!

They went for what appeared the ' cuddly fluffy angle ' instead of researching the situation first.

As you say you know nothing about Studland.

Packham and the BBC called sailors ' gin swilling wreckers of the environment ' while nothing could be further from the truth.

I am one of many who complained to the BBC only to get a standard computerised response - and would like to see him and the unprofessional insulting people who also failed to research this subject apologise with an intelligently clued up programme based on the real facts - or be sacked for being inaccurate sensationalists.

The stutland bay is going to be placed on the protected list, its a for gone conclusion.
Free anchoring boaters pay no tax when doing anything for free which isn't cricket is it?

 

[SimonFa]

OH decimating is such a word used to frequently to describe mass extinctions
You do realise that Red Kites are natural to the Eco system of this country and were hunted to extinction and that if they are multiplying it means that there is plenty of food around and therefore a good healthy ecosystem, if you do not have top down predation you end up with an unbalanced ecosystem :encouragement:
these Birds are not decimating anything but keeping natural selection in check therefore not allowing a dominant species to take over , and in hard winters or lack of food these birds will suffer , it is the natural order of things .
This is why large predators are fewer in number than the predated .

I lived in the Chilterns when they were first reintroduced on the Getty estate. My first sight of one was running along the road on a lovely Sept evening and seeing it lit from underneath, fantastic sight.

As they started to spread and become popular people started to feed them, against the advice of Natural England and they definitely got overstocked. We used to have masses overhead when it was feeding time by one of my neighbours and they started to become quite annoying. If and when and others stopped feeding them it will be a problem.

 

[Boathook]

The stutland bay is going to be placed on the protected list, its a for gone conclusion.
Free anchoring boaters pay no tax when doing anything for free which isn't cricket is it?

Anchoring isn't free in any means. The whole anchor system was taxed when purchased plus I pay tax when I go ashore to eat and drink. Overall I seem to pay a lot tax in the from of VAT to carry out my hobby/pastime/interest plus supporting local businesses in the goods purchased.

 

[Seajet]

Anchoring isn't free in any means. The whole anchor system was taxed when purchased plus I pay tax when I go ashore to eat and drink. Overall I seem to pay a lot tax in the from of VAT to carry out my hobby/pastime/interest plus supporting local businesses in the goods purchased.

Exactly, the view from the Bankes Arms isn't free and helps the local economy, as do boats going on into Poole - as the Chamber Of Commerce should have worked out long ago

 

[Tomahawk]

Oh Goose for Dinner
...... but as I live in Scotland I also like to see wildlife and enjoy my Sailing , that is why I believe Scotland is a leading force in the UK for Conservation and access laws and I believe England needs to follow:encouragement:

https://www.parliament.scot/ResearchBriefingsAndFactsheets/S4/SB_13-74.pdfazing

Conservation is a hobby for people who like conservation. It is no more or less than that. Other hobbies include sailing (as demonstrated here?), opera, hill climbing, photography, horsey riding, motor racing, cycle racing, stamp collecting... there are even fans of the Austin Allegro (though perhaps they need help). It is interesting to observe there are very few conservation based magazines in the shelves at news agants. From that I infer that conservationists make up a very small portion of the overall population.

Yet conservationists will argue their hobby is of paramount importance and that everyone else has to submit to the superiority of their hobby. They demand huge areas of land is reserved for their hobby and impose controls over other peoples lives whenever there is any conflict between themselves and the rest of the world.

And right now a flying shitting thing is sat on top of my windex. It will probably shit all over my boat when if flies off and I will have to spend time and effort cleaning up.

 

[FlyingGoose]

Conservation is a hobby for people who like conservation. It is no more or less than that. Other hobbies include sailing (as demonstrated here?), opera, hill climbing, photography, horsey riding, motor racing, cycle racing, stamp collecting... there are even fans of the Austin Allegro (though perhaps they need help). It is interesting to observe there are very few conservation based magazines in the shelves at news agants. From that I infer that conservationists make up a very small portion of the overall population.

Yet conservationists will argue their hobby is of paramount importance and that everyone else has to submit to the superiority of their hobby. They demand huge areas of land is reserved for their hobby and impose controls over other peoples lives whenever there is any conflict between themselves and the rest of the world.

And right now a flying shitting thing is sat on top of my windex. It will probably shit all over my boat when if flies off and I will have to spend time and effort cleaning up.

Oh dear I never returned here because I have my views others there's and we are allowed to differ in a sensible argument , I think you will find that the majority of Scientists based in Conservation also work in their communities for local projects and bigger worldwide projects to save endangered habitat and fauna , without the effort of these people and their lobbying we would not have national parks which I sure you enjoy lake district , dales , or beautiful coast lines along Devon and Cornwall the list goes on the problem is we shout down these people call them interference
tell them to get a life and yet we take from them that they have freely given to enhance all our life's , now it is up to you if you want to enjoy it or not , but you will be a minority of the 65 million of the UK that enjoy open spaces , wetlands, coasts protected, bays etc.
So no Conservation is not just for the conservationist as Old Harry likes to tell us , we are surrounded by conservation no matter were we look so next time you like to take a pop at these people remember STOP think and look around and breathe your clean air and listen to the bird songs and watch the wildlife , because without conservation this would not happen
I also wonder how many on these forumites have visited USA and visited their national parks Yosemite a key player , created by a conservationist from Scotland
I appreciate I will get some response that belittles this but I am right and you know it so any response will only show that you either live in a dark cave or on the moon :encouragement:

 

[Tomahawk]

All this conservation malarky is an odd thing.
We like to walk. Not the macho "I walked the Penine way" sort of walking, but simply to plod from home to a pub in the next village (Essex) across so called valuable open "countryside". We never see anyone else. For all the importance of "environment" no one is taking any notice of it. The rest of the population is in the shopping mall or playing footie on a patch of man made grass.

Thus you demonstrate my observation. So called conservation is a hobby for conservationists.

 

[Blue Sunray]

... but I am right

Oh no you're not.