Rewilding Broughton (Subtitled)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 вер 2024
- The Broughton Sanctuary Nature Recovery Programme is a heartfelt commitment to address one of our deepest contemporary crises - our lack of harmonious co-existence with the Earth - an issue causing mass extinction of species across the globe as well as a deep lack of belonging for humanity.
We feel it is our duty to leave the Broughton Sanctuary in a much healthier condition for generations to come and aim to demonstrate how humans can live in a more fruitful and positive partnership with the land, in a way which helps both nature and humanity to truly flourish.
To achieve this, we are transforming our 1030 hectares of high intensity sheep pasture into a mosaic of different habitats that coexist and work together, to not only produce food, but also work towards helping nature recover.
Within our land management plan we aim to migrate our intensive agriculture practices over towards a regenerative farming model that works to support nature. We have also dedicated some areas for rewilding, where we are working with nature, to get natural processes, the foundations of life, working again.
Respect Replenish Reward 🌿
So beautiful seeing children planting trees and healing the land from the damage of their ancestors.
Keep up the great work!
So glad to hear of more and more rewinding projects around the world.
I would have liked more information on exactly what is done concretly
Roger Tempest especially but all the narrators are such awesome inspiration! Thank you from a suburban, garden rewilder ❤🤩🤩
@@RussTillling Thank you🙂
Awesome :) more of this please
Absolutley amazing! I am so glad that there is growing awareness about rewilding in England. I was somewhat shocked to see how tiny the woodlands are there compared to the ones in Germany.
Great documenter
This could be awesome. It’s a real shame about the terrible auto subtitles. The river Aire is misspelled multiple times as is Broughton. It’s great seeming landowners taking some responsibility as the impact the majority us can make is small in comparison Being a complete pedant the planting looks very planted I get the constraints with the need for machinery to break ground but the straight lines of tubes is far from natural. I pass it on the way to work everyday, it’ll hopefully look better on time, and better public access!!!!
I'd like to see a more regenerative agriculture approach personally, along the lines of Mark Shepard's project.
How do Neil and Roger became so illuminated? Every single farmer and landowner I ever interacted with were as obtuse, greedy and blind to environmental needs as it gets. Change is clearly possible, but what are the tools to accelerate the process?
Have you tried not calling them names? I would not listen to a person who called me obtuse and greedy.... even if they didn't say it straight to my face, if they were the kind of person who thought that about me and my life and lively hood I would want them as far away from me and my property as possible :)
@@miazilla I didn't call them anything. I just was listening to their short sighted opinions about the environment being at the disposal of humans...and so on. Who they where and how they behaved existed independently of what I thought about them, not as a consequence of my opinion.
@@oacho3 dude, if I can tell from two comments that you were condescending to them they could tell too. People don’t like folks who condescend to them. Mutual respect is necessary to foster good relationships, working or otherwise.
@@miazilla Wait a second, are you saying farmers in my town have mind reading superpowers? I was in the local theater among 200 people (mostly farmers) who gathered there because the new major wanted to pitch to landowners a series of small project to improve sustainability in town. Tiny interventions, almost ridicolous compared to what is described in the video. I just listened religiously from the second last row of sits and said nothing. Their arguments were the exact opposite of what Nail and Roger say in the video. Stuff like "wildlife are varmints, nature exist to serve humans, without humans nature can not sustain itself, tree lines need to be removed not added because dangerous insects for our vineyards hide in there, what we spray does not harm the environment, what is the point of doing the suggested interventions in our land given that people from the nearby town will not do it ..." on and on for almost two hours with an endless pile of ecological nonsense.
My family owns a vey little piece of land 5000 m2 in town and a week later I went to the major and said we were happy to give it up to seed crops that wasn going to be left there during the winter for migratory birds. The field is now cultivated with soy by a local farmer. The guy who is cultivating the soy told me he was not going to let me do that (this was mind blowing since I am the owner of the land). The guy who owns the combined harvester who harvests the soy for all the local farmers asked me if I wanted to make him go bankrupt (again. I own 5000 m2). Is this enough context for you? As you can tell, it does not matter what I think or write on UA-cam, these people are already defined by their words and actions. This is their way of thinking, and the first to disrespect wildlife, other inhabitants of town and logic are them. I am not at war with them and I am more than happy to remove from my comments any word that you find disrespectful, but the difference between the mindset of the farmers in this video and what I had heard just few week ago was so huge that was impossible not to wonder my original specific question..."how do we get landowners and farmers to think like Neil and Roger ?"
Great project and yes good point we all expect Brazil to save its rain forests and yet we did a pretty good job of getting rid of ours here in New Zealand and also the UK etc. Hope is eternal....
❤❤❤❤
Nice video. Couple of comments. First, it's a real shame you chose to plant wall-to-wall tree whips in tubes. This is absolutely the wrong way to do rewilding. Plant small clumps and allow them to then act as source populations for natural infilling between planting. You're just going to get an even-age stand which isn't all natural. And you also bypass the spectacularly important early successional open grassy shrubland phase. Second point: why talk about pigs with no mention of Wild Boar? Rewilding Britain especially should qualify all mention of pigs by stating that we'd far rather have a co-ordinated Wild Boar recovery plan for England but because Wild Boar has no such plan - it's a neglected native - we're forced to use domestic pigs for now.
If the stocking density is dictated by the funding, it might not actually be ecologically fitting. It looks too crowded to me, no natural forest has that many trees in such close proximity. Because they have been planted in such a tight arrangement, it means they will have to grow upward quickly in a competition for light rather than putting their energy into bearing fruit and seed.
agreed... maybe they get the funding and thin it out in a decade?
Look up the Miyawaki method, very interesting results including here in the UK. Just because we are used to seeing sparsely populated and managed woodland doesn’t make it natural necessarily
Ya, so many things about it are unnatural. Straight rows, consistent density of trees throughout, etc. It's almost like they're trying to maximize the money they can get from the gov't instead of doing what's best overall for the area.
I’ll be honest, from working on some tree planting projects myself, the reason for why they plant so densely is due to the fact that some of the trees just won’t make it. The idea is to maximise space so that the greatest number of trees have best chance of survival. As an example, for every 100 trees planted, only 60-70% on average will actually survive to maturity. Regarding planting in rows, I’m not too sure. The likelihood is that’s it’s a more efficient way of planting & allows for easier site access for any maintenance needed (cutting grass, weed removal, removing plastic guards, etc.) 👍
“Abcdjkx” what an armchair critic!
Tree planting is not rewilding... tree planting is primarily to get funding for carbon.
It really depends upon what you plant, and how. Monoculture planting is useless. But if you plant a diversity of trees and include understory species like shrubs, wildflowers, native vines, and other native species, planting does improve the land and in time will bring back biodiversity of animals as well.
@@abbyhillman769 passive rewilding better mimics nature, with reasonable numbers of semi-wild herbivores controlling plant growth. Knepp estate comes to mind. Planting in straight rows as shown in this video is a no-no.
@@bt3-skyreaper299 Spot on
@bt3-skyreaper299 Well they explained in the video that they had to due to there being not many trees on site to disperse seeds. As it was historically a highly managed parkland estate many of the trees that are present are probably non native ornamental species anyway
Really interesting topic, but vid would be better without the subtitles. They are distracting.
27:58 i don't know how someone can see this image and think, "wow, that's so natural." It looks like humans trying to impose their will on nature still, just in a different way.
And all the plants growing up with plastic guards and stuff. Everything planted in parallel rows. Even if they're different plants it still creates some level of monoculture.
You won't notice the lines after a while. Not all the trees will survive, and they use a mix of species of different forms and lifespans. There's a woodland near me that was planted in a similar way 20 years ago and now it looks as if it was naturally regenerated
All I see is fields of plastic tree guards which will give rise to plastic pollution, no natural regeneration or succession. You do at least recognise the problem of an imbalanced ecosystem with too many herbivores. It's not rewinding its an artificial plantation that will be constantly dependent on human input. Not good
As much as i LOVE rewilding projects i think its a terrible idea to make farmers reliant on government subsidies!
The government doesn't give two sh*ts about famers and will F*** them over when ever it suits them
Many if not most farmers are already reliant on public subsidies via the basic payments which reward farmers for managing land is agricultural condition. The basic payment scheme is being phased out to be replaced with a scheme which aims to ensure that taxpayers money better benefits taxpayers, the soil and the environment.
There’s no single solution for farming and land management in the UK but if you want to find out more the book Land Smart by Tom Heap is an excellent read and very thought provoking.