The Power Of Nature.Wild Weather.Climate Change.

[honeybee13]

It's not what we were promised with Brexit.

Britain is becoming a toxic chemical dumping ground – yet another benefit of Brexit | George Monbiot | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Perhaps our government imagines bulldog spirit will protect us from the dangerous substances that Europe rules unsafe, says Guardian columnist...

 

[tobyjugg2]

I've an idea that what this is is clearing out stock of old tech panels as there have been signs of major breakthroughs in solar tech - inc what is effectively solar paint

 

reuters.com

WWW.REUTERS.COM

 

[tobyjugg2]

So much for the Torys and Brexit protecting the UKs waters and fish

“Industrial fishing is designed to kill marine life as efficiently as possible,” said Hugo Tagholm, the executive director of Oceana UK. "Everything from sharks to starfish are hoovered up by bottom trawling, which can destroy whole ecosystems and empty our seas of life. This also threatens communities seeking to make a sustainable living from our seas.

“How can we call them ‘protected’ if we have such highly extractive industries in them?

 

 

‘Hoovered’ up from the deep: 33,000 hours of seabed trawling revealed in protected UK waters | Marine life | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Analysis shows alarming prevalence of harmful fishing methods thought to ‘destroy whole ecosystems’

 

Edited March 20 by tobyjugg2

[honeybee13]

How sad. No thought of the ecosystem or the future of fishing either.

[tobyjugg2]

More indications that we are passing through the solar maximum - or our Suns activity has increased a significant tick

Lets hope its the former

 

Northern lights predicted in US and UK on Monday night in wake of solar storms | World news | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Spectacular aurora borealis caused by geomagnetic storms on sun’s surface may be visible in North America as far south as the midwest

 

[honeybee13]

Crisis talks at Thames Water over its debt problems.

Since this was written, investors such as USS [universities pension scheme] and the Chinese wealth fund have said that Ofwat's conditions are unviable and they won't invest any more money.

https://archive.is/vojVl

[tobyjugg2]

Yep, those 'requirements' not met to shareholders satisfaction seem to me to be:

1. Not being allowed to increase customer bills by 40% (of which well over 50% of the new total would NOT be investment)

2. 1 plus regulators not agreeing to letting them do 'things in their own time (ie carry on regardless)

[honeybee13]

Amazing claims from South West Water. The public has no right to swim in the sea and SWW has no legal duty to keep waters clean.

Who does the sea belong to? EDIT: It seems it's the Crown Estate. Another thought I've had since this started is what happens if the pollution reaches French or Belgian waters the other side of the Channel? Can the UK be sued by them?

 

Public has no right to swim in sea, claims firm that dumped sewage at bathing spot

INEWS.CO.UK

---

As South West Water defends a court action from a Devon swimmer, it also claims it has no legal duty to keep waters clean

 

[tobyjugg2]

The Boat race

“The warning was stern: Do not enter the water. Not because of the tide. Not because of sharks. Because of the sewage."

- Thursday’s New York Times

"The New York Times, Fox News, ABC, CNN and numerous other international media have run stories in the buildup to Saturday’s race – although it is what is floating in the Thames, rather than on top of it, that has piqued their interest."

 

Do not enter the water: how dirty Boat Race has captured world’s attention | The Boat Race | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Sewage scandal has brought extra focus on the race and forced more caution from the rowers but enthusiasm is undimmed with Oxford...

 

[tobyjugg2]

Labour’s shadow environment secretary, Steve Reed, said: “It is sickening that this Conservative government has turned a blind eye to illegal sewage dumping that has put thousands of people in hospital. To make matters worse, consumers face higher water bills while water bosses pocket millions in bonuses.

“Labour will put the water companies under special measures to clean up water. We will strengthen regulation so that law-breaking water bosses face criminal charges, and give the regulator new powers to block the payment of any bonuses until water bosses have cleaned up their filth.”

 

That should also include blocking payments of dividends and any increase in domestic charges until the companies have improved infrastructure and reduced debt.

 

[honeybee13]

Water shortages threatened despite record rainfall.

UK at risk of summer water shortages and hosepipe bans, scientists warn | Water | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Hot and dry conditions could force measures despite country experiencing wettest 18 months since records began

 

[tobyjugg2]

That will be another nail in the tory coffin pre GE

maybe they will claim they are going to do something - after 14 years of just removing monitoring and gutting regulator power

- they will be lying

[tobyjugg2]

and lets not forget

"Water companies in England and Wales have almost doubled their profits since 2019.

