http://www.cpre.org.uk/magazine/opinion/item/2802-getting-wind-energy-right

I think that the most useful point made is by Rachel Coxcoon, who is broadly in favour of more turbines because of our need to produce our own energy without large carbon emissions. She says that the problem is more one of people feeling disempowered, and having infrastructure thrust upon them who’s benefits are distant and who’s profits go to large and/or foreign companies. Apparantly the severe reaction to turbine proposals are remeniscent of the spread of railways in the nineteenth century (a problem that seems to continue with HS2!).

I agree that governments should encourage local and regional ownership of renewable energy generation, instead of disempowering people by pushing from the centre, and do this with proper financial backing and consistent policies (rather than the recent solar PV mess!). I also agree with Rachel that people need to use less energy overall: something that isn’t actually that difficult to do and saves money, and yet some remain reluctant to consider. In my view, not taking control of, and responsibility for, our impacts upon our environment is selfish, careless, stupid, and will one day be illegal.

Dilemmas such as that around wind turbines is a direct result of our inability to control our energy use, as the more energy we use, the more CO2 goes into the atmosphere, and the more infrastructure we need to satisfy the requirement. Are you aware that the impact of terrestrial turbines is likely to be small compared with that of the proposed new national electricity grid, which will require many additional pylons? Having walked the length and bredth of the country, I find these have a far greater impact in industrialising the countryside than turbines.

Power pylons near Buckingham

So the message is, if you want a nice countryside, you can help by managing your energy use carefully.

Anyway, if you’re interested, do read the article.

Introduction:

The UK Government has decided to carry out a cull of badgers in an attempt to deal with bovine tuberculosis which infects some of the UK cattle herd. Over 100,000 of a protected species could be killed with little certainty about outcomes, and alternative solutions remain undeveloped.

Such wildlife massacres have occurred throughout human existence, and we take full advantage of our technology to kill more efficiently where we should be using it find less destructive solutions.

What drives this? Should the meaning of ‘humane’ be reversed because to be human seems to imply a love of killing and cruelty?

Human Pressure

There are few corners of this Earth that are unaffected by humans: we are unique among species in having colonised every single habitat from the equator to the arctic, even burrowing deep into the planet and putting astronauts into orbit around it. We naturally prefer to live where resources are plentiful and the climate benign, but are capable of coping with, and even thriving in the extremess. As the World population rapidly increases, pressure increases on the available land and therefore upon the ecosystems, organisms and resources that exist there. The effects of this increase is amplified by our demand for ever higher living standards, and our preference for meat over vegetable diets which results in more land needed for animal production (which is much more land intensive than crops).

As well as agriculture, mining, fishing, waste, pollution and urban development all put remove habitats and put pressure on wildlife. In The Observer newspaper this week I read that many species in islands around the globe that are officially administered by the UK are threatened with extinction (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/mar/18/seabirds-british-overseas-territories-extinction), along with tigers, orang-utans, pandas, some whales, albatrosses…. the list goes on and on. Anyone who tells you that the dramatic collapse in species in not caused by humans is either lying or is willfully ignorant.

There are two main drivers: human need and human greed, in both cases for land, resources and money. People in Brazil hack into the forest to create a small-holding to feed their burgeoning families, whilst others illegally destroy hundreds of acres of forest to steal the timber, create mines or set up cattle ranches. It comes to the same thing: the destruction of a complex ecosystem that supports great biodiversity, less space for wildlife, and the loss of an essential World-wide resource.

It’s all happened before

Sometimes, we attempt to reverse the situation, for instance, where I live, the red kite was driven almost to extinction in the UK by being declared ‘vermin’ because gamekeepers and farmers believed that it took game chicks and lambs. (http://www.redkites.co.uk/) In 1989, four pairs were introduced to the Chiltern Hills from Sweden and they have flourished so that these lovely birds can be readily admired across much of Buckinghamshire. It is unfortunately probably the case that one reason for their success is the number of animals killed on the roads, but none the less, can be counted as a success.

So what has all this got to do with badgers?

Well, although this rather endearing and retiring forest dweller is protected, it has effectively been declared vermin by the current UK government, which begs the question, “Have we learned anything from the past?”. It doesn’t seem so when all we can think of doing is to carry out a massacre.

The problem is real: badgers have become infected with bovine tuberculosis, which the must have caught from infected cattle, and so they get sick, and then they wander onto farmland at night, re-infecting the heards of cattlen This is heart-breaking and expensive for famers and one has sympathy with them. But is the answer just to kill the badgers?

Badgers have been here an awful lot longer than cattle, of course, but that counts for nothing. However, cattle are far from an ‘environmentally friendly’ option for agriculture as they contribute to global warming through methane production and beef production takes up more land than crops. If we were sincere about food security for the burgeoning human population, we would not be considering beef, but be focusing in growing what provides the most food, which is crops. As it is, people across the World are demanding more meet as their incomes increase.

However, what drives everything is money… and power of course.

The options currently open to farmers are few: they are not allowed to kill badgers unless they have a special license, and if the problem is severe, the may be forced to discontinue cattle farming. Vaccinating the cattle or the badgers would be very expensive and anyway both are problematical.

