Hope this is the one....
Chris Townsend wrote:
> In message <48c85f8e$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Eugene Miya <eugene@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
writes
>
>> In article <OrjWd+DTAoxIFwQJ@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>> Chris Townsend <Chris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There are European brown bears in places too. Not many though.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm not certain of the extent of brown bears in Europe other than as
far
>> North in Norway and Russia, French Alps (possibly the Pyrenees), etc.
>
>
> They venture into Sweden and Finland too and I think they are found in
> Eastern Europe in countries like Poland.
>
>>
>>> I've seen a wolverine in Norway - and tracks a few times.
>>
>>
>> Lucky you! 8^) I have a hat, used ruffs, zoos, etc.
>
>
> I've never seen one in a zoo!
>
>>
>>> Plus moose (called elg in Norway).
>>
>>
>> Big deal in the US. VP candidate shoots them. Dresses them, eats
them.
>> Slurp.
>
>
> So we hear. Our politicians are very urban.
>
>>
>>> The Sami have been there thousands of years. They probably had a
similar
>>> effect to Native Americans on Canada and Alaska.
>>
>>
>> I have a Swedish friend, and we were going over Scandinavian history
>> last evening driving up to the City: "So why did your people repress
the
>> Norwegians? ..." It was fun putting them on the hot seat. I am
>> uncertain yet of the comparison. I have to think about it more. I've
>> heard it before.
>
>
> They both repressed the Sami, who were a nomadic people with no concept
> of land owner****p.
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I led a ski tour on Spitsbergen, the main island of Svalbard, many
years
>>> ago. We carried a rifle. No polar bears - it was an inland trip, not
>>> coastal. Spitsbergen may be like the arctic coast of the Yukon.
Northern
>>> Norway is very similar to the Yukon - coniferous forest, boggy tundra,
>>> rolling hills.
>>
>>
>>
>> Was the rifle your responsibility or did you have a licensed guide
>> with it?
>
>
> It was my responsibility. However one of the group was experienced with
> firearms and a gun club member so he took charge of it. He had been on
> previous trips with me so I knew him pretty well.
>
>>
>>>> Oh yes, and according to Wikipedia, Norway asserts Antarctic claims
and
>>>> Queen Maudland is consider Norwegian territory. It's B-c.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's interesting.
>>
>>
>> The United States choses not to recognize the claims of other countries
>> and choses not to assert its own claims for international reasons.
>
>
> Which are?
>
> Svalbard was a key place during the Cold War of course. The Soviets
> maintained a coal mine on Spitsbergen so they could have a presence
there.
>
>>>> The US has a fair number of the latter which have no official
standing.
>>>> Some have berms to close those areas and let remediation take place.
>>>> The problem now is changing fire prevention issues. That those
>>>> might be
>>>> more rural (a precursor to cultivation like drainage).
>>>
>>>
>>> Here 4WD tracks are built by private estates for stalking (deer
>>> hunting). They have no official standing. There's rarely any fire
>>> prevention problems. It's too wet.
>>
>>
>> No burning peat bogs?
>
> It would take a very long drought! Peat is cut for burning in homes. It
> has to be stacked and dried for many weeks. I like the smell of burning
> peat.
>
>>>>> The Flow
>>>>> Country of Caithness and Sutherland in Northern Scotland is of
>>>>
>>>> I've never heard the word flowcountry used before.
>>>
>>>
>>> It's specific to the area and usually capitalised.
>>
>>
>> OK. I can believe you. We make all kinds of new words.
>
>
> I think it's been called the Flow Country for a long time.
>
>>
>>>> extraction industries
>>>
>>>
>>> Private deer stalking estates are traditional opposition here. They
>>> don't want regenerating forests or predators. Traditional extraction
>>> industries aren't a problem in the Highlands but energy extraction in
>>> the form of wind farms, hydro schemes and associated power lines is.
>>
>>
>> No cover?
>> Use herbicides, kill it off off and give the deer nothing to hide
behind.
>
>
> The deer have nothing to hide behind here. Scottish red deer are smaller
> than European ones because they live on open hillsides while the latter
> live in forests. Better and more food in the trees.
>
>>>>> Many trees were cut down in Scottish forests in the 20th century
world
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>>> much since the Middle Ages. The last major change seems to have
>>>>> been in
>>>>> Roman times.
>>>>
>>>> Set by roads?
>>>
>>>
>>> In part. To march armies around and crush the Celts. Also the spread
of
>>> agriculture, especially in southern England.
>>
>>
>> Oh those Romans.
>
>
> What did they do for us?
>
> Not as much as people think, according to Terry Jones' The Barbarians.
>
>>
>>>>>> Parks are more spectacle. They have greater entertainment value.
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> Nothing is safe in the long term.
>>>>
>>>> Economics. So Preservation might be doomed.
>>>
>>>
>>> Something always survives. So far. The northern Europe areas we are
>>> trying to conserve are all less than 11,000 years old - post the last
>>> Ice Age. Geologically they barely exist.
>>
>>
>> So far. Ice sheets are mostly gone.
>
>
> You'll see ice caps in Norway. Hardangerjokulen. Jostedalsbreen.
>
>>
>>>>> Hunting is very different in much of Europe to the USA and Canada.
In
>>>>
>>>> Are we going to have to enumerate the various forms of regulation
which
>>>> is why some of our more conservative republicans and our libertarians
>>>> declare the USA to be a Nanny State?...
>>>> If you want to make a deal that hunting is elitist, go ahead.
>>>
>>>
>>> It's not regulation that makes hunting elitist, it's private land
>>> owner****p.No hunting without permission. No permission without a large
>>> fee, booked dates and hunting guides.
>>
>>
>> I think you have different opinions.
>
>
> Just opinions?
>
>>
>>>>>>>> try to claim you have wild lands and not merely unused rural
>>>>>>>> pasture
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When does unused rural pasture become wild again?
>>>>>
>>>>> Almost immediately I would say. There are an increasing number of
>>>>> areas
>>>>> in the Scottish Highlands where grazing pressures have been reduced
>>>>> and
>>>>> the trees are regenerating without planting or fencing. I think of
>>>>> these
>>>>> as wild.
>>>>
>>>> I'm trying to think if I could agree with that.
>>>> If it was originally your bog, and you drained it to get pasture,
>>>> did you reflood it? You might get birds back. Older large aniamls,
>>>> likely not.
>>>
>>>
>>> Some bogs were drained for pasture, though few in the Highlands. When
>>> trees were cut down the land was either just left or replanted with
>>> non-native species that were felled in turn after 30-40 years. Smaller
>>> mammals are returning with the natural forest - pine martin, red
>>> squirrel, roe deer.
>>
>>
>> I would argue that since drainage, the bog started to get civil.
>> Wildness was reduced.
>
>
> I agree. In places - mostly down south in the lowlands - bogs are being
> flooded again to try and restore the wildness.
>
>>>
>>> I think when an area is "rewilded" to use the current in word it
becomes
>>> a new type of wild area. The past cannot be recreated. In Britain
large
>>> mammals arrived when the land was connected to mainland Europe.
There's
>>> no way for them to get here now.
>>
>>
>> I have to think about rewild.
>
>
> An interesting word. I have doubts about it.
>
>>
>>
>>>> The Right argues that more of it should go into private hands.
>>>> Tompkins is doing that in Chile, South America.
>>>
>>> As are the National Trusts, John Muir Trusts, Royal Society for the
>>> Protection of Birds and other bodies - all private.
>>
>>
>> Can be nationalized?
>
>
> Very unlikely. The Trusts have a great advantage in being independent of
> government. The trust deeds usually mean that properties can't be sold
> or exploited - they are to be conserved "in perpetuity".
>
>>
>>>>>> well as offensive). So wild here mostly means roadless.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think wild here often means roadless too, but the roadless area
>>>>> can be
>>>>> quite small. Roads may be visible and a place still called wild.
>>>>
>>>> I think here, we've decided to do minimum sizes for wilderness areas.
A
>>>> 5x4 mile wilderness area might be the minimum for a wilderness.
>>>
>>>
>>> We have a few areas that would fit into that.
>>
>>
>> Ye, but they also sit in the middle of road lacking forest area. 5x4
>> surrounded by roads is another. A lot of road kill..
>
>
> A lot of road kill indeed. Mainly rabbits and pheasants here with a few
> squirrels. Collisions with deer are common.
>
>>
>>
>>>>> By Land Trust do you mean the National Trust? There are two - one
for
>>>>> England and Wales and one for Scotland. The National Trust for
>>>>> Scotland
>>>>> does own much wild land - as well as castles, gardens and stately
>>>>> homes.
>>>>
>>>> You have Trusts. We have Departments and Services.
>>>
>>>
>>> But the Trusts are private.
>>
>>
>> Advantages and disadvantages.
>
>
> Mainly the former.
>
>>
>>>>> I'm back from the Mountaineering Council of Scotland AGM & Gathering
>>>>> weekend. Conservation and wild land is a key topic for us.
>>>>
>>>> "Wait'll you see the new clipboards..." 322 lines. Edit Chris.
>>>
>>>
>>> I am editing. It's still longer!
>>
>>
>> More Chris. More.
>>
>> 365 lines. Cut Chris, cut.
>
>
> Snip, snip, snip.
Ed Huesers
Http://www.grandshelters.com
|