During this parliament, which started in 2019, pre-tax profits at water companies have climbed by 82%, according to a Liberal Democrat analysis of Companies House data.

It found that in 2022-23, England’s water firms made £1.7bn in pre-tax profits. This is up 82% since 2018-19, when the same companies made £955m. Since 2018-19, water firms have made £4.2bn in pre-tax profits."

 

Water firms’ profits in England and Wales almost double since 2019, find Lib Dems | Water industry | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Party to call for measures to stop companies prioritising profit over environment at spring conference

 

[cjcregg]

The president of Botswana has a good point.

Botswana is literally overrun with elephants. They've become an invasive species that destroys the environment for every other living creature and have to be controlled somehow. The devastation they cause has to be seen to be believed. 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not pro hunting but hunting has more than just the benefit of controlling numbers. It provides employment to an impoverished nation and most importantly, managed hunting reserves maintain pristine environments (to the benefit of all living species) that would otherwise be concreted over or turned over to intensive farming.

 

Botswana threatens to send 20,000 elephants to Germany

WWW.BBC.CO.UK

---

Germany wants tougher limits on hunting the animals, but Botswana says it has too many of them.

 

[tobyjugg2]

1 hour ago, cjcregg said:

Botswana is literally overrun with humans. They've become an invasive species that destroys the environment for every other living creature and have to be controlled somehow. The devastation they cause has to be seen to be believed. 

 

1. Elephants were there first for millions of years before Sapiens

2. They cause far less damage than the equivalent number of humans

3. There are orders of magnitude more humans than elephants

 

Surely we need to look at controlling our own numbers and planetary destruction tenancies first and foremost.

Looking at other species is just a distraction.

 

[honeybee13]

 

Just 57 companies linked to 80% of greenhouse gas emissions since 2016 | Greenhouse gas emissions | The Guardian

WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM

---

Analysis reveals many big producers increased output of fossil fuels and related emissions in seven years after Paris climate deal

 

[cjcregg]

30 minutes ago, tobyjugg2 said:

1. Elephants were there first for millions of years before Sapiens

2. They cause far less damage than the equivalent number of humans

3. There are orders of magnitude more humans than elephants

 

Surely we need to look at controlling our own numbers and planetary destruction tenancies first and foremost.

Looking at other species is just a distraction.

 

Please stop editing my posts in your quotes. You've got form for doing this.

I said that ''Botswana is literally overrun with elephants'' (remember?) But you substituted ''elephants'' with ''humans'' presumably to distort my opinion to suit your argument.

I'm always happy to participate in informed debate, but only if it's in good faith.

 

[tobyjugg2]

4 hours ago, cjcregg said:

Botswana is literally overrun with elephants. They've become an invasive species that destroys the environment for every other living creature and have to be controlled somehow. The devastation they cause has to be seen to be believed.

 

Surely you mean

Botswana is literally overrun with humans. They've become an invasive species that destroys the environment for every other living creature and have to be controlled somehow. The devastation they cause has to be seen to be believed. 

 

1. Elephants were there first for millions of years before Sapiens

2. They cause far less damage than the equivalent number of humans

3. There are orders of magnitude more humans than elephants

 

Don't we need to look at controlling our own numbers and planetary destruction tenancies first and foremost?

Looking at other species (even locusts) is just a distraction.

 

Example

Gasping for Breath: The Devastating Impact of Environmental Pollution in Botswana

WWW.BOTSWANACLIMATENETWORK.ORG

---

Botswana is a landlocked country located in Southern Africa with a rich cultural heritage and an abundance of natural resources...

 

 

that suit your preferences better @cjcregg?

Edited April 4 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

Now - want to consider how climate change, habitat shrinkage on a massive scale and human infestation of even those shrunken habitats to illegally log and hunt actually define the increased interaction between human and elephant - among other species?

 

Perhaps start with a simple question:

If elephants vanished from Botswana tomorrow, would the issues currently attributed to elephants in the reports related to your claim actually vanish - or would the situation actually get worse if the limited protections in place for elephants remaining habitats were rescinded with the elephants disappearance?

 

(of course the interactions would end - but would the environmental damage decrease or increase?)

Edited April 4 by tobyjugg2

[cjcregg]

1 hour ago, tobyjugg2 said:

 

Surely you mean

Botswana is literally overrun with humans. They've become an invasive species that destroys the environment for every other living creature and have to be controlled somehow. The devastation they cause has to be seen to be believed. 

