6 Replies to “Saturday cartoon by Ralph Underhill”
So true and a monument to this very rotten Government.
A great cartoon of a truly shameful attitude to our precious wildlife habitats by a government of care nots, ignoramuses and chancers. This is our real heritage being destroyed can you imagine this happening to our so called heritage built environment for this obscenely costly white elephant? No me neither yet that being destroyed is at least as valuable and important if not more so.
I can’t believe that anyone, other than those few who will massively benefit financially, still believe that HS2 is a good idea. Yes it’s an ecological catastrophe but equally the economic case has never stacked up and nor does it help us to meet the UK zero carbon/climate change targets.
I hope that Natural England and professional bodies such as CIEEM will respond robustly to the idea that ancient woodland can be translocated. If they don’t then every site can be considered translocatable and nowhere will be safe from future development.
There actually are folk in English Nature and NaturistScot who believe that if there are trees, thats all you need…. They do not understand what a woodland is.
These people are in positions of power over our biodiversity, they get on well with politicians.
I still remember (what I consider to be) the utterly brain-dead MP who said that woodland could be relocated (or suggested that it could). I’ve watched and read the examples of tried and failed (with no current successes) of those suggested relocations.
Any replanted areas (I think the term is ‘environmental offset’ in the planning arena) will have to be protected for a few hundred years for them to have any hope of being a replacement. That’s the time scales they’ve now bought into. They may need deep pockets to ensure their ‘environmental offsets’ actually happen. Eyes will be watching.
“Any replanted areas (I think the term is ‘environmental offset’ in the planning arena) will have to be protected for a few hundred years for them to have any hope of being a replacement.”
Yes. If, for the sake of argument, we accept that the destroyed woodlands can be successfully replicated in this way (and few do) what confidence can we have that the new woodland won’t itself be bulldozed out of the way by some future development project it happens to lie in the way of?
Comments are closed.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRejectRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
So true and a monument to this very rotten Government.
A great cartoon of a truly shameful attitude to our precious wildlife habitats by a government of care nots, ignoramuses and chancers. This is our real heritage being destroyed can you imagine this happening to our so called heritage built environment for this obscenely costly white elephant? No me neither yet that being destroyed is at least as valuable and important if not more so.
I can’t believe that anyone, other than those few who will massively benefit financially, still believe that HS2 is a good idea. Yes it’s an ecological catastrophe but equally the economic case has never stacked up and nor does it help us to meet the UK zero carbon/climate change targets.
I hope that Natural England and professional bodies such as CIEEM will respond robustly to the idea that ancient woodland can be translocated. If they don’t then every site can be considered translocatable and nowhere will be safe from future development.
There actually are folk in English Nature and NaturistScot who believe that if there are trees, thats all you need…. They do not understand what a woodland is.
These people are in positions of power over our biodiversity, they get on well with politicians.
I still remember (what I consider to be) the utterly brain-dead MP who said that woodland could be relocated (or suggested that it could). I’ve watched and read the examples of tried and failed (with no current successes) of those suggested relocations.
Any replanted areas (I think the term is ‘environmental offset’ in the planning arena) will have to be protected for a few hundred years for them to have any hope of being a replacement. That’s the time scales they’ve now bought into. They may need deep pockets to ensure their ‘environmental offsets’ actually happen. Eyes will be watching.
“Any replanted areas (I think the term is ‘environmental offset’ in the planning arena) will have to be protected for a few hundred years for them to have any hope of being a replacement.”
Yes. If, for the sake of argument, we accept that the destroyed woodlands can be successfully replicated in this way (and few do) what confidence can we have that the new woodland won’t itself be bulldozed out of the way by some future development project it happens to lie in the way of?