Alternative answers to killing badgers do exist but are relatively untested, such as improving the badgers’ nutrition, which protects them from TB and would mean that they did not need to wander so widely. The National Farmers Union has been working for years to persuade the government to let them take up their shot guns and poison bottles and kill the buggers (badgers). This will be costly, but cheaper than attempting vaccination.

Unfortunately, most studies have cast doubt on the value of culling and even the ministry admits it will only reduce bovine TB by 17% if it does work as intended whilst the entire population of badgers will be wiped out in some areas. But it will make the farmers feel good ‘cos they are getting back at the badger and doing something to protect their herds (and therefore their living).

The ecological outcomes cannot be known, and the loss of this beautiful animal in large areas of the country will be a total tragedy. It says a lot about the human mind: we are prepared to kill over 100,000 of our protected native mammals because it might cut down the incidence of a disease that we brought into the country among money-earning livestock.

Which brings me to the concept of what is ‘humane’. This behaviour is certainly human , and in view of the relative behaviour of humans and the beasts in this tale, I think it would be a good idea to reverse the meanings of ‘humane’ and ‘beastly’.  Humans are capable of behaving appallingly at all levels, and slaughtering other animals is part of our make-up. What is so obscene here is that it is totally pre-meditated slaughter when we have the knowledge to find better answers, if only we would take responsibility for our affect on the environment and not just be driven by money and expediency.

The previous labour government considered this cull, but shied away from it, whereas the “greenest government ever” is more in the thrall of the land-owners. There is another factor in this which is the Secretary of State For The Environment and Rural Affairs which is Caroline Spelman MP. Here’s some information about her career from her web site:

Caroline Spelman’s Career:
Sugar Beet Commodity Secretary, National Farmers Union 1981 – 1984
Deputy Director, International Confederation of European Beetgrowers, Paris, 1984-1989
Research Fellow, Centre for European Agricultural Studies, 1989-1993
Director, Spelman, Cormack and Associates, Food and Biotechnology
Consultancy 1989-2009#

So she is an agricultural technologist who is, or has, earned a living from biotechnology. When humans see the living World through technological eyes, the results are often chilling, and end up contributing to the destruction of animals, plants, habitats and ecosystems that do not earn money. Her decisions must be unemotional, pragmatic and based on what is thought best for agri-business, and also her political party.

It is not humane, but it is human. It is not even efficient as an answer as the outcome is too uncertain, and the process filthy, murderous and ugly.

Poster in Dinton village: one of many

The landscape close to Waldridge Farm

The owner of Lower Waldridge Farm (Mr Jeremy Elgin) in the county of Buckinghamshire, Near Aylesbury, is proposing to put a wind turbine on his land that will generate electricity for the National Grid. This has stirred up highly organised and vocal opposition that is passionate, and fixed in it’s view. For the protestors, it is instantly a question of right and wrong, a gut reaction, and emotional.

We have lived with power pylons striding for hundreds of miles across the countryside through beautiful areas, but wind turbines have a way of stirring people up.

The Landscape

This is a pleasant part of rural England, about 3 miles west of the steep scarp of the Chiltern Hills that descends to Aylesbury Vale and the River Thame (a tributory of the famous Thames). The Hills are densely wooded, and a designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, but at Waldrige, the valley is fairly flat and intensively farmed, and all the forests have been removed over centuries as the land is very fertile. The area dotted with villages and hamlets some of which are very ancient and pretty, and the people are mostly quite well-off, and unlike much of the country, property prices have not dropped very much. This is Middle England in every sense and they have voted Conservative ever since voting was invented.

The People And Their Attitudes

From an environmental perspective, peoples’ attitudes and behaviours vary according to what is being considered.

Villages and their surroundings remain lovely because the residents look after them and protect them from most forms of development, although the exception is a tendency to fill in gardens and open spaces in villages with new buildings in order to make money.  It is not uncommon for someone to fight a planning application down the road only to put in their own planning application a while later. However, things do not happen that actually change the overall appearance of the place because opposition is quick and effective. The focus is on keeping appearances prim, pretty and tidy: buccolic is name of the game around here.

Regarding the land, people are ambivalent: they like nice views (that’s partly why they move here) and the peace (although they drive everywhere, often in larger 4 WD vehicles and don’t support public transport or cycling very much), and many of them like to walk on the many footpaths that cross the farms and villages for leisure. However the farmers do farm the land intensively with mixed attitudes to wildlife, pesticides and good land management. The focus tends to be on convenience and profit (see earlier blog, “A Walk In The Countryside”) such that most remaining hedges are subjected to machine flailing that is crude, industrial and deadly, and fields are croppped right to the very edge rather than leaving a strip for birds and bees.

However, when it comes to the immediate physical environment, most people are true conservatives: they like a traditional English countryside, and many, including farmers, work hard to preserve it.

When it comes to the Global Environment, things are far less clear, and the truest countryside conservationists become arch sceptics when it comes to issues like global warming, species depletion and population.  Flying to remote corners of the planet at the drop of a hat is simply part of life’s fun for the well-off, and it is astonishing how far people feel they have to go for a good time. Any journey that can be is taken by car, and the supermarket is the source of food, unless it is a nice piece of steak from the posh butchers, and my recent forays into increasing cycle and walking paths found little support. Regarding domestic or business energy use, the main motivation for increasing house insulation or installing solar panels is to save money, and a local gentleman proudly told me that he had installed some panels as the yield  is good, but he is a cynic about the environment.

That being said, many people like to be able claim their part in ‘Saving the Planet’, which can include being quite good at recycling rubbish, not using too many chemicals in the garden and managing domestic energy use. However, my mother had a favourite Scottish proverb that could often be applied: “The path to hell is paved with good intentions.”

The Proposal In Question

The landowner is proposing a single wind turbine on his farm situated in the field below. It will be operational for 20 years.

Actual site of the proposed wind turbine

The main details from the turbine website (http://lowerwaldridgeturbine.co.uk/) are:

• One turbine of a maximum ground to tip height of 102.5m (336ft).
• The turbine will generate in excess of 1.5 million Kilowatt hours of electricity annually. This is enough to power in excess of 320 homes.

The proposer has done a lot of research and spent money on consultants who have produced data that indicate that the carbon cost of creating and erecting the turbine will be covered within a very few years, and thereafter it will contribute to reducing the UK’s carbon emissions. He will make money out of it, but declares himself to be deeply concerned about our environment: he has already has installed solar PV panels and plans to buy an electric car.

The residents of the local villages of Ford and Dinton are very concerned (http://www.dinton.org/WindTurbineAll.pdf) and a very vocal protest movement has started up, with large banners being erected around the area (see above). They maintain that:

• The turbine will not be energy efficient and will take a very long time to pay for itself.
• If this goes through, then it will open the door for many more, and the landscape damage caused by one (which is considerable in their view) will be multiplied many times.
• There will be a problem with noise.
• Propertly prices in the area will plummet.

Leaders of the two sides are neighbours, and are remaining very civil, travelling around and lobbying local councils and residents together.

My view of the facts

I went to visit Mr Elgin at the farm and saw the proposed location, and came to the conclusion that it is a project worth supporting.

The reasons that this proposal has arisen are as follows:

1. Mr Elgin sees it as a business opportunity that also accords with his larger concern about the environment, and in particular energy in the UK.

2. The UK Government is committed to delivering 20% of our energy through renewable means by 2020, so is subsidising suitable installations and requiring local authorities to add to energy generation through wind turbines.

3. Mr Elgin has researched the viability of a turbine at this location and points out that he would not be prepared to invest the very large amount of money, time and effort required in the project if it were not worthwhile both financially and environmentally. Whether wind turbines and other current renewable energy generation schemes are the answer to our country’s long term energy problems is another question and not relevant here, as both the National Government and the land owner have decided that wind has a part to play in low carbon energy generation.

The farm is adjacent to the village of Ford, and close to Waldridge Manor, but the turbine will be at least 500 metres from any residence. It will be much taller than any other structure in the area, so will be seen from roads and some houses, and visible from  several kilometres. Whether it will be an eye sore will largely be a matter of personal opinion: I rather like them.

It is extremely doubtful that anyone would hear any noise whatsoever from the turbine unless they were on the nearby footpath, a long way from any dwellings.

He is monitoring wind speeds in the exact location and has found that there is ample wind to keep the turbine working at an efficent rate, and this is backed by solid data gathered by engineers over an extended period of time. (This can be found at http://www.enercon.de/en-en/59.htm)

Personally, I don’t think that a turbine, even a tall one, in such a position would cause property prices to plummet at all, let alone to the extent claimed by the protestors. I do, however, understand how people come to believe the worst and support the protest, especially as they have nothing personally to gain by it. Some would say that they might well become financial losers as the subsidies are paid of increased energy bills for users and the economics of this are beginning to bite in Germany and other countries. However, this is not Mr Elgin’s problem, and he is only attempting to do what the Government wants, and is willing to support.

How to find a balance?

• Will the turbine pay it’s way and perform as predicted, repaying it’s carbon cost in a reasonable time?
• Is the landscape damage significant in this place?
• Must we get used to these on the landscape in order to produce energy without the carbon emissions?
• How much will local peoples’ lives really be affected?

Only the first of these questions has a ready answer, if one is willing to accept the research that has been done and data produced by experts, which suggests that turbines in this area are a viable proposition, and the pay-back should be rapid.

The remaining questions are much more difficult to answer, and engender conflict between environmentalists and the general public (sadly these remain separate entities, see http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2009/08/death-to-the-environmentalist-one-environment-one-humanity-one-survival/), and between environmentalists with different perspectives. In putting up wind turbines, we are continuing to industrialise the countryside, adding to the power pylons, roads, HS2 railways, housing etc., and that cannot be a good thing. But anything that reduces our country’s carbon emissions, and reduces our reliance upon coal and gas must be worthwhile.

The big answer is to find ways of using less energy, which has huge global implications on lifestyles and population, and these do not help at this corner of England. Mr Elgin is doing his best to communicate what he is doing and why it is worthwhile and we can only hope that the debate that continues sheds light rather than doubt and confusion.

See also http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2011/12/the-mysteries-in-the-forest-floor/

http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2011/08/a-walk-in-the-countryside-natures-resurgance/

http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2009/08/death-to-the-environmentalist-one-environment-one-humanity-one-survival/

Old Strasbourg, on the River Ill which flows into The Rhine

Strasbourg is a French city, but only just: it is in the easterly province of Alsace and sits on The Rhine river which forms the border with Germany.

The Rhine is a mighty river, and regarded by Wagner as so German that he based the legend of his Ring Cycle there: the first opera being Das Rheingeld. It leaves Switzerland at Basel and flows northwards in it’s wide and fertile valley, between the Black Forest (Schwarzwald) and the Vosges mountains towards Strasbourg, The Netherlands and finally the North Sea. Nowadays, between Basel and Lautenburg, the East bank is in Germany, but the West bank is in Alsace which, these days, is a province of France. However I met a man, aged about 50, in a brasserie in the middle of Strasbourg who’s mother had experienced Alsace changing from French to German, to French, to German, To French during her lifetime. Most of the place names on the Alsatian side of the river are German (Strasbourg derives from the German for town at the meeting of roads), but everyone speaks French, and although there are a number of dialects that use German words, these are not widely spoken. On the German side, the names are exclusively German, as is the spoken language.

In the flat Rhine valley, the land is very fertile and mostly intensively farmed, the fields stretching for kilometres, unbroken by hedges or woodland, but speckled with settlements. As the land rises from the valley, the agriculture turns from arable to fruit farming as you approach the Black Forest, and intensive viniculture as the land rises towards the Vosges mountains in Alsace.

The village of Riquewihr

Here, walking through one of the better preserved villages, such as Riquewihr, feels like walking through the film set of Pinocchio, as you are surrounded by impossibly picturesque timber-frame houses, brilliantly painted and with storks nests adorning the steep, tiled roofs. Among all the tourist kitsch is the huge, and serious, business of wine and there are opportunities to taste the delicious Alsatian Riesling, Gewurtztraminer and Pinot gris wines. There are also some less known reds, including a pinot noir that is served from the chiller that has become fashionable in the bars of Strasbourg and beyond.

Strasbourg is an important city: one of the largest ports on the Rhine and at a major cross-roads for both road and rail, and the home to the European Commission and the European Court of Human Rights. The old city, mostly situated on an island in the River Ill, holds an historic cathedral with a famous unbalanced single spire on it’s two towers, and retains many of it’s lovely old Alsatian buildings. These are criss-crossed by timbers in a multitude of patterns and penetrated by shuttered windows right up into the roof. At street level are smart clothes shops, little delicatessens, and countless cafes and restaurants, mostly offering the local specialities such as Choucroute Garni a l’Alsacienne (sauerkraut dressed in the Alsatian style), calves head, veal steaks and quiche lorraine.

Strasbourg Cathedral

As we finished our delicious brasserie meal, surrounded by murals of past events and the cathedral, the sound of German, French, English and other languages floated from the tables around us and seemed to be spoken by all of the waiters.  It occurred to me that Winston Churchill would have been delighted to sit here, 67 years after the end of WW2 and see how his idea that ‘jaw-jaw is better than war-war’ has been realised. A Europe living in cooperation and peace, where a short river crossing takes you from one language and culture to another, but no passports are needed, and where those cultures are enjoyed but not imposed; where people are open to sharing friendship, or commerce whatever your origin or nationality. In Alsace, where the tanks have rolled and army boots tramped the growing vines into splinters time and again over the years, the Rhine rolls on regardless of it’s German and French banks, and ignorant of the legends that humans have thrust upon it.

The gentle prosperity of Strasbourg is a huge achievement that belittles all of the petty self-interest, jealousies and ‘traditions’ that are thrown up by narrow nationalists. Their emotive posturing, and harking back to a history that can be spun and embellished with tradition and legend to suit their needs, only serves to divide folk and foment unjustified fear and resentment which, unfortunately, may often be the actual objective.

In 1937, my father was an iron miner in nearby Lorraine and saw the advance of the Nazis with horror, so although a pacifist by nature, he joined the Allied army to fight them. He lost his left hand in a battle in Narvik, but never regretted the sacrifice and rejoiced as the European Union developed. In his youth, his friends were French, Polish, German or Italian, and my Uncle Oscar, who enjoyed a drink could be heard speaking all four within a single sentence. This is what people are like: they get on and live all jumbled up like Oscar’s speeches, making some kind of sense, until some political nutcase with an axe to grind intervenes, setting folk at each other’s throats.

The European Union may have brought bureaucracy, and the spread of the Euro currency caused financial difficulties, but it has also brought peace and cooperation on a continent that was forever riven in strife and wars. May Strasbourg live in peace for as long as the Rhine (or Rhein, or Rhin) flows through Europe, to the sea.

To each of us, having more money, more freedom, more choice is a good thing; that is pretty universal. For the majority of the Earth’s population, it is survival, and a never-ending struggle to secure food, clothing and shelter, let alone healthcare and education. In the richer countries, we strive to gain :

a. Sufficient for our needs or

b. Plenty so we don’t have to worry or

c. Loads so we can have anything we want or

d. Even more than the next billionaire.

For many people, having enough is sufficient, but we now know that for certain people there is no limit to greed and that it is infectious. Thus corporate executives constantly compare their earnings to others, and society is sucked in to believing that they have to advertise higher salaries to secure ‘the right quality’ of person. This has contributed to the huge disparity in wealth that exists across the world today, and the earnings gap is socially divisive, unfair and damaging to corporate finances, especially where failure is being rewarded because of gilt-edged pay deals. It contributes to corporate executive arrogance, which can result in the sort of disastrous decisions that led to the banking crisis of 2008.

Prior to then, people in general in the developed nations were becoming better off, and I have been surprised at how quickly we have forgotten the ‘waste not want not’ ethos of the post war mid 20th century. The throw-away society, started in the USA in the late 50s and fostered by Western governments’ pursuit of economic growth as THE measure of success, has resulted in people believing that it is their right to buy anything, go anywhere, waste anything and have everything tailored to their personal desires, particularly if they have money. This generates waste for the sake of it as people manufacture anything at all that will earn some money: just consider the pile of rubbish that a Disney store pedals for example, or the growing dumps in peoples’ lofts and cellars, and this is just the good stuf.

For countries relying on ever-increasing economic growth, it is like a heroin addiction in that the body feels very sick without the drug and ever increasing amounts are needed. Anyone who suggests that the drug is not a good thing is a boring, kill-joy bore and, by the way, the final outcome is fatal.

http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2011/12/the-mysteries-in-the-forest-floor/

http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2011/08/a-walk-in-the-countryside-natures-resurgance/

http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2009/08/death-to-the-environmentalist-one-environment-one-humanity-one-survival/

Certainly, environmental activists of all hues (and there are many, unfortunately) have failed, in spite of all the many gains:

* Media coverage. We see and hear information about all the dire environmental issues that face us today on the media far more than previously.

* Protection of land and waterways. We have European Environment Directives, subsidies to help farmers do less damage (and certainly, the poisons that were brought into focus by Silent Spring have largely disappeared), protection of fish stocks, clean waterways, control over wastes and so on. In fact, industries complain that there are so many environmental regulations that it is difficult to do business.

* Protection of green countryside. We have planning rules that make it quite difficult to build on green field sites, particularly green belts and national parks so that people involved in many aspects of housing say that we are not building anywhere near enough houses: this does beg the question why we want to build on more green field when there are large numbers of empty houses and bits of land that could be brought into service, but it is a big issue now.

Yet the global problems listed above haven’t gone away, they just get worse: how can this be?

* World GDP will grow an average 3.1%/year through 2030, driving oil demand from the current 84 million barrels/day to 103 million b/d, when European governments and others have targets to reduce imissions as early as 2020, and dramatically by 2050.

* The human population is growing exponentially: it doubled between 1960 and 2002 and the rise is not slowing.

* That population is demanding ever more resources per head: energy, water, richer food, travel, consumerism.

The combination of population and resource demand means that we simply devastating the system that we depend upon for survival; the atmosphere, water, land to inhabit, wilderness, forest, mineral resources.

Even if you go against the science and believe (yes, believe) that, if global warming is happening it isn’t caused primarily by human activity, you have to admit that there is a serious threat to the stability of existence 20 or 50 years down the line. This means that there is a serious threat to our childrens’ and grand-childrens’ futures. Although we often hear that children are  “the most important things in our lives”, we still we don’t take the action needed to negate the threats to their futures.

I was therefore fascinated to hear that a new political movement has got underway, focused on environmental conservation that is even causing concern in David Cameron’s true blue Witney constituency. These people (who probably include those in the movement against wind turbines in the countryside) are against changes in the English planning law designed to simplify and streamline regulation. Currently, if you want to build on a green-field site adjacent to many towns, you are likely to be confronted by a strong local opposition that can be very organised and effective, and that often prevents important housing and infra-structure projects from proceeding. This is very expensive, and politicians are concerned that the UK economy is suffering as a result and that this is the cause of the low level of house building which people, apparently, need. So the Government is proposing to cut planning law down to make it much simpler and also, and here lies the rub, to shift the balance towards the developers to overcome this log-jam.

The protest movement has worked out that there are sufficient voters in potentially affected constituencies to vote out many sitting Tory MPs if they vote tactically, and this they are threatening to do if the houses and factories start appearing on their beloved countryside. All strength to them I say! There is little enough open countryside left in this crowded isle.

But what has made me think hard, is that the environmentalist movement has rarely managed to gather such political momentum: we have remainedout of the mainstream of society, seen either as sandel-wearing nutters or at best as do-gooders who’s ideas we really should try to implement… a bit (see ‘Death To The Environmentalists’ blog below). Politicians are boasting of being “The greenest government ever!” (D.Cameron) and other such guff, but both this government and New Labour before them have seemed unwilling to really put the coordinated, funded policies into action that bring these aspirations about.

Environmental activists can and do strive to engender positive action by governments through lobbying, the media and direct action, and these days web petitions, and these do have an affect that supplements the more powerful long term economic need highlighted by Nicholas Stern and others. We local activists often feel that we are on the edges, nudging peoples’ attention and consciences, but actually achieving little in the way of changing attitudes and behaviours towards the environment. We have to content ourselves with tiny successes, be very patient, and believe that just plugging away year after year WILL make a useful difference. I have my doubts.

So why have the Tory heartlands suddenly become avid conservationists? Because they do love the countryside and, being among the better-off part of society, spend more time it than their poorer urban fellow citizens. It is naked self-interest, centred on this generation’s preferences and narrow in it’s focus. Like anything, it is a gut reaction, from the heart, emotional: “My glorious countryside where I walk the dogs and enjoy the spring flowers, my heritage..” etc.

So there is a passion there, and a willingness to act: how can it be broadened such that the mainstream of society starts to demand stronger action by government, and starts to modify it’s behaviour to deal with our big environmental problems? What is going to put a ‘fire in the belly’ of Mr & Mrs Averge Middle-Class start to threaten to change their votes if local councillors and MPs across our country do not take significant action on the environment?

It’s the old ‘Dunkirk Spirit’ we are looking for, but as in 1939, it is likely that only a dire and immediate threat to our country, and therefore to all of our best interests, is going to bring about the change that we need: and that will be far, far too late.

Beech trees are very stately, their smooth grey trunks, like cathedral columns rising from the leafy forest floor, often only spreading into a canopy dozens of feet up in the air. The foliage glows warm green in the spring against a blue sky, and in the autumn turns golden before the leaves fall and add to the deep litter on the floor.

When men go into a forest to chop it down, they see trees, and powered by burning the carbon of trees that grew 200 million years ago, smash their way through to bring down the trees and gain the timber. In an ancient wood, beneath the vast wheels and metal tracks they are also destroying an amazing complexity of life that thrives under the surface of the forest floor, and this is one of the reasons why ancient woods are so precious. It is also where the mystery dwells.

I have a favourite beech wood atop the Chiltern ridge which is reached by a small path running steeply uphill from a nice country pub. This  wood is not only very lovely, with it’s open, leafy forest floor and towering columns of trees, but very rich in fungi. At first glance, the floor seems rather devoid of life as not much grows beneath mature beech, but look closer, particularly in the Autumn, and you will find all manner of colourful and exotic fungal life among the leaf litter. In parts it is carpetted with delicious black Horns of Plenty, stumps covered with little bonnets and small common puffballs, innocuous looking greyish Death Caps and occasional cepes and chanterelles (as well as many small brown jobs).

  
(Chanterelle, left; Common Bonnet, middle; Magpie Ink Cap)

Southern England has had a very dry, warm autumn especially during the peak mushroom season of late September to early November which worried some farmers (a bit), made it a lot easier to walk along Chiltern forest paths as the usual slushy mud was absent, and caused a near absence of fungi. On a foray I joined in October in my area we found almost nothing – a few ‘small brown jobs’ if you looked hard, but all of the normal exotic fecundity was absent: it was a disappointing day, so I went for a run instead.

The dry weather continued until the middle of November, when some heavy showers moistened the soil. Leaves were still on many of the trees, and a foxglove was flowering in my garden – a flower which would normally be long gone by October.

I kept visiting these woods and on November 16th, things began to get interesting again, but the fungi were a quite different range from last year: if 12 species, only 2 matched! These were funnel caps (some very large) and common bonnets (picture above) and two edible species, the Wood Blewett (below left) which is purplish and oyster mushrooms, below right.

Mushroom do not just grow from a seed, like green plants, but are the fruiting bodies of the main plant, which is the ‘mycellium’. This is a network of fibres, or hyphae, that can be absolutely enormous, spreading over acres of forest floor, or very localised  on a single tree stump, or anything in between. Therefore, underneath the leaf litter on this beech forest floor is an amazing complexity of intertwining fungus hyphae of many different species, the overall mass of which is much, much greater than that of the mushrooms and toadstools that we see on the surface from time to time. Also, whilst the fruiting bodies are ephemeral, the underground plant, or mycelium, may be as old as the forest itself.

In fact, fungi are critical to a forest’s health as the trees grow in symbiosis with them. The roots of many trees are ‘infected’ with the fungi around them, and this seems to benefit both organisms, helping the tree gain nutriants and possible water. So a healthy ancient forest is one in which many species depend upon each other for their survival, not only in predator-prey relationships, but as symbionts.

The colourful and varied fungi shown here are manifestations of the real forest mystery that lies unseen beneath our feet and is much too complex and mysterious for us to competely understand. Thus I will keep visiting the forest during the autumn to see what is fruiting at any time, possibly finding something delicious for supper (only taking what I can eat), and always enjoying the beauty of the forest.

If you want to find out more about fungi and experience the delight of finding these ephemeral beauties, locate the nearest fungus group on the internet. In this area, we have the Bucks Fungus Group which can be found at http://www.bucksfungusgroup.org.uk/

See also http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2011/08/a-walk-in-the-countryside-natures-resurgance/

Down Spickett’s Lane there are several wild plum trees festooned with fruit and I stretch up, standing on the bank  to gather some. They are small and crimson when ripe, and quite deliciously sweet with an intense flavour. Juice dribbles down my chin. There are damsons, small and black and too high to pick without a ladder, more small yellow fruit and one in-between. On the other side the lane, the blackberries are not ready yet, but will be black and luscious in a couple of weeks.