 

1. Elephants were there first for millions of years before Sapiens

2. They cause far less damage than the equivalent number of humans

3. There are orders of magnitude more humans than elephants

 

Don't we need to look at controlling our own numbers and planetary destruction tenancies first and foremost?

Looking at other species (even locusts) is just a distraction.

 

Example

Gasping for Breath: The Devastating Impact of Environmental Pollution in Botswana

WWW.BOTSWANACLIMATENETWORK.ORG

---

Botswana is a landlocked country located in Southern Africa with a rich cultural heritage and an abundance of natural resources...

 

 

that suit your preferences better @cjcregg?

Thank you for re-editing my post.

No, I don't mean Botswana is literally overrun with humans. Why would I when it's one of the most parsley populated countries in the world? Its population density is just 4.52 people per sq km, compared to 270 in the UK.

The human population isn't the problem, at least in Botswana, it's how we manage our co-existence with other species and conserve them, all of them.

Sure we need to control our own numbers but that's just an aspiration, it's not a solution to the immediate problem or even at all. The elephant population in Botswana has doubled in the last 20 years and Botswana's finite natural resources aren't capable of sustaining such exponential population growth. Something has to give, it's just a question of what.

 

[tobyjugg2]

Botswana has massive resources. Britain is very densely populated. As you say - Botswana just 2M people - so loads of space?

I partly agree its how we manage our co-existance with other species - and our and their environment.

 

You do realise this is kicking off because of the threat to ban the very profitable sale of trophies - much of which trade seems to be illegal from poachers?  - ?despite? government intervention

(see the reports of hundreds of unidentified dead elephants and wildly varying elephant population densities )

 

I agree with understand culling species if absolutely necessary - NOT when that culling is wrapped up in illegal killing to sell the ivory. Rather like the illegal aspects of the diamond trade.

AND The elephant population is a major driver of Botswana's tourist industry - 20% of the countries economy

 

So, after basic sanity checking - do you think that the ecological damage would reduce or increase in the then ex-elephant' zones if the elephants were exterminated - or crowded in smaller areas despite all that space ?

 

Botswana: Mining, Minerals and Fuel Resources

WWW.AZOMINING.COM

---

Botswana is a country located in Southern Africa. The total area of the country is 581,730 km² with a population of 2,098,018...

"Botswana is abundant in natural resources such as diamonds, silver, copper, nickel, coal soda ash, potash, and iron ore. Almost 70-80% of export earnings are attributed to diamond mining. The mining sector of the country, especially diamond mining, plays a dominant role in its economy. The global downturn of 2009 greatly decreased the demand for Botswana's diamonds. In the recent years, Botswana has transformed itself into a middle-income country with the GDP amounting to $30.09 billion in 2011."

 

Botswana’s Varying Elephant Population(s)–The numbers are all over the place—are they being manipulated? - Conservation Frontlines

WWW.CONSERVATIONFRONTLINES.ORG

---

Botswana now has the largest elephant population in Africa. In the early 1960s, there were thought to be fewer than 10,000; by 1990...

 

Botswanas Elephants And Where To Find Them

THECULTURETRIP.COM

---

With the help of this Culture Trip guide visitors to Botswana will be all set to enjoy the country's most incredible natural assets: its...

 

[cjcregg]

It has 'loads of space' but 70% of it is the Kalahari desert which can only support a very limited number of elephants.

Elephants don't eat diamonds or any of the other 'natural resources' you listed. Clearly I was referring to food resources ie vegetation.

Thanks for the links but I'm quite up to speed with pretty much everything I need to know about Botswana.

 

[tobyjugg2]

41 minutes ago, cjcregg said:

It has 'loads of space' but 70% of it is the Kalahari desert which can only support a very limited number of elephants.

Elephants don't eat diamonds or any of the other 'natural resources' you listed. Clearly I was referring to food resources ie vegetation.

Thanks for the links but I'm quite up to speed with pretty much everything I need to know about Botswana.

 

Clearly not with such ridiculous responses as 'elephants dont eat diamonds'. Might be everything you want to know .. but clearly NOT what you need to know.

 

So, if you are such an expert you dont need to refer any further:

Why is the Botswana government not doing more to alleviate genuine issues with poached ivory?

How much cash has the government got (impressively mainly made from NOT doing what African nations leaders do with any money) - largely unused apart from a relatively small part keeping the elite rich

In a nation larger than France, but with only a bit over 2 million inhabitants, and loads of cash - why aren't they greening the desert and savanna rather than moaning about elephants moving from the areas that can either no longer support them  or they have been driven from?

and a key question:

Why is such a wealthy (relative to inhabitants) nation apparently so involved in elephant hunting and illegal trophy markets?

Why is such a sunny country not investing its 'spare' money in solar? Sticking rather with coal which puts money in the hands of a few?

Why is a country near the front line of climate change, with lakes etc retreating significantly, yet with an apparent strong will to stay with historic herding lifestyle not doing more to enable it?

Why is there such high unemployment in a relatively wealthy potentially developing nation?

Some useful background for a starter - if you bother to read it - its not complex at this stage. Half hour at most.

 

Botswana - Democracy, Tribalism, Wildlife | Britannica

WWW.BRITANNICA.COM

---

Botswana - Democracy, Tribalism, Wildlife: Under the 1966 constitution (since amended), Botswana is a multiparty republic...

 

Wildlife vet: the Botswana elephant debate is actually about a bigger conservation issue - Africa Geographic

AFRICAGEOGRAPHIC.COM

---

The debate following the handing over of the social dialogue report on lifting of the hunting ban in Botswana continues.

 

what was done and can be grown upon - but it has rather stalled and changed direction

Botswana: From dusty bowl to sparkling success story

WWW.BBC.CO.UK

---

How the southern African nation managed to make the best of its natural resources.

 

Is elephant poaching on the rise in Botswana? - Africa Geographic

AFRICAGEOGRAPHIC.COM

---

A spate of arrests points to an elephant poaching increase in Botswana, shining a light on the efficacy of anti-poaching systems

 

Edited April 4 by tobyjugg2

[cjcregg]

I wouldn't consider myself an expert as such but I do think I'm somewhat better placed to understand the issues that the over population of elephants is having on Botswana and other species. I don't pretend that I know what the solution is but I do speak with conservationists on the ground there who believe that the situation is so precarious now that hunting has to be considered as part of the solution.

My family owns shares in game reserves in both South Africa and Botswana and I have witnessed with my own eyes a single bull elephant completely destroy acres of mature woodland in just a few weeks. This has a devastating effect on all other life forms that depend on such environments, both directly and indirectly. It's not unlike the effect that logging has on the Brazilian rain forest.

You correctly identify that elephants are a tourist attraction but fail to recognise that so are many other species - whose existence is being threatened by the habitat loss caused by elephants. Nobody would be interested in safari tourism that just featured elephants, but that's where this is heading. If the elephant population in Botswana halved tomorrow, there would still be 100,000 elephants to see. And they're not exactly difficult to spot. 

At Limpopo Lipadi we can sustain a small population but many times that number of migrant elephants regularly enter the reserve via the Limpopo river, circumventing the game fencing and trashing the habitat. In 2020 alone it cost $150k (the entire annual conservation budget) to translocate 20 bulls and within 15 months that number had re-established itself in the reserve. Many arboreal species too numerous to mention are now absent from the reserve. This situation is replicated across Botswana and beyond. In Kruger National Park in South Africa the elephant population is at its highest level ever despite major culling programs. I've visited Kruger for decades and noticed that visitors don't even stop at elephant sightings anymore as they're so numerous.

You can criticise the Botswanan government all you like but bunny-hugging armchair conservationists Googling 'Botswana' are not going to identify the solution until they have a meaningful understanding of what the problem is.

 

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

4 hours ago, cjcregg said:

I wouldn't consider myself an expert as such but I do think I'm somewhat better placed to understand the issues that the over population of elephants is having on Botswana and other species. I don't pretend that I know what the solution is but I do speak with conservationists on the ground there who believe that the situation is so precarious now that hunting has to be considered as part of the solution.

My family owns shares in game reserves in both South Africa and Botswana and I have witnessed with my own eyes a single bull elephant completely destroy acres of mature woodland in just a few weeks. This has a devastating effect on all other life forms that depend on such environments, both directly and indirectly. It's not unlike the effect that logging has on the Brazilian rain forest.

You correctly identify that elephants are a tourist attraction but fail to recognise that so are many other species

 

 

Back to the point you ignored:

You do realise (that article) is really about Germany banning imports due to elephant hunting/poaching (err) and  internationally illegal trophies which many countries ban due to the entwