Berkshire flooding also "major incident"

[emordnilap]

How forestry grants could reduce river floods - a short Q&A with Friends of the Irish Environment's Tony Lowes.

[Tarrel]

So, you accept that a global human population of 7+ billion human is unsustainable and that a large and early collapse of human civilisation leading to a significant die off is probably our best chance for making it into the deep future? If so, we are singing from essentially the same page CLV.

I'm pretty confident a population of 7bn+ people can be supported on the planet in terms of basic needs. One just needs to look at how the poorest folk live today, how little non-renewable resource they use to feed, water, shelter themselves... Remember one American is today using something like 2 orders of magnitude more non-renewable resource than the poorest decile.

What I have no hope for is a transition from where we are now to what is clearly technically possible. I agree that a the larger and sooner the collapse happens, the better humans will be doing 500 or 1000 years from now.

I'd question that. Bear in mind that massive urbanisation has taken place in many developing countries, and that's where a lot of the population is concentrated. (Take Nigeria for example). I don't think that volume of people could be fed without an industrial food production system with the attendant fossil fuel inputs.

I'm not saying the food production system couldn't be changed for a more sustainable one. I just struggle to see how it could keep up with the demand.

[Tarrel]

How forestry grants could reduce river floods - a short Q&A with Friends of the Irish Environment's Tony Lowes.

Woodland creation grants are certainly available from the Forestry Commission in Scotland, and they are quite lucrative; up to £4000 per Ha for establishing mixed woodland, with a maintenance payment available per year thereafter. Smaller grants are also available for restructuring and other sustainable management practices.

In the Highlands, the Crofting Commission has now recognised the idea of a Woodland Croft, in which the croft's main products are woodland-based (whereas traditionally a croft was seen as generating income primarily from grazing sheep).

I think there are two potential barriers:

1. A cultural expectation of "what farming is", and where woodland fits into this picture. I get the impression that woodlands typically exist on farms as shelter belts, and are not seen as productive in their own right. This has to change, perhaps through education, demonstration, incentive, regulation or a combination of all these.

2. Because of (1.), creation of woodlands on farming land could be seen as "reducing the amount of land available for food production", which seems to be a negative thing. If it could be shown that woodlands are capable of producing an abundant spectrum of foodstuffs, AND doing this in a way which produces better quality food, improves soil condition, reduces water run-off and improves carbon-sequestration, then opinion may change in favour of reforestation.

ETA; The FC grants are probably also available in England. I haven't checked.

Edit to further add; No they're not. Just checked. Regeneration / restructuring grants are available, but not woodland creation grants. "Closed Until Further Notice" according to the FC England website!

[RenewableCandy]

Incredibly, I have heard of people objecting to new woodlands on the basis that they "block the view"

[clv101]

I don't think that volume of people could be fed without an industrial food production system with the attendant fossil fuel inputs.

I'm not saying the food production system couldn't be changed for a more sustainable one. I just struggle to see how it could keep up with the demand.

My suspicion is that we can produce enough food - but only with 20-30% of the workforce involved in primary agriculture rather than the <1% (0.8% in the UK I believe) we have today. Oh, and probably without as many cows! I think reason we have the agricultural system we have today is because labour is expensive and energy is cheap - that leads to maximum mechanisation (arable crops) and artificial additives. Our agricultural system has probably maximised profits within the framework it's operating in - which is a little different to maximising food production, let alone food production in a low/non-fossil fuel future.

[biffvernon]

Exactly so, but let's keep in mind the joker of climate change, which looks like making agriculture more difficult on average.

[biffvernon]

[Lurkalot]

Incredibly, I have heard of people objecting to new woodlands on the basis that they "block the view"

I have a friend who owns a property in mid wales and he recently purchased some land adjacent to the house something like three or four acres. His main reason for buying the land was that it gave them a "nice view" and he didn't want anyone building on it although ironically he has thought of turning an exsisting barn to a holiday let. When it came to the question of what to do with the land he was quite negative to pretty much all our suggestions. Being a vegetarian he wasn't comfortable with sheep being in the fields ( although this has transpired as his only real option) but everything else from allotments , wild flower meadow and trees he thought would be an " eyesore "

[RenewableCandy]

Some people really are a waste of space...in the strict literal, non-judgemental, sense.

[Lurkalot]

He's been my friend for decades but yes you may just have a point. He irritates and frustrates his family too so I'm not alone.

[emordnilap]

he wasn't comfortable with sheep being in the fields ( although this has transpired as his only real option)

That sounds incredibly difficult to believe. Our friend woodburner would have a few suggestions, were he not dead/lurking/whatever.

Basically, I find that saying a piece of land has no 'purpose' except to graze sheep is a bit, well, odd. I mean, for a starter, it could just be, which carries with it a far greater 'purpose' (if you think it needs one) than just EU-issue sheep.

[RenewableCandy]

Yes but it'd look untidy

[Lurkalot]

he wasn't comfortable with sheep being in the fields ( although this has transpired as his only real option)

That sounds incredibly difficult to believe.

Sorry it's probably harder to believe as I hadn't really given you all the facts as I was just backing up RC's post about people complaining about trees.
The sheep option is his only one left as he has dismissed pretty much every thing else.
The story-
My friend had purchased a cottage in mid Wales some time ago with a long term view to renovate it. When the adjacent fields came up for sale he decided to try and buy at least some of the land ( it was sold in two lots) simply because he liked the view and didn't want it spoiling by development. The flaw in his plan was that he had limited income . He is a draughtsman but not up to date and so not working at that only as a part time bus driver. His wife is a teacher who also only works part time. They have a small rental income from a property although there is still a mortgage on that . As a consequence of this and needing to maintain fences and hedges he really needed some income from the land apart from the rent that comes in for the telegraph pole.
The land itself is very steep at one side sloping down to a fairly boggy area with an area of rough pasture . It was being used previously for sheep.
Another flaw in the plan was that my friend doesn't live in the cottage. We both live in Staffordshire and the cottage is past Welshpoole . Both family and friends tried suggestions as to what he could do with the land non of which meet with his approval. I even tried asking on a couple of Internet forums to see if anyone could think of something else.
We gave him details of how to apply for grants for trees but they didn't like the idea of turning it into a forest.
We gave him details of grants for letting the land become a wildlife meadow but no , it would have to be left uncut and be as RC says "untidy" .
Another friend of mine has a small holding and gets a grant for pasture but again this is another avenue my friend has decided to not go down.
To be quite honest he frustrates the hell out of his family and though he's been my friend for 30 years I have to say I really don't think he's the sort of person who should be allowed to own farm land of any description. He almost made us want to slap him when he said he perhaps turn it into a caravan park. Trees are an eyesore but white boxes aren't? As it is the land isn't suitable without a fair bit of levelling and drainage and the provision of services.
As I mentioned there are now sheep on the land and the arrangement is that the sheep owner maintains the fences rather than paying rent , an arrangement that isn't perfect for him but does make life easier.

[RenewableCandy]

But...but...I was taking the mick!! Aaaarrgh!!!

And to cap it all, if he doesn't even live there he won't see the fecking view.

We actually had a step-rel of the same ilk. Let 2 (two) houses he owned go to rack-and-ruin.

He's dead now.

[Lurkalot]

He's dead now.

I was only thinking of slapping my friend