I turned right, past the piggery where a few Oxford black-and-tan rare pigs remain, snoozing in the gentle morning, then round the edge of the bean field down towards the river. Waddesdon Estates farm this land and, as part of their Environmental Stewardship Scheme, all of their fields have a wildlife strip around the edge where wildflowers (weeds) prosper and bees and butterflies dart and settle in their search for nectar. A month ago, when the wildflowers were at their best, there were lots of butteflies: meadow brown in particular, common blues and small whites, green-veined whites, red admirals, peacocks. Now these are fewer, but they are still to be found along with a gatekeeper (small meadow brown) or two.

There are rustlings in the high, scrubby hedgerow and I hear some squirrels having a fight, squeaking and jumping about but see nothing. I cross the stile that penetrates it and step into a cow pasture with a wooded, watery drainage channel on my left. This is where newts, grass snakes and waterfoul skulk and a source of dragonflies and damselflies, and I see a large one zoom over my head, too fast to identify.

There is a brown bull with broad shoulders and a deep chest right ahead of me, on the footpath route over the field, and I approach with a little caution; but he is quiet and docile as I skirt around him. The air is fairly quiet now where it was alive with birdsong a month or two ago, but there are birds about. A buzzard circles up on a thermal, but doesn’t come close enough for me to see his colours. There are a lot of crows in the sheep meadow, and rooks in the wood at the top of the field, and an owl box in the tree near the cattle bridge where I saw a tawny owl last march. And there are the ubiquitous pigeons, flapping away noisily as I approach, and sparrows.

The cattle bridge crosses the River Thame, and a pause to see if I can see any fish in it’s fast flowing water. The reeds are varied and luxuriant and a shy moorhen pokes it’s head out of them but doesn’t emerge this time. A couple of cows gaze vacantly at me as they chew their cud.

I cross a gate and a stile, entering the Eythrope Estate, home of Lord Rothschild, who also owns the entire Waddesdon Estate.

Again there are wide, wild field borders, and as I skirt the field through longish grass, I see more white butterflies, and a couple of brimstones that look like a leaf when they stop to feed.

Above, buzzards and red kites glided under the blue sky and seemed to be gathering over the hill to the north: perhaps there was some carrion there.

[SinglePic not found] [SinglePic not found]

As I walk, young pheasants suddenly burst up from the wheat and tall grass, flying further down the track or running into the scrub for cover. These are being bred for the shooting season that starts in October, but that is not the only doom that awaits these tasty game birds!

From only a few feet away, a fox springs up from the wheat where it had been lying in wait to catch a pheasant dinner, and runs off disconsolately through the golden crop.  It is amazing what a wheat field conceals: along with the fox, and the pheasants, various small birds would suddenly appear, wings flapping at great speed in their panic to reach the nearby trees.

I come to a wider area of wildflowers still in bloom: this area would have been planted with a rich variety of native species as part of the Waddesdon environmental work. The air hums with honey and bumble bees, many different flies and some small blue butterflies. This is a sound I hear too seldom these days where it used to be the norm on a summers day. It is the sound of nature at work in a healthy countryside and alien to blank squares of monoculture. This land is intensively farmed, but space is left for natural ecosystems to work and it’s health protected from chemicals and machines.

I stop to enjoy this buzz of life, then as I turn, a hare bursts out from the undergrowth a few yards away, and disappears into the hedge. About half a dozen kites are still circling in the air high over the hill, and a sudden birdsong bursts from nearby trees.

I leave the Waddesdon land, and climb through a meadow, then over another stile onto a neat and tidy field of rye grass: green and even and silent. The field edge has been mown, and it is empty of flowers, insects or any interest and the contrast is staggering.

We have turned much of our countryside into an aseptic monoculture which has been profoundly destructive to the diversity of nature in the British countryside. We have cut down hedgerows, ancient forests (over 80 percent have dissappeared this century), poisoned waterways and tried to turn the land into a factory floor which, for sterility, this field resembles. The terrible thing to me is that we have forgotten what the countryside should be like, and was like until very recently. The land along the Thame Valley shows that we can have both efficiently produced food and healthy natural ecosystems.

Waddesdon manages to farm profitably and efficiently, and because the people running it leave some land for nature and take care how they use modern technologies, after only a few years there is a resurgance of a diverse and healthy countryside. This creates a balance that protects crops, a balance that is destroyed by over-use of expensive chemicals and over-intensive practices. The result is that many of our species of  birds and mammals are on endangered lists, and the countyside is often silent and boring.

My walk took me less than two hours, and in that time I have come across dozens of species, and been inspired and amazed by seeing the web of life at work. We do need more of it throughout our country, and it is us, all of us who have to make it happen realising that it is our health and quality of life that is at stake, and doing what we can to understand and restore our countryside.

See also: http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2011/12/the-mysteries-in-the-forest-floor/

http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2009/08/death-to-the-environmentalist-one-environment-one-humanity-one-survival/

The problems of alienation from society that result from inequalities are deep seated and complex, and although some very good minds have been trying to tackle them for a long time, their solutions inevitably answer only part of the problem and are ham-strung now by lack of money.

Factors contributing to the attitudes that resulted in the riots are (not in any order):

* Poor parenting, which has been deteriorating over the past 30-odd years. This stems from the way society has become more individualistic, materialistic and unequal so that people at the bottom feel increasingly hopeless, disengaged and powerless. Parents turn to drink, drugs, sex and difficult children are left to get on with it without standards, discipline or guidance.

* A materialistic society – one who’s values turn more around bling than caring. One manifestation is the ‘shop-till-you-drop’ celebrity who acts as an icon that suggests that you can have all the money and stuff without having to work and strive for it.

* The idea that greed is good: being super-rich is often a sign of achievement (though not for the offspring of the super-rich), but what is important is how that achievement is measured. If achievement is being a Madoff who doesn’t get found out (and they do exist though he was extreme), then society has lost it’s moral compass. Anger at the banking crisis and it’s outcome, where the bankers cleaned up and society paid, is deep and wide-spread and contributes to the ‘why should I care?’ attitude.

* The increasing gap between the rich and the poor, both within our countries and across the World. This has resulted in a disconnect between sectors of society, and between governments and the rump of society. The result is that people at the bottom end either despair, or grab what benefits they can and live without working or contributing, and/or they become criminal without any concept of it being wrong.

* Lack of education, or at least, success in education: T Blair put billions into UK state education, but we still have 30% of children leaving primary school below the expected basic standard, many unable to read and write proficiently or at all. This in spite of huge research and endless initiatives have been put in place to turn things around. Schools try to instill discipline and set standards, but the problem exists largely in state schools (social deprivation, large class sizes, unvalued teachers) and not in the private sector (social privilege, small class sizes, highly valued teachers). Again, the wealth divide pertains.

* Too much information: Vast amounts of information are fed at everybody, totally unfiltered, through the media and IT, so school learning is devalued. Values are influenced or even dictated by what people happen to absorb. The increased reliance on social networking where people will gravitate towards others with similar attitudes makes any trend self-perpetuating, to the extent of large groups rushing out to trash the streets to create mayhem. It is not a question of limiting the technology or freedom, but of working out how society can best cope with this to produce a favourable outcome.

* Lack of moral leadership: Politicians are not trusted, even less since various UK MPs and US Congressmen have been jailed for corruption and immorality. Of course, politicians are people like you and me, and neither all bad or all good, and no-one likes a ‘goody-goody’, but the media amplifies misdeeds, without balance and often with a political spin, whilst much good is ignored. Company directors tend to line their own pockets to the cost of everyone else. There is Enron, of course, and Madoff, and Fred-the-Shred (ex MD of RBS) but also in the UK, an analysis of the FTSE 100 company directors showed that the average pension entitlement of main board directors was £160,000 per year, whilst the average employee could expect £6,000.

* I have rights, but sod the responsibilities. It’s my right to have (or sire) any number of kids by any number of partners, and the society will pick up the bill. It’s my right to get benefits to pay for my flat, food, children, schooling, medicare and fags, so why should I work? This is a very difficult problem to tackle as any adjustment to benefits causes hardship to the most deprived and increases resentment and anger.

A positive solution will be very difficult to achieve as it is a long-term project – this has been 30 years in the making. It is not a question of left or right-wing politics as neither have all of the answers, and an unbalanced approach will end up with a worse situation. Funnily enough, democracy itself contributes to the problem as political parties work towards getting elected or re-elected, rather than longer term outcomes. I think, perhaps, that this coalition govt is trying to work long term, with the opposing factions within the parties (and they are dramatic – lefty liberals and hang-em-high reactionaries at the extremes) cancelling each other out. But leadership has to be decisive within this continuing war, and a fast-moving situation. Good luck to ‘em.

Any blanket solution to the underlying problems is utopian and unrealistic when you take into account the reality of human nature and any govt that tried to carry out such a policy would probably end up fascistic and so fail.

Our society (Western capitalist) is a bit like a run-away train, with the drivers valiantly trying to keep the thing on the tracks whilst the bad injuns throw rocks and logs. And if the train comes off the rails, as it probably will, doing 90 miles per hour, and most of the people on board are killed, well it’s happened before. Of course it’ll be bigger this time, but those left will pick themselves up and start again. And we still won’t realise that you and me have no importance at all – we are as irrelevant as an ant in a heap: just read your history.

China is criticsing the USA for it’s debt situation following the down-grading in it’s rating. They point out the disproportionate amount of money the US pours into it’s military might – per head of population, it is simple madness.

The UK is not far behind – why DID we go into Iraq/Afghanistan/Libya? Why are we proposing to spend billions on a Trident replacement?

And then why are we, that is, our Government, so keen on nuclear power and reprocessing after Fukushima and when we are shutting down the reprocessing facility at Sellafield as it has been a big financial failure – billions down the pan. This project was set up under Thatcher and strongly opposed by Greenpeace and others, but who listens?

It is all madness, and my view is that some of the anger that exploded this weekend is the first outburst of many prompted by the growing inequalities in society and the total lack of accountability by those in power for squandering our country’s wealth. This chart brings another, very powerful, perspective on the matter and shows that we simply should not be spending vast amounts in this way.

And talking of grandiose projects, don’t get me started on HS2!

http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2011/12/the-mysteries-in-the-forest-floor/

http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2011/08/a-walk-in-the-countryside-natures-resurgance/

http://www.doug-kennedy.com/2009/08/death-to-the-environmentalist-one-environment-one-humanity-one-survival/