The Battle for the Countryside: Britain Should Rewild its Uplands
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 січ 2019
- Imagine if swathes of the British countryside were allowed to be wild once again, if trees and rare plants could flourish and beavers, boars and white-tailed eagles could retake their place in the ecosystem. That’s the goal of the growing numbers of nature-lovers who support the idea of rewilding Britain’s uplands. We tend to think of these uplands as ‘wild’ and ‘natural’. But in fact, as the rewilders point out, they are entirely man-made, the result of clearances by man to make way for millions of sheep whose grazing over the last 200 years has rendered the land bare. Sheep farming, once a major source of Britain’s wealth, is now largely uneconomic and depends on billions of pounds of subsidies. But where rewilding is taking place, in Britain and in Europe, a boom in tourism is providing a more sustainable local economy. We must make space for wild nature in places where farming does not make sense.
That’s romantic tosh, say the opponents of rewilding. People matter too, and the idea that we should do away with traditional ways of life for the sake of wild bilberries and wolves is getting things out of proportion. Get rid of the farms in the uplands and you will destroy not just the livelihoods of farmers, shepherds and vets, but also the village schools, shops and pubs that are at the heart of rural communities. Yes, upland sheep farms are subsidised but so is almost every other kind of agriculture. And do we really want rampant scrub to replace peaceful scenes of grazing sheep and gambolling lambs, and introduce dangerous animals who will all too soon encroach upon the outskirts of our towns and villages?
Intelligence Squared brought together four speakers who care passionately about the countryside but disagree profoundly on how we should manage it.
Glad for this debate. I'm Norwegian and when visiting the UK I've always wondered why the people dont plant new forests instead of just having flat grasslands. I bet the UK would be absolutely lovely with lots of forests and wildlife.
I agree. The Scottish highlands are an extremely damaged environment and not natural at all, for example. I come from SE England and now live in Germany and I love hiking in the forest.
Norway has a population of 5.4 millon and the UK has a population 66.6 millon.
@@knockschool Yes, and?
@@knockschool Norway and Scotland have the same population, what's your point?
@@knockschool Scotland has a population of 5.4 million.
I love the bit where she sent her friend off to survey all the wildlife to counter the claim that it's just a few birds and nothing else. "Actually, there are midges too."
The lady who said that demise of the song birds was perhaps due to predators and cited sparrow hawk. It is highly more likely that the loss of these garden song birds is predestination from domestic cats and foxes, raiding the nests of the eggs or fledglings. And of course the wholesale use of slug pellets and insecticides, that either deprived (especially thrushes) of their main foodstuff or poisoned these birds. We must also remember that re-wilding is not just planting trees, but creating truely diverse natural habitat.
Wild animals have lived together for millions of years and predators never turn their prey extinct. Not until domesticated predators came along.
I left the UK in the late 80's and live in upstate New York where there are hills, lakes, mountains. grassland and close to 12 million acres of woodlands. I didn't go back for over 10 years and when I did, I saw with new eyes and my impression of the countryside was that of one big cultivated garden, rows of commercial pine trees standing like soldiers and wild woods that covered maybe 10 acres, if that.....All very orderly, managed and bland. Some wildness would definitely be of benefit, not just for looks but ecologically too.
My question for Minette and Rory:
"We heard George state that his initial ambition would be to see 10% of the UKs uplands rewilded. With that in mind, if 10% of the Lake Districts uplands were rewilded with a mix of closed and open canopy native woodland as well as through peatland restoration projects, do you think it would receive less visitors? Bearing in mind that those changes could:
a) provide long term savings with regard to flood mitigation downstream, something that has been a significant issue in parts of the Lake District due to the way the land is currently being managed
b) increase the carbon capture/storage potential of the area to help meet climate targets
c) increase the habitat diversity and therefore biodiversity of the area
.....whilst still allowing 90% to be managed as some kind of flash flood inducing, taxpayer funded wall museum.
They weren’t arguing against planting more trees! There’s a big difference between planting more trees and rewilding.
The British countryside is what brings tourists in. It’s also a national treasure. Rewild it, please.
Finally, a good topic to debate on .
I live in the countryside, and it's an absolutely privilege and honour to live on such vast wilderness
I envy you.
That's the point though isn't it. There isn't much Wildlife at all due to the wet deserts that dominate our Landscapes.
Britain is a mostly a desert.
There seemed to be some common ground that agriculture at present is not sustainable. George Monbiot has put forward an idea of rewilding but why all the fear from his opposition when restoration of ecological systems can work with farming in the UK. Upland farming is about percentage use. I don't think anybody was arguing for total closed canopy woodland, as quoted by the opposition, when wood pasture and meadows are part of the solution as well as some grazing.
You could clearly see the decisive tactics of a career politician at play there from our Cumbrian MP.
He mentioned dry stone walls alot....many of which are not being maintained under the present system and are replaced with wire and sheet metal because the money and man power is not there to fix them under this system. No fault of the farmers!
As far as the NFU are concerned, money talks because their organisation will not insure half of my AGRICULTURAL equipment!
It’s all a class war underneath it all :(
Thumbs up for more beaver in the countryside.
Thumbs up beavers from me too. I think they're magnificent.
Hell Yeah !!
@Jeremy Brookes awesome !
@@fburton8 they are magnificent !!
We need to rewild. Economic arguments in the face of healthy ecosystems/nature are pitiful.
Livestock are essential for a healthy ecosystem/ . the argument was not well presented. livestock can graze in woods. regenerative farming provides more wildlife. It also has less inputs and greater profits. It is possible to farm with nature. problem is they farm against it. it is possible to have both with farming enhancing nature and with profit. No one is having the correct discussion / . it is either one way or the other way, black or white, etc... but it dose not have to be like that. you can have both together and everyone happy. It just is not discussed.
@@juliamarple3202 well seid
@@juliamarple3202 I agree on the black white ness of this debate. I disagree on that livestock is essential for ecosystems. Really, that is an odd thing to say - like there wasn't any ecosytem before farming.
things farmers should be (finacially) permitted to do is stop importing soy, stop using fertilizer, stop using pesticide and stop exporting meat. But I know that is just impossible in this globalized market we 'chose' to live in.
@@juliamarple3202 Yeah because ecosystems didn't exist before animal agriculture.
Wow George Monbiot is a such a great speaker
He makes a truth compelling...
I think it's also worth noting that as an Island we should have a fantastic, rich and diverse ecosystem
It basically costs nothing either.
@@michaelairley2015 Does too. At the very least, there's opportunity cost.
@@izdatsumcp Of course. Just mean in comparison.
I grew up in Britain, in the 1970s and 80s. When I see it now, I can't believe how broken and dirty it is. It is heartbreaking.
Looks fine to me.
@@billycaspersghost7528 do you live there?
Yes I do.all my life ,born and bred.
some aspects of it are not great such as ex industrial towns and inner city areas but I do not remember any "golden age" when they were not pretty grim.THey are not dirtier but are probably more broken socially.
Over my life much wildlife has returned .Badgers,foxes are at near pest levels in urban areas. Kestrels became common and I can see Kites hovering almost everytime I take a walk in the nearby fields.In hot years I find adders and lizards on the moors ,creatures I had never seen in the first 40 odd years of my life.
Rivers have returned to a cleanliness capable of supporting fish,there are many managed wetlands around.(Virtually any ex mine site).
On the social issues that have ensued since Britain de industrialised then in many ways "Broken" can be applied.
Bloody hell, it was worse then - sure you're not looking back with rose tinted specs?
The pioneering reclamation of Oostvaardersplassen (labelled a disaster by Minette Batters) saw the unexpected return of water birds to its lakes; Eurasian Spoonbill, Sea Eagle, Cormorant, Egret, Acrocephalus, Black Stork and breeding pairs of White Stork. Herbivores were introduced exactly for the purpose of preventing succession to woodland, (otherwise the lakes would dry up.) Herbivore populations were uncontrolled due to the absence of apex preditors, (the wolf has since made a return to Holland) and unregulated browsing pressure lead to food shortages. Balance is key: the lynx should be brought back to The Caledonian Forest, a shy woodland preditor, which would reduce deer numbers, introducing an environment of fear to their habitat, thus regulating their browsing and allow the natural regeneration of trees. It would also predate foxes, (which take more sheep than any lynx might.) In regards to agriculture (jobs and growing food) - silvopasture and agroforestry. Regenerative farming must replace the CAP, it's now or never..
I didn't realise what an absolute beast George Monbiot is. Like him or lump him, that was a great speech.
of course you wouldn't🤔 .
until after watching the video???!!😶
because😏 your
Captain "Hindsight" 🦸🏻♂️
😉😏🤗😃😁😆😅😅🤣🤣🤣🤣
Meanwhile, local council residents complain about falling branches...
The arguements against rewilding feel like they are more about very personal individual exeriences and romance with farming and the countryside rather than what is for the greater good
Ah, yes... the "greater good".
That's always a poor argument.
@@joelhall5124what? How are you opposing the concept of a “greater good”
@@j-wizzy are you seriously asking that?
@@joelhall5124yes please tell me how a greater good can ever be a bad thing
@@j-wizzyfair enough, tell me what the "greater good" means and what you're willing to sacrifice or make others suffer for, for it.
Beautiful call to rewild 👍🏾👍🏿👍🏼💚
I am from the Netherlands and the Oostvaardesplassen besides of the amusing pronunciation is indeed a good example that we have to be very careful with 'rewilding'. Since it was and still is a great disaster with hundreds of starving animals. But what happened there was, that we just stuffed some land with great mammals thinking we could out of nowhere create a safari. Well we can't, we should start with planting trees and reintroducing smalls animals. And if I compare the English landscape to my home region than I am so happy to live between forests.
Interesting to hear this. Agreed, it's a learning point for how we shouldn't rewild and not a point against doing it altogether.
Rewilding uplands can work. Check out the Ennerdale project in the lake district since 2003. Reducing the number of sheep has led to a huge increase in plant biodiversity..The mistake we all make is thinking that these bare hills up upland Britain are natural and have been there forever.
How can minette call herself a farmer when she has no respect for nature. She is a pure example of what the future does not need. Couldnt even listen to her .
I'm not entirely sure why we can't have both re-wilding and traditionally farmed heathland. There are currently plenty of relatively cheap estates of 1000+ acre parcels in upland areas. Sell 20 homes in London, buy up the 40'000 abandoned acres currently for sale. Re-wild those, allow the deer/grouse hunting and farming to continue on adjacent properties. Once the forests are established (10-15 years), allow the sheep and deer to maintain the competitive under story as well, or allow reintroduce other ruminants. Everyone wins. I feel everyone up there wants to see a better environment and wealth for upland people.
Never thought I would be agreeing with a Conservative. Well done Rory Stewart. Your deep knowledge and understanding of rural land management, history and communities were undeniable. Your deep knowledge of the subject is indisputable. On the other side of the table.... when you know you have lost the argument, what do you do? Appeal to the audience's fears and insecurities. and tell them to "vote for the uplands, to send a signal, regardless of the argument!. Really? In other words, ignore the facts and follow the fear. As for Monbiot, I object to spending money on wars, weapons and military equipment. I object to spending money on WEF technocratic policies. I object to financing the production of synthetic food that will make farmers and farming redundant. Land clearances is inhuman and unethical, and that would be the outcome do the kind of rewilding you are arguing for. NGOs and finance companies are involved in the biggest land grabs in Africa ( the same is happening in the UK) and are evicting indigenous communities from ancestral and common lands, depriving pastoralists of grazing and water. Africa Parks, a private company owned by a dutch billionaire now owns 30 million hectares of land in Africa, areas which are now militarised zones. The company has exclusive rights and employ armed guards to deny indigenous farmers access to grazing and water.
The Dimbleby family business is pointing at someone, saying "Yes, you" and describing their appearance.
that, is very very funny.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
"No not you , the gentleman in the spectacles....."
It's amazing how entitled we humans are, essentially the farmers argument is, we cant rewild because i wont make money and i lose the land i own. Land ownership is purely human make-believe, climate change and mother nature does not respect our human borders, your money will not buy you food in a famine. Rewilding isn't just about satisfying the eco warriors and giving the public somewhere nice to hang out on holiday, this is essential for the health of the planet and the health of humans. There is many examples of great prehistoric societies that all came to an end because of their practices in agriculture that lead to micro climate change, top soil erosion and hence famine, except we are now doing it on a global scale at breakneck industrialised speed. No-till regenerative farming, reduction in meat consumption and large scale rewilding, or mother nature will push us out the way and do it for us, simple.
We should replant the highland to the highest possible extent. Then bring back the lynx, see their benefits, then bring back wolves and maybe bears. After this other herbivores can be further reintroduced with elk and moose and hogs.
I'm not so sure about bears, but wolves and lynx are usually harmless.
@@tsarnicholasii274 same with bears, they're probably the least likely to prey on livestock.
@@stonedape2406 I'm talking about in terms of harm to humans. Bears are far more dangerous and predatory to humans
@@tsarnicholasii274 not European brown bears, they tend to avoid humans at all costs.
I get that brown bears are native, but I think since everyone wants the countryside experience
If we have brown bears, you can be harmed
Black bears are peaceful and can be scared away
Lined up against re wilding are a huge number of commercial organisations and tourism bodies hell bent on turning places like The Lake District and Snowdonia into densely populated Theme Parks.
The tory bloke doesn't grasp something important about fertility and diversity....
low fertility ecosystems in our climate , such as chalk downland,heathland and uplands are potentially the most bio diverse .
Rich soils are ideal for producing high yields in our crops yet our native flora thrives in poor soils..in general.
Also the fox took a lot of encouragement by humans to reach high population dynamics, and an incredible amount of releases of captured foxes from Europe done by the fox hunting fraternity .
Previous to the 1760s the wolf suppressed the fox !!! and the badger too.
It is mad to blame natural predators for declines in populations...you just have to think it through 30 seconds .
In truth natural predators not only co evolved with their prey but keep the prey quick witted and healthy ...WOLVES BACK ...would help the red deer population stabilize and stop it over grazing the habitat ,allow forest regeneration, but also keep them sharp and healthy...obviously wolves eat the slow the sick the stupid ones first ...the survivors get a great workout .
Predation itself leads to rapid tree regeneration.
Removal of predators leads to rapid decline in tree cover.....
The hunting shooting land owning fraternity are extremely mendacious in what motivates them.
They persecute the beautiful raptors to make sure the denuded landscape has plenty of grouse to shoot for paying aristocrats.
The toffs killed the crofters and the wolves at the same time when they invented a new breed of hardy white sheep that no longer needed shepherding and corralled at night ... The infamous highland clearances wiped out people and wolves...
If sheep farmers have for years received euros for every uneconomical sheep ....in theory can't they get the same cash for any killed by wolves and lynx and brown bear....they are used to taking back handers! redirecting tax for the benefit of the toffs !
Talk about conning the public ....crooks really lets face it .
The woman who said clues in the name about sparrow hawks!!! THE SPARROWHAWK literally shaped the sparrow ...they co evolved.
Also the missing mammals ARE ingrained in our collective memory , place names for example.
Wolves were wiped out over much of europe yet eventualy made their way back with little problem ...in the UK they need help getting back here,they have only been wiped out 360 years remember!
of course they should reforest the uplands. so should all countries as much as possible.
China, Taiwan, Japan, Korea all learned this thousands of years ago, they lead the world.
Forest holds in erosion, slows down rain drainage so the rivers are better off, builds nutrients which trickle down to low ground. Birds love it. Native animals belong in it instead of hedgerows. It looks better.
There's nothing better than raising young lambs, and then cutting their heads off when they're basically still children. Beautiful.
The return of Wolves, Lynx and Bears is discussed as some radical & drastic proposition. What about the fact these animals were here relatively recently and had crucial role that we are only beginning to understand. Our aggression and need to control our surroundings led to them being violently hunted to extinction in the British Isles. For that reason alone, they deserve to return.
Minette - "you can't say that upland farmers are unprofitable, there's clear evidence that shows the top 25% are absolutely in profit". Strong figures then. Sod the other 75%
Good debate with much passion.
Yes, yes it should
Big Ag's Special Interests Vs. Logic
Absolutely. It’s like watching a tobacco lobbyist argue that cigarettes are good for you.
It's worth noting that Chalk Downland habitat harbours some of the greatest biodiversity found in the world, often described as European rainforest. Up to 40 species of plant in a single square metre, which cascade benefits to other fauna. The UK itself has around 50% of the worlds Chalk Grasslands. Since the continuous settlement of humans in the UK, the vast swathes of Chalk Grasslands present for most of this time, were created and maintained as a man-made, waste product of people farming the land extensively with sheep. Sheep were introduced to the UK by humans and their grazing behaviours, as an alpine grazing animal, created an artificial alpine environment for species rich Chalk Downland to occur
19:40 If governments didn't take taxes out of people's pockets (theft), maybe there would be more money left and higher food prices wouldn't be a problem?
And her only argument that the uplands are alive was that her friend was bitten by insects.
Anyone know when this was recorded? By the shorts guessing the saucy summer of 2018.. curious for Michael Gove context
Very surprised with the swing against the motion…
Produce some food in your back gardens ffs.
Don't have one mate.
I only have a small garden,but I grow Plums,Strawberries,Rhubarb and Lemmons,have just
dug up a flower bed in my front garden to plant stinging nettles (got some funny looks).
Rory Stewart's argument in a nutshell:
"Listen to me I'm right. I'm a tory but I'm a good tory back from when the tories used to be pure and truthful, you remember? The tories under Boris are bad now, he's a bad tory. Look at George Monbiot he's like a bad tory, he's like Boris Johnson, you know what I'm saying?"
George Monbiot is a legend
But most uplands are pretty wild by definition - they can also be quite productive like that!
We should rewild the entire island, including ourselves and set humanity back within nature not aside from nature as it should be.
I'd be for rewilding portions of the Highlands if the funding was provided on a voluntary basis. I'd also be for getting rid of all subsidies that prop up unproductive farms.
I found it interesting that one gentleman mentioned how Britain had been deforested since the Romans were there. Yet, he never mentions that much of those forests Romans took down were to build first and send back to the massive Roman machine that covered a huge part of the European world. It just shows that Britain has been at a forest deficit since the Romans! And they argue about which area needs more trees. The truest answer is All of them!!!
All for rewilding here as long as we can get the public on board! Get those native trees planted asap :D
we might think we control the land but we can never control time and in time we have the best healing process to rejuvenate what's around us look around you now its pretty much scarce of wildlife because we took away what lives on trees, shrub's, bogs, wetlands , lets save wildlife and restore its beauty
Let's Rewild all Europe, no F excuses please.
Quick point ....we the people have been excluded by the hunting shooting fraternity and their poodles ,the sheep farmers for generations , since the murdering of the crofters and so it is a bit rich to now point the finger at the ignorant townies or anyone else they have excluded...bit rich that
I want more British rainforests
We don't need to wait for beavers to create dams, we can do it ourselves very quickly.
"Most importantly the pubs...", glad he's got his priorities right
The argument against rewilding the uplands was essentially one driven entirely by emotion for the preservation of rearing sheep, drystone walls and green carpets as far as the eye can see. Nothing regarding the environmental and ecological benefits of upland farming practices to the public and biodiversity. The problem isn’t that people don’t want to buy expensive meat, it’s that the overwhelming majority can’t afford it. Instead we have the demand for cheap meat, which is ramping up soya production in Brazil, causing mass deforestation and further exacerbating the ecological and climate crises.
That’s not to mention the atrocity to biodiversity and public health that is grouse moor farming. Merely a service yuppies/bourgeois to go and bumble about shooting!
good debate, but what a pathetic argument and attitude from the farmer
Minette Batters “Land has to be managed by people you just can’t leave it be” what a load of rubbish.
Maybe she should go to Chernobyl and see how nature has returned in the space of 30 years.
Without people messing about with nature evolution will always be the organiser in the end.
This was mostly a good debate with interesting points. Since the only strong argument against rewilding uplands is that we will simply eat lamb from somewhere else, we should maybe discourage eating lamb (and other meat especially beef). In that case the uplands farmers will be forced to transition in any case.
Rory's argument that people would not want to visit the Lake District if there was more flora and fauna was bizarre.
The model that works is the one that evolved before it got trashed and continues to be trashed elsewhere like in Romania.
Small villages drawing their livelihoods from surrounding common land.
This is impossible given the land ownership regimes and ridiculous cost of land to bring common land back again.
Remove the greed from the equations. Permaculture to replace factory farms, rewild the landscape between reconstructive permaculture bubbles. Leave room for us humans to live too in nature.
Regenerative / Restoration Agriculture. Inspiring video.
ua-cam.com/video/sRPP4Ilpxso/v-deo.html
Oooh, there's that term, "temperate rainforests". You must restore those, so to restore nature's hydrology, meaning it'll boost the archipelago's fresh water stores. It'll help the Continent too. Also will help with carbon sequestration & chiefly with climate stabilization, needed most cuz we face climate chaos, not mamby-pamby mere climate change.
True. They never want to talk about the fact that fresh water tables in Britain, the USA, and several other deforested countries are beginning to see real water deficits that need forests back.
@@nancykraus5127 Awe thanks. There's like a jillian reasons to reforest & to stop deforestation style logging, AKA clearcut logging. This would restore the economic base of lumber, while restoring the ecological base for wildlife habitat, as well as foods (including culinary mushrooms), (herbal) medicines, fibres, dyes & latex. This is perfect for replacing all the uses that petroleum was put to. Also I didn't already mention forests were nature's carbon sink. Now carbon just runs off into the oceans where it has an increasingly devastating acidifying effect. So strategic reforestation can remedy that, but needs attn. ASAP!
Could we 'Rewild' Glasgow?
I lived in Greece and there goats are even more destructive but sheep also play their part.
Environment>farmers
No two ways about it
15:35 "Farmers are experts in their own field" get it?
No to animal agriculture industry, period.
No to agriculture industry.
That's retarded, without agriculture we wouldn't have any food. Besides, animal agriculture in the UK is the best and most environmentally friendly use of our land. You're confusing our free range farming with factory farms in the US.
that guy on the right got the most british smile i've seen
William Dafoe is good
Rewilding is a no brainer!
Wow! I never ever knew that UK was such a desert when it comes to forests and wildlife! When they are talking about rewilding they are talking about trees, shrubs and birds! Such basics things! Never knew they are extinct in UK! I thought the forests are already THERE and they are discussing reintroduction of bears, wolves and lynx and other big animals ! This is too sad!....Pathetic really.....The people need to make a change! They need to be the champions for future generations! There is no time to lose!
The hills were not denuded in response to EU subsidies. The first farmers in these isles 6,000 years ago cleared both hills and lowland forests for grazing. Without trees, the fertility of hill soil reduced as nutrients were washed downhill without much humus to replace them. Over millennia, hills therefore tended to become less fertile and from there comes the tradition to use them as low quality sheep grazing land, which in turn discourages new forest growth, making the problem ever worse. If it's anyone's fault, it's the Neolithic people's.
Leaving them to go wild is not a solution because a healthy ecosystem which is also beneficial to humans will not just happen in a decade. It would take centuries by natural means, or might never happen on its own. The solution is to manage them and to develop new, sustainable methods of agriculture using all that environmental science can tell us.
And how do you think rewilding would be achieved, anyway? By taxpayers paying people not to farm their land ‒ the exact thing George was complaining about.
The subsidies pay for farmers to keep their land bare.
The solution is to reward farmers for being both productive and environmental. Paying subsidies not to farm the land for environmental reasons is just as bad, because it forces other areas of the farming industry to be even more intensive.
@@LughSummerson They're paid to keep the land bare - free of biodiversity - which is the opposite of positive environmental action
I was talking about rewilding. You would have to give subsidies to farmers not to farm. That may be environmentally beneficial, but it's economically mad ‒ taxpayers paying landowners to do nothing, while the actual problem continues to get worse.
Rewilding is an offset system, but free to the polluters. It allows big, damaging agriculture to continue unabated and expects the taxpayers to pay to roll back some of the damage.
You can have the best of both worlds by green legislation ‒ tax the intensive farms for damaging and give tax breaks for good management practises like wild borders, traditional hedgerows and carbon sequestration. Make low-intensity, environmentally sound, sustainable farming more attractive than petrochemical input farming and let capitalism do the rest.
Ignore the lack of arguments on my part, ignore facts, ignore your opinion, instead just do what I say and vote for my side, as a favor to my terrible debating skills. 1:23:43
Just like brexit majority,just,for the motion only maybe they find it didn’t go to plan because politician’s and bureaucrat’s are involved
I wonder if rewilding the uplands would involve removing the fell ponies or ...are they now wild?
wow Monbiot so resembles Freek de Jonge!!
also:
Oeestvathers Plashen, has despite the blatant cock up of ignoring the public's lack of ecological knowledge - that tiny bit of no future, sub-marine clay has probably still far more species than the whole of UK's farmland.
Me listening to the pro farm people: Will you shut up, man
The final vote was counted before the rebuttal, in which the support the motion side won the argument.
I think that's how most Intelligence Squared debates are done. But yes, it doesn't make sense to have the vote during closing statements.
Wildflower brexit is the only way every being can enjoy life
If I was allowed to manage some land for a rewilding I would be able to rebalance and naturalise the land and draw wild life in
Watching Minette Batters talk about how wonderful it was bringing new life, a new lamb or calf, into the world. She neglected to mention the industrialised and horrific slaughter queues just a few short months later. Vile.
is that michael gove? 8:26
yes!
did i get this correctly? ppl voted against rewilding the uplands after the debate? sad
The majority of sheep get exported in any case, very little is Actually eaten in the British isles. this is not great for the UK Carbon foot print!
To say theres more woodland today then there ever was ,is so untrue, I hate to bring up HS2, clearing so many ancient woodland ,Many Oaks over 300 yrs old, all for saving 20 minutes on travel time, when ever there's a new housing Estate, Woodland seems to be the first choice of being Trashed., What ever Happened to the Bristol new forest, that was just a Failed pipe Dream!
Hahaha just stumbled across this as Rory Stewart announced his candidacy for Tory leader. And I thought he was one of the lesser evils...
another debate about too many people being born in (and immigrating to) the UK, that simply (not underestimating the gravity of the topic) looks at the perspective of food production vs natural restoration.
Can anyone point to a good iq2 debate where they talk about whether it should be considered 'inhuman' to breed multiple children while the parents know that theyre unable to properly feed and raise them? I only use the term 'inhuman', as its often cited when people are requested to donate money to starving families
Hi John,
People living in the developing world have more children than the typical Western family for many reasons:
- Lack of gender equality mean that women may be raped or expected to have sex without contraception, including by their husbands.
- Tropical diseases for which treatment is not available are likely to cause the death of their children, so by having more they ensure their bloodline and that they will have someone to look after them when they are old.
- Families are destitute and need all the help they can get to run a house or work the farm.
Take a good look at yourself and question your consumption habits, which as a UK citizen produces around 20x the impact of one Indian citizen, before you criticise people in the developing world struggling to survive.
Leon
#infrastructure
Its the farmers stoping it from happening and there's a hand full out of the whole room
Good job. I hope british scientists wont let the planet earth unsupportable for life.
Excellent debate. What a tragedy that we have lost Rory Stewart from government.
U.k need to bring back wolves link's bear use garding dogs likes alabi kangal akbash Kafka's dogs use bear sprey.
I thought this would have intelligent people speaking! I even saw Michael knife in the back Gove there
Just been up in the uplands today both sheep and cattle grazing produsing food and am aboundance of wildlife
Halfway through and it's obvious that the division of upland vs lowland is intended to take away the importance of realising the uplands being brought back to productive use, increasing soils and tree coverage would add resilience to the whole picture incl. lowlands, restore aquifers etc.
Shameful that yet another strategy of divide and conquer to win an argument in favour of greed is so obvious in this 'debate' showpiece.
Yes very good point. It seems like putting the focus on the uplands made it easier for Rory to object and deflect to the lowlands and help him talk about anything other than rewilding itself.
As if predation was an anti rewilding point like disproportionate predation isnt a consequence of disturbed ecosystems lmao
What a marvelous and ordered Debate Culture you have!........ Rewilding Europe
RoryStewart... A few belittle comments a name drop and an idolised view of industrial farming. Conservative is an app name for his ideology this is about a change.
Shock Horror, Rich, Privileged Tory's don't want their advantageous situations to change.
Rory Stewart seems trustworthy.? right guys? doesnt come across as some sort of deceitful wormtongue type character at all. that boyish charm selling the rolling hills of feudalism. Sign me up.
In movies, the filmmakers tell you who is evil by using visual cues. In the real world, Wormtongues use their good looks, erudition and charm to fool the shallow-thinkers. Are you living in fantasy land or in the real world?
well, often both. but that tory is a blatant shit bag for my money. Im not impressed by his schtick at all, although, he seems rather impressed with himself.
I thought he came off the best of the four, with the least bullshit. Did he say anything in particular that was factually incorrect?
he couldnt answer in terms of scientific environmental knowledge, couldnt discredit it to his own admission. so started by attacking one of the counter arguments by attacking the the person and not the argument. obviously trying to split the opposition. that was my first boke to tell you the truth. And his wriggle and struggle to combine myth with fact.... like his story of sheep farming. You'll have to give up lamb then or it will have to be farmed somewhere else. ignoring the fact that alot of lamm is farmed already somewhere else and the industry in britain is propped up by subsidies. its one of the only times you'll hear a tory championing something other than profit. but it does profit doesnt it? just not through farming. but the landowners still get their money.... and the bigger the plot...the more they get. thats what i felt Rory was championing... but using his intellect to pretend otherwise. deliberately focussing on the sensational aspect of where a wilding project could head... large herbivores roaming the countryside and that. an deliberately ignoring the absolute positives of letting some nature take hold of perhaps 10% of our uplands. waffle and tradition. 'course, marv'lous speaker.
@@LughSummersonHe didn't say anything factually incorrect but I also don't think he actually gave a reason not to do it.
Saying that we should rewild the lowlands isn't an arguement against doing it in the uplands, the two aren't mutually exclusive. Also saying that people currently visit the Lake District isn't an arguement against rewilding the UKs uplands. No one is saying we should rewild ALL the uplands, so the 'protecting our cultural landscape' slant isn't a valid argument against it either.
He also literally suggested we should rewild the uplands of the UK (Scotland)....so the more I think about it the more I think it was quite a vacuous performance with about as big a gaffe as you could make!
17:09 shes hardly read one book, and hasnt even opened the other
"The uk tree covered surface is 1/3 of the European average, and this is the European Union's fault."
... wait, what?
Not what he said.
Instead of planting trees why not just release native fauna into these landscapes and let it naturally regenerate.
That’s not viable. The sheep will just graze it all