Rewilding the Highlands vs right to roam

epicyclo":1t8bodug said:
highlandsflyer":1t8bodug said:
The landlords of old have long since had their impact exceeded by utility companies....
They all have the Clearance mentality. Add the RSPB to that too...

..ah, but.. you have sullied yourself using their Forsinard monstrosity!

I agree entirely. SNH are acting like feudal landlords too. I would love to see the Flow Country properly protected, but I would like to see it done sympathetically to people's needs.

Pushing people off the land is not the answer, most environmental work historically has been done in attendance to commercial use. Farmers and crofters are the key to maintaining the land. Huge organisations such as the RSPB are rarely sensitive to local needs.
 
highlandsflyer":guw2dx0l said:
...I would love to see the Flow Country properly protected, but I would like to see it done sympathetically to people's needs...
I was wondering how much of the Flow Country was actually agricultural and pastoral a few hundred years ago.

After our discussion of the old fort on Ben Griam Beg near Forsinard, I pulled up an aerial view of it. It was big - much bigger than I expected it to be, which implies the population would have been bigger than I surmised too. But the visible evidence on the flat ground wouldn't support that.

But how much heritage is hidden under a few hundred years of peat - or been plowed under?



I can see a bit of hike a bike coming up next trip north. I want to know if those things that look like defensive walls further down the slope are actually that or just random natural features. :)
 
Re:

Wouldn't mind seeing Nicola S being chased across the heather by a pack of hungry wolves.
 
With things like rewilding, it seems to me that it often is little more than those without the land, telling those who do have it, what to do with it.
 
epicyclo":107kpvma said:
After our discussion of the old fort on Ben Griam Beg near Forsinard, I pulled up an aerial view of it. It was big - much bigger than I expected it to be, which implies the population would have been bigger than I surmised too. But the visible evidence on the flat ground wouldn't support that.

But how much heritage is hidden under a few hundred years of peat - or been plowed under?

I can see a bit of hike a bike coming up next trip north. I want to know if those things that look like defensive walls further down the slope are actually that or just random natural features. :)
https://canmore.org.uk/site/6792/ben-griam-beg

Peatland certainly absorbs evidence. No wonder settlements on higher ground are easier to identify.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top