The Calder Valley constituency is currently the one offering the greatest support to the e-petition calling for a ban of driven grouse shooting. That’s not surprising since it is the home of the Ban the Burn campaign and there is plenty of support for the idea that recent floods have been caused by the intensification of moorland burning and drainage on Walshaw Moor and local grouse moors.
Local MP, Craig Whittaker, spoke in favour of intensive grouse moor managment in the Westminster Hall debate on grouse shooting of 2016. I’d be delighted to see this seat change hands and in the 2017 general election it almost did – Whittaker had a majority of just 609 votes over Labour.
The toppling of Whittaker by local Labour candidate Josh Fenton-Glynn has been made even more possible by the brave decision of the Green Party (631 votes in 2017) not to contest the seat. This must have been a difficult decision but I welcome it (even though I am no longer a member of the Labour Party myself).
Given that Whittaker has spoken in favour of a second referendum on the EU membership issue, he might not get cut any slack by the Brexit Party which would further reduce his chances of re-election. In fact, this seems to be a fairly strong Brexit-favouring constituency so everything is up in the air, including the remote possibility of a Brexit MP, but the more important thing may be which out of Labour and Conservative lose most seats to the official Brexit party.
I haven’t noticed Josh Fenton-Glynn say anything about grouse shooting and moorland management (this blog has several readers who are local residents – can you help here?) but the Labour policy on grouse shooting and upland burning ought to help as a vote winner here.
This will be one of the election results I will be looking out for keenly.
[registration_form]
perhaps some of these places could twin themselves with Delhi – sounds like they ought to
Mark, ,Josh Fenton -Glynns 5 Policy Priorities are number 1 Climate Change and Flooding.2 a Strong Local Economy.3 the NHS.4 Transport in the North.5 Decent Work.
Brian – excellent!
I quote you ‘ that recent floods have been caused by the intensification of moorland burning and drainage on Walshaw Moor and local grouse moors ‘.
A very unfair and exaggerated claim on your part and no doubt driven by your own political leanings and other background I cannot quite fathom.
There were many other significant factors which resulted in these massive floods which affected many other areas across the North of England in the same time frame.
I am local to the area and you are grossly unfair in appearing to lay the blame for these floods primarily on the management of local moors.
There was heavy rain over a number of weeks , and other rain in the months running upto the most recent floods. There were also said to be failures by statutory agencies over a number of years in the neglect of drains, river courses and other drainage systems.
We have seen other flooding across the country where similar failings contributed likewise. In many of these other floods there were no grouse moors within a 100 miles of the incidents.
I feel for the residents and businesses who suffered the effects of horrific flooding – particularly in recent years- but climate change – driven by events elsewhere in the world- has not helped.
Please try to control your apparent bias. It would also be nice to see you see report the larger picture – as I hope others who read your blog will appreciate you fail to do.
Respectfully
Philip – than for your ‘respectful’ comment which misses off the first words of the sentence you quoted. The sentence was about what local people think and how that translates into Calder Valley being the constituency in the UK most strongly in support of banning driven grouse shooting – which it is.
Misquoting like that indicates you are either a journalist or have a bias of your own.
“The sentence was about what local people think and how that translates into Calder Valley being the constituency in the UK most strongly in support of banning driven grouse shooting.”
There are 104,805 voters in Calder Valley, 510 have signed the petition. Perhaps ‘local people’ mostly don’t give a toss?
Stig – perhaps, but perhaps not. And the point was, compared with local people in the other 649 UK parliamentary constituencies, they care a lpt.
The problem with all these arguments especially anything on grouse moors is – confirmatory biases – you only believe in your argument, no matter what evidence is put in front of you. The great example for the masses of this country is this Brexit nonsense, now it’s evolved into political elections and around in circles we all go.
I called Packham a plank for advocating the planting of conifers, a lot disagreed with my view, that’s fine, but he, you have no experience of being responsible for land rewilding of any sort, yes, you know the theories by heart, you can make a lot of money writing books, appearing on TV and theories’ talks, but actually doing it – well no! Packham has become a brand – you associate with – if that’s want you want – then great.
In the end you follow these people and politic parties like masonic lemmings, sometimes the only person to believe in is yourself.
The petition raised over 100,000 mouse button pushers, that’s not a lot of people; they’ll all fit into Old Trafford with room to play a six-a-side. This constituency as I expect the vast the majority won’t give a jot for this petition – it’s a shame but that’s confirmatory biases.
Thomas – look in the mirror.
Parliament set the threshold of 100,000 signatures not me, and not you. Presumably they thought it meant something. Which is your constituency by the way?
When is CP advocate planting conifers also where and how many
The only times I have heard Chris Packham advocating the planting of conifers have been for areas of northern Scotland within the previous footprint of the Caledonian pine forest – exactly where conifers should be, but now are missing. And he refers to native Scots Pines, not exotic conifers planted for commercial timber production. And I think he has got it exactly right.
You might want to check out (a) what confirmation bias means and (b) the capacity of Old Trafford.
Yes you called Chris Packham a plank for advocating the planting of conifers, but rather proved you’re the real one when he actually advocated the return of the Caledonian forest, and so many other types in various parts of the world, NOT commercial forestry. Perhaps you don’t understand the difference, or hoped other people don’t. As far as rewilding being a theory goes again you are misinformed or showing your own bias – it’s been happening for a very long time, it’s just now that it’s more a result of conservation policy than ‘neglect’ as with the return of wildlife to Chernobyl. I think Knepp and Glenfeshie among an increasing list of others show that rewilding isn’t a theory it’s what nature does when humanity takes a step back, and maybe even give it a bit of a helping hand with reintroductions to make up for past damage. Of course this isn’t news to people with even a basic knowledge of wildlife and ecology or for that matter a degree of common sense. There are also very valid reasons why many people have a high regard of Chris Packham and a low one of Ian Botham – the politics of envy strikes again eh Thomas?