Rewilding the Highlands vs right to roam

[jonthefish]

No doubt that exclusive model of 'rewilding' exists but the science and philosophy behind rewilding is simply about allowing nature to function as it should. There is no logical reason for a functioning ecosystem to be devoid of people and every reason to suppose that the more productive ecosystem resulting from not running the land for deer, sheep and tax-break forestry could and should support more people.

I suspect that epicyclo and I agree more than he suspects. I'm just back from working in Glen Kinglass and only one bloke lives there! It is utterly mad and the ruins of villages are testament to the productive potential. But it isn't wolves, bears or forest that keep people off the land, it is the model of land ownership.
If you think the only way to 'rewild' is to throw up fences and keep even more folk out then that would indeed be the thin end of the wedge and I'd be the first to oppose it. But if more folk are to live in the landscape it needs to be productive once again. People and wildlife can coexist perfectly happily given the chance. I think the argument can become too polarised if folk, perhaps understandably, assume that 'wild' means 'no people'. It doesn't need to unless (like some landowners) you want it to.

 

[highlandsflyer]

My grandfather took me out to the 'wilds' as a kid, and explained to me that these areas were once populated. He felt measures should be taken to repopulate them. Back then that may have proven difficult, but in this age of eco living and working remotely via the internet, something could be done.

I am not sure people want the Highlands to be covered in forest again, nor filled with animals that might prove slightly more deadly than the likes of an adder.

Filled with people enjoying life in the beautiful rural landscape, however, I am sure we could all get behind.

 

[jonthefish]

"Filled with people enjoying life in the beautiful rural landscape, however, I am sure we could all get behind."

Absolutely and well said.
My sympathy for forest comes from seeing it properly used and utilised and I don't think that necessarily contradicts the concept of rewilding. I spend time in Norway, as my missus is Norwegian. They use their local forests to build houses, warm their hearths, hunt food and create local products for sale. And their glens, which have just as poor soil as ours, have more people and more wildlife in them than ours do. To some extent, the two support one another.

Anyway, I don't want to be argumentative as I think most of us would like to see some kind of change in the landscape. Hope I can meet you guys for a bike ride some time!

 

[highlandsflyer]

Re:

I am all for forests! We need to make sure they don't impinge on the visual amenity though. We need to control how they present, in terms of tailing them off towards roads and rights of way/trails to make sure the beautiful Scotland we see in all the wonderful pictures on Retrobike and elsewhere does not become limited to coastal and drone views.

Mind you, perhaps a few well placed trees would obscure the fecking wind turbines!

 

[epicyclo]

...Anyway, I don't want to be argumentative as I think most of us would like to see some kind of change in the landscape...

I regard landscape as ever evolving - which historically it is.

Right now all we need to do is get rid of an invasive species. The Clearance landlord. The rest will happen.

 

[jonthefish]

Indeed. Land reform first. Then we can usefully debate/argue about how best to use our patch.

 

[epicyclo]

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...

 

[highlandsflyer]

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.

 

[epicyclo]

...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.

 

[M-Power]

Re:

Wouldn't mind seeing Nicola S being chased across the heather by a pack of hungry wolves.