Wildlife management is so easy, even a caveman could do it. They did, in fact, though they called it survival (in their own proto-Proto-Indo-European tongue). It takes a special type of imbecile to underthink it. Probably Ivy-trained. I recall reading Farley Mowat’s book about living among wolves in Canada, Never Cry Wolf, in which he quoted an old aboriginal saying: “The wolf keeps the caribou strong.” You can’t expect soy boys to have anything idea what that means. Or to have any idea what anything means.
You misunderstand the “insects-as-food” sellers’ objective: it is to RETURN to the proto-Proto-Indo-European model of existence (although I would suggest the Proto-African model instead, as in the Great Rift Valley from which homo sapiens emerged), with the I-A-F sellers in charge. It’s currently unclear where they will get Perrier & jet fuel…
Why are these people winning in court, from the Nature Conservancy to the trans identified men getting cosmetic surgery funded by taxpayers, in prison?
Something similar is happening in the UK, but on a larger scale. The National Trust, the biggest land owner in the UK, has decided to evict all the tenant farmers from the farmland it owns and "rewild" the prime agricultural land. At the moment, a token period of "consultation" is taking place but its already happening in Cornwall. Apparently humans don't need fresh meat, veg or dairy to survive.....A similar scenario will occur, habitat will be curated carefully for "nature".
It's part of the globalist push to go 'plant-based', which used to be called vegan. Have you noticed how 'plant-based' is on so many food products now? It's a top-down corporate directive. From a military perspective, a nation of submissive vegans will lack the testosterone or muscle-mass to fight back. Yet I'll bet the menus of the 1% still include fois-gras and steak tartare - and possibly the occasional human sacrifice.
It's all full of chemicals as well and actually few plants. True vegan food, based on pulses and wholegrain is pretty healthy as an addition to meat and dairy - I go meat free 3 days a week purely because I have a few recipes I like to make and eat that are vegan/veggie. And I like variety.
More insanity from California central planners. Pushing out working cattle and dairy farmers under the guise of conservation. The farmers have an incentive to keep there herds healthy. The ideologues who make these decisions only incentive is keeping there oversized egos healthy.
This sounds very weird to me, when it comes to the "no predators"-part. Are they planning some system of hunting-permits to trustees or something like that?
Otherwise, expect a population explosion of elk, with the corresponding rampant epidemics of disease and parasites (and parasite-carried diseases unless California is too hot and dry for ticks excepting the two-legged kind?), plus elk trying to migrate to other areas.
Y'see, we did almost the exact same thing here in the 1970s with red deer (greater Stockholm region) and boars (Scania, our Deep South).
The result of the virtual ban on deer hunting plus farm/grazing land turned into forests was an explosion of deer - from under 10 000 to over 50 000 in a decade or so - and now the entire region surrounding Stockholm has a huge problem with ticks carrying Lyme disease and TBE (one tick in 200 is a carrier, is the official average).
Last decades they've relented and allowed annual hunts and even culls, but's it's an ongoing struggle between people who think they love nature, and people who actually do love nature but also knows a thing or two about management of land and animals. It ain't easy, re-wilding the land. It takes decades and you have to have zero human presence, not even roads going through - just look at Pripyat and Chernobyl for the perfect example of re-wilding in practice.
In Scania, boars were re-introduced in the 1970s (I think it was). Now, we have in excess of 80 000 boars, at least a quarter of those in an area no larger than 250km*250km (ca 155miles*155miles) which is also home to in excess of 1 500 000 people, and half that area? Farmland, among the very best in the entire world (which greedy capitalists are trying to turn into golf courses...), better even than Ukraine's black soil. No need to spell out the problems in detail.
Lengthy diatribe aside, this idea you mention bears close watching - it can oh so easily tip into disaster with no going back, and that's before even considering the farming and the farming families, loss of skills and knowledge, loss of tradition and so on.
Point Reyes is located within a temperate microclimate (which made it so ideal for the cattle). It’s just north of “The Bay Area”, along the coast, which includes San Francisco, and doesn’t have the hot and dry weather of other parts of California.
Already happened. There's a explosion of ticks all over America and tick borne disease. But unless you have three characteristic bull's eye when you hit the physician's office, good luck. Lyme is a dirty word sure to get you diagnosed with" delusional parasitosis". Been fighting this with my daughter for almost 2 years.
We can always go back: chainsaws, tractors and bulldozers can
push nature back at a great rate. All we lack is the will to tell the environmentalists the truth: that their objectives are insane. For 55 yrs, being pro-environment has been an emblem of pride. It needs to be regarded as an emblem of mental illness.
I'd settle for environmentalism to go back to it's pre-1990s style.
Minimise pollution, in intelligent and doable ways. Encourage production of durable, repairable stuff. Cheap electricity produced in as unintrusive way as possible (i.e. nuclear and hydro-electric mainly, in our case). Strict border control of plants, seeds and animals to avoid all the problems associated with invasive species as much as possible. Fixed upper and lower limits on no. of [animal] on a national scale, and leave the rest to hunters. Tax free domestic/local food production if it was under a certain limit (to avoid the formation of huge corporate monopolies). Re-sale of old stuff to be VAT-free.
Et cetera. Practical, pragmatic everyday stuff really.
Between 1985 and 1995, it's like they dropped the enviro-part of the word.
Environmentalists are like the farmer who says “I don’t want much, just the land next to mine.”
The objectives of the 1970 Clean Air and Water Acts were achieved by 1980. But here we are 45 yrs later, and targets are now defined in percentage reductions year over year. It has become the legendary “self-licking ice cream cone.” There is no objective other than perpetually increasing employment within this vampire-ish “profession.”
Years ago (1995) I rode out on a two-day (photographic) wild horse hunt near Bishop, CA, offered as an extension course from UC Davis - the ag school of the UC system. Around the campfire after a chuck wagon dinner that night was a professor from UCD presenting a lecture about grass. (He also consulted with people, organizations, companies interested in keeping grasslands healthy.)
Once he had been engaged by the Nature Conservancy. They wanted to understand why the grass in an area they had purchased to “return to wilderness,” and from which they had removed all the cattle, had become woody and thick and patchy and unhealthy and nothing like they thought it should be once the cattle were removed.
Standing at a fence line between the woody unhealthy grass of the Nature Conservancy land, and the healthy grass where the cattle still grazed, the NS guy was puzzled: where cattle “destroyed nature” the grass was green, healthy, not woody at all; where the ruminants had been removed by NS, the grass was in very poor shape.
Prof told the NS: grass in the American west evolved in conjunction with ruminants - tens of millions of buffalo, elk, deer, etc. If it wasn’t grazed regularly, this is what happens: it goes to crap - pointing at the woody, patchy, unhealthy grass “saved” by the Nature Conservancy.” If the grass is grazed regularly - pointing to the healthy grass under graze on the other side of the fence - the grass is healthy as it’s in its normal evolutionary/ecological niche.
The Nature Conservancy dudes have no idea of nature or conservation, they’re a bunch of urban ignorant do-gooders whose idea of wilderness is Disney. In their ignorance they leave destruction wherever they go.
In Marin, they’ve pushed out the ranchers. More expensive food will be one result. (Unemployment for workers and ancillary businesses in town will be another, as will reduced taxes for the commies running CA…). But the AWFLs & their soyboy hubbies funding the NS have a plan for higher food prices: keep the illegal aliens on the plantation to keep wages & prices down.
The problem is ranchers just can't help but rat fuck their grazing lands, whether they be public or private. They chronically over graze, which replaces deep rooted natives with short lived invasives. Their cows destroy riparian areas, turning wetlands in to gullys. So, fuck em'.
The government can’t bear to take a light approach to the management of so-called wild life. I have a small state forrest near by. I rarely see anyone else there, maybe once in every thirty hikes. Never the less, there must be $30 million dollars worth of park equipment. Last year, they closed the park for two months because it rained. Guess what, I live in Florida. It rains here. A LOT.
