The following is an extract from the Moorland Association response to a DEFRA consultation on burning of blanket bogs, peatlands and heather moors.
Payments, payments, grants, payments, payments…
What does the Moorland Association want? It’s pretty clear – they want either to be left alone to damage priority habitats as they have done for decades or to be paid not to damage them.
DEFRA – sort it out!
[registration_form]
* Payments for time spent thinking up more things to be paid for
* Milking the tax payer training
I cannot recall being able to claim any payments when government changed the rules about stuff that impinged upon my life ofeten costing me money but then I’m an OAP so I may have forgotten but I doubt it.
Even though Tory governments have often feather bedded their friends, this is surely taking the piss. In DEFRAs shoes I think I would be telling The Marquess of Downshire and his landed pals in the Moorland Association to f*** o**.
But it’s their traditional way of life
They are Bred to milk whatever they can
Totally agree with you Paul
By the way you’ve not quite got his name correct old boy
Its
Arthur Francis Nicholas Wills Hill 9th Marquess of Downshire
Indeed Valerie, he likes to pretend he is just an ordinary chap calling himself Nick Downshire. All I can say is shame we didn’t have a similar revolution to the French at the end of the 18th century.
Yes great shame
He was my terrible landlord for 20 years never met him once.
Thankfully I have a council house now.
Vive la revolution
Subsidy scroungers
So, not only do they wish to be allowed to continue to trash the hills in order to ‘farm’ more grouse for the guns, they would like all the lesser mortals and potential flood victims to pay for it. I would like to see this kind of information in the national press. (Yes, I know some of the items on the list are meant to be habitat “improvements’ but it’s debatable that this would really be the case) .
Suggestion: write checks for carbon storage and enhanced water storage for an amount that at minimum tempts the marginal estates to take the cash. In exchange, the ground would be maintained in a natural state with no economic activity that was detrimental to the habitat. There will be a complete cessation of all hunting and any activity related to hunting or any activity that leads to any animal suffering in any form.
Offer the deal for a limited time. Once accepted it would continue in perpetuity with adjustments depending on market rates, e.g. if a carbon tax was introduced. After the offer expires then it’s open season on getting all forms of detrimental activity banned and compensation paid out to all who suffered adverse effects of said detrimental activity.
If the estates are just in it for enhancing the rural economy then what objections could they have.
This might stick the throats of a lot of people but the end result is more birds of prey and more diversity in wildlife and habitats. If this got us there sooner rather than later then it’s time to hold one’s nose and get on with it.
Management practices in agriculture are well illustrated in today’s Guardian’s “The Long Read”.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/25/the-end-of-farming-rewilding-intensive-agriculture-food-safety
Yes it’s a very good read even mentioned food waste!
I don’t mind the government sticking it’s hand in to my hard earned wage packet to take money to subsidize hospitals the police and the poor etc, but for public money to be paid out to toffee nosed scroungers takes the piss, all subsidise / benefits should be means tested, “you own a grouse moor” Go Away. That’s being polite
It’s called ‘farming the envelope’ I believe, among farmers (the envelope the subsidy cheque would arrive in).
I’m interested in what a ‘duel’ wheeled tractor might be. I know what a ‘dual’ wheeled one is, but this sounds altogether more combative. Any suggestions?
Doug – it’s an old banger!