The idea of native vs invasive species is really a hoot. Years ago, I was walking with a crazy liberal on a beautiful trail that overlooks the San Fransisco Bay. I threw away an apple core. My friend started scolding me for introducing an invasive species. I pointed out the apple doesn’t see itself as invasive. It beguiles us to gladly scatter its seeds. In fact, every species seeks to populate the entire planet, including us. Birds do it. Bees do it. Even sentimental fleas do it.
With you in spirit, but you should look up the history of the Bradford pear tree. They’re favored by developers because they’re fast growing, but they die quickly, have horrible thorns, produce an avalanche of airborne allergens and are “dirty” trees with crap falling off them every season.
The leftist idea of management is to do nothing until something becomes a crisis. Then blame everybody except the actual do-nothing managers. And then cry poor and beg for money.
At the same time these people want natural habitats to reintroduce themselves they also want to import millions of people. It takes a special kind of stupid to not see the contradiction.
It’s not stupidity – it’s intentional. European-descended people are too inventive, intelligent and fiercely independent, so we are being phased out through abortion promotion and societal self-destruction. Much better to import Huxley’s docile Triple Epsilons from elsewhere.
I'm in the middle of Cincinnati, and we have coyotes all over the place. It's not good for us, and it's not good for the coyotes. But heaven forbid, in the middle of a city entirely developed by man, that we should dispense with the delusion that we're 'all natural'.
I think their attitude is mixed. They do get paid for supposed wolf depredation. And outside of the park wolves are fair game. As I recall, there was more resistance from big game outfitters, worried about competing with wolves for the elk.
They were reintroduced to Yellowstone. There were many articles on it, IIRC. I know I have read articles since the introduction stating the changes the park has undergone since then.
Having grown up on a beef cattle farm in NOVA, I feel like I have a valid opinion about this. My dad worked off the farm but raised beef cattle. When each one of his four children turned eight years old, we were gifted with a heifer calf to feed and nurture and start our herd. These animals would later be sold to pay for our college education. I can still smell the odor of the powdered formula I prepared each morning in the cellar of our 1800's farmhouse. I carried the bucket (with rubber nipple attached) to the barn and fed "Dixie," the eventual mother of my herd. Now our youngest son owns a meat stand at a thriving local farmers market and the wholesale prices keep rising exponentially. So far, the meat lovers in the community are paying the prices for his prime beef but there will be a tipping point. If they haven't read informative essays like this one Chris, they won't have a clue about the cause and effect of food costs. Thank you. Knowledge is power.
Wildlife management is so easy, even a caveman could do it. They did, in fact, though they called it survival (in their own proto-Proto-Indo-European tongue). It takes a special type of imbecile to underthink it. Probably Ivy-trained. I recall reading Farley Mowat’s book about living among wolves in Canada, Never Cry Wolf, in which he quoted an old aboriginal saying: “The wolf keeps the caribou strong.” You can’t expect soy boys to have anything idea what that means. Or to have any idea what anything means.
You misunderstand the “insects-as-food” sellers’ objective: it is to RETURN to the proto-Proto-Indo-European model of existence (although I would suggest the Proto-African model instead, as in the Great Rift Valley from which homo sapiens emerged), with the I-A-F sellers in charge. It’s currently unclear where they will get Perrier & jet fuel…
Soy boys is an excellent term.
Why are these people winning in court, from the Nature Conservancy to the trans identified men getting cosmetic surgery funded by taxpayers, in prison?
Who are the judges making these decisions?
Can these cases be appealed?
Elections have consequences. California effed around and found out. It took long enough, but biblical conflagrations tend to focus the mind.
Yay, more fodder for the yearly fire in Cali.
Hey, I've got an idea for the Cali cattle herds. Bring them to Texas, we've got water, we've got grass, it's cooler, and it's closer to Kansas.
Let the commies in Cali burn the damned place down.
It's what they want to do anyway.
Something similar is happening in the UK, but on a larger scale. The National Trust, the biggest land owner in the UK, has decided to evict all the tenant farmers from the farmland it owns and "rewild" the prime agricultural land. At the moment, a token period of "consultation" is taking place but its already happening in Cornwall. Apparently humans don't need fresh meat, veg or dairy to survive.....A similar scenario will occur, habitat will be curated carefully for "nature".
Those who thought "Let them eat cake" was a bad perspective for the government never imagined "Let them eat bugs."
^This!^
It's part of the globalist push to go 'plant-based', which used to be called vegan. Have you noticed how 'plant-based' is on so many food products now? It's a top-down corporate directive. From a military perspective, a nation of submissive vegans will lack the testosterone or muscle-mass to fight back. Yet I'll bet the menus of the 1% still include fois-gras and steak tartare - and possibly the occasional human sacrifice.
Plant based means chemical plant.
It's all full of chemicals as well and actually few plants. True vegan food, based on pulses and wholegrain is pretty healthy as an addition to meat and dairy - I go meat free 3 days a week purely because I have a few recipes I like to make and eat that are vegan/veggie. And I like variety.
Like.
When people talk about re-wilding here, I try to ask:
"Re-wild to which point in time, precisely?"
It's not as if nature is static, and wild-life were much different in 17000 BC than it 1106 AD.
Something something commies something something starvation
Evergreen
Let's just outsource all the food growing. What could possibly go wrong?
In this rewilding scenario, will they suppress fire and exclude predators, or are they going to reintroduce wolves to the Shire?
More insanity from California central planners. Pushing out working cattle and dairy farmers under the guise of conservation. The farmers have an incentive to keep there herds healthy. The ideologues who make these decisions only incentive is keeping there oversized egos healthy.
This sounds very weird to me, when it comes to the "no predators"-part. Are they planning some system of hunting-permits to trustees or something like that?
Otherwise, expect a population explosion of elk, with the corresponding rampant epidemics of disease and parasites (and parasite-carried diseases unless California is too hot and dry for ticks excepting the two-legged kind?), plus elk trying to migrate to other areas.
Y'see, we did almost the exact same thing here in the 1970s with red deer (greater Stockholm region) and boars (Scania, our Deep South).
The result of the virtual ban on deer hunting plus farm/grazing land turned into forests was an explosion of deer - from under 10 000 to over 50 000 in a decade or so - and now the entire region surrounding Stockholm has a huge problem with ticks carrying Lyme disease and TBE (one tick in 200 is a carrier, is the official average).
Last decades they've relented and allowed annual hunts and even culls, but's it's an ongoing struggle between people who think they love nature, and people who actually do love nature but also knows a thing or two about management of land and animals. It ain't easy, re-wilding the land. It takes decades and you have to have zero human presence, not even roads going through - just look at Pripyat and Chernobyl for the perfect example of re-wilding in practice.
In Scania, boars were re-introduced in the 1970s (I think it was). Now, we have in excess of 80 000 boars, at least a quarter of those in an area no larger than 250km*250km (ca 155miles*155miles) which is also home to in excess of 1 500 000 people, and half that area? Farmland, among the very best in the entire world (which greedy capitalists are trying to turn into golf courses...), better even than Ukraine's black soil. No need to spell out the problems in detail.
Lengthy diatribe aside, this idea you mention bears close watching - it can oh so easily tip into disaster with no going back, and that's before even considering the farming and the farming families, loss of skills and knowledge, loss of tradition and so on.
Point Reyes is located within a temperate microclimate (which made it so ideal for the cattle). It’s just north of “The Bay Area”, along the coast, which includes San Francisco, and doesn’t have the hot and dry weather of other parts of California.
In other words, ticks (and sundry other parasites/animals using elk as propagation-vector) will be a concern in a few years if this goes through.
Already happened. There's a explosion of ticks all over America and tick borne disease. But unless you have three characteristic bull's eye when you hit the physician's office, good luck. Lyme is a dirty word sure to get you diagnosed with" delusional parasitosis". Been fighting this with my daughter for almost 2 years.
Been there, done that. I was lucky enough to be in the 30% to get the bull's-eye rash. Lyme testing is a joke, thanks to the CDC and the IDSA.
My sister has chronic Lyme, which is officially viewed as hypochondria, as you point out.
We can always go back: chainsaws, tractors and bulldozers can
push nature back at a great rate. All we lack is the will to tell the environmentalists the truth: that their objectives are insane. For 55 yrs, being pro-environment has been an emblem of pride. It needs to be regarded as an emblem of mental illness.
I'd settle for environmentalism to go back to it's pre-1990s style.
Minimise pollution, in intelligent and doable ways. Encourage production of durable, repairable stuff. Cheap electricity produced in as unintrusive way as possible (i.e. nuclear and hydro-electric mainly, in our case). Strict border control of plants, seeds and animals to avoid all the problems associated with invasive species as much as possible. Fixed upper and lower limits on no. of [animal] on a national scale, and leave the rest to hunters. Tax free domestic/local food production if it was under a certain limit (to avoid the formation of huge corporate monopolies). Re-sale of old stuff to be VAT-free.
Et cetera. Practical, pragmatic everyday stuff really.
Between 1985 and 1995, it's like they dropped the enviro-part of the word.
Environmentalists are like the farmer who says “I don’t want much, just the land next to mine.”
The objectives of the 1970 Clean Air and Water Acts were achieved by 1980. But here we are 45 yrs later, and targets are now defined in percentage reductions year over year. It has become the legendary “self-licking ice cream cone.” There is no objective other than perpetually increasing employment within this vampire-ish “profession.”
Thanks for your Scandinavian experience. See also my comment about Yellowstone/Grand Teton https://chrisbray.substack.com/p/cattle-free-by-93-alive-and-extended/comment/89037374
Ah for the good old days when you could be drawn and quartered for hunting in the “Kings land”. The more things change….
So, badly farming elk instead of intelligently farming cattle? Yep, sounds like California.
Years ago (1995) I rode out on a two-day (photographic) wild horse hunt near Bishop, CA, offered as an extension course from UC Davis - the ag school of the UC system. Around the campfire after a chuck wagon dinner that night was a professor from UCD presenting a lecture about grass. (He also consulted with people, organizations, companies interested in keeping grasslands healthy.)
Once he had been engaged by the Nature Conservancy. They wanted to understand why the grass in an area they had purchased to “return to wilderness,” and from which they had removed all the cattle, had become woody and thick and patchy and unhealthy and nothing like they thought it should be once the cattle were removed.
Standing at a fence line between the woody unhealthy grass of the Nature Conservancy land, and the healthy grass where the cattle still grazed, the NS guy was puzzled: where cattle “destroyed nature” the grass was green, healthy, not woody at all; where the ruminants had been removed by NS, the grass was in very poor shape.
Prof told the NS: grass in the American west evolved in conjunction with ruminants - tens of millions of buffalo, elk, deer, etc. If it wasn’t grazed regularly, this is what happens: it goes to crap - pointing at the woody, patchy, unhealthy grass “saved” by the Nature Conservancy.” If the grass is grazed regularly - pointing to the healthy grass under graze on the other side of the fence - the grass is healthy as it’s in its normal evolutionary/ecological niche.
The Nature Conservancy dudes have no idea of nature or conservation, they’re a bunch of urban ignorant do-gooders whose idea of wilderness is Disney. In their ignorance they leave destruction wherever they go.
In Marin, they’ve pushed out the ranchers. More expensive food will be one result. (Unemployment for workers and ancillary businesses in town will be another, as will reduced taxes for the commies running CA…). But the AWFLs & their soyboy hubbies funding the NS have a plan for higher food prices: keep the illegal aliens on the plantation to keep wages & prices down.
The problem is ranchers just can't help but rat fuck their grazing lands, whether they be public or private. They chronically over graze, which replaces deep rooted natives with short lived invasives. Their cows destroy riparian areas, turning wetlands in to gullys. So, fuck em'.
So you’re an urban ignoramus and not someone who ever has lived or worked in a ranch. Got it.
The government can’t bear to take a light approach to the management of so-called wild life. I have a small state forrest near by. I rarely see anyone else there, maybe once in every thirty hikes. Never the less, there must be $30 million dollars worth of park equipment. Last year, they closed the park for two months because it rained. Guess what, I live in Florida. It rains here. A LOT.
The idea of native vs invasive species is really a hoot. Years ago, I was walking with a crazy liberal on a beautiful trail that overlooks the San Fransisco Bay. I threw away an apple core. My friend started scolding me for introducing an invasive species. I pointed out the apple doesn’t see itself as invasive. It beguiles us to gladly scatter its seeds. In fact, every species seeks to populate the entire planet, including us. Birds do it. Bees do it. Even sentimental fleas do it.
With you in spirit, but you should look up the history of the Bradford pear tree. They’re favored by developers because they’re fast growing, but they die quickly, have horrible thorns, produce an avalanche of airborne allergens and are “dirty” trees with crap falling off them every season.
YOU are the carbon they want to eliminate. Get used to it.
Yes they are stopping the growth of human population via restricting energy and food.
Hey Winston--Food is oppression. Hunger is freedom.
We've got to limit farming or people will starve. Cricket farming, however, is OK.
Another memo needs to be placed on the desk of the President .
It's too late. The ranchers have agreed to the settlement, and are being paid to leave. The Biden interregnum has done its harm.
The leftist idea of management is to do nothing until something becomes a crisis. Then blame everybody except the actual do-nothing managers. And then cry poor and beg for money.
At the same time these people want natural habitats to reintroduce themselves they also want to import millions of people. It takes a special kind of stupid to not see the contradiction.
It’s not stupidity – it’s intentional. European-descended people are too inventive, intelligent and fiercely independent, so we are being phased out through abortion promotion and societal self-destruction. Much better to import Huxley’s docile Triple Epsilons from elsewhere.
Just happened to see this; perhaps another motivation for removing the cattle ranches. From Catherine Austin Fitts.
https://rumble.com/v6dktud-once-they-have-control-of-your-transactions...-they-can-dictate-what-food-y.html
This will probably work out as well as grey wolves have in Yellowstone. Id still like to find the jackass that reintroduced coyotes to the East Coast.
I'm in the middle of Cincinnati, and we have coyotes all over the place. It's not good for us, and it's not good for the coyotes. But heaven forbid, in the middle of a city entirely developed by man, that we should dispense with the delusion that we're 'all natural'.
They like to eat cats and smaller dogs. They live in the culverts and large storm drains during the day.
The wolves in Yellowstone have been a net benefit. Everything in the park is healthier as a result. Not to mention they're a huge tourism draw.
I doubt the ranchers around the park feel the same way.
I think their attitude is mixed. They do get paid for supposed wolf depredation. And outside of the park wolves are fair game. As I recall, there was more resistance from big game outfitters, worried about competing with wolves for the elk.
Not sure they were released. They spread naturally and have no natural boundaries.
Here in the Mid-Atlantic, they spread rapidly. Funny how the local news missed that migration but we heard about killer bees for years.
They were reintroduced to Yellowstone. There were many articles on it, IIRC. I know I have read articles since the introduction stating the changes the park has undergone since then.
Coyotes or wolves?
Wolves.
Having grown up on a beef cattle farm in NOVA, I feel like I have a valid opinion about this. My dad worked off the farm but raised beef cattle. When each one of his four children turned eight years old, we were gifted with a heifer calf to feed and nurture and start our herd. These animals would later be sold to pay for our college education. I can still smell the odor of the powdered formula I prepared each morning in the cellar of our 1800's farmhouse. I carried the bucket (with rubber nipple attached) to the barn and fed "Dixie," the eventual mother of my herd. Now our youngest son owns a meat stand at a thriving local farmers market and the wholesale prices keep rising exponentially. So far, the meat lovers in the community are paying the prices for his prime beef but there will be a tipping point. If they haven't read informative essays like this one Chris, they won't have a clue about the cause and effect of food costs. Thank you. Knowledge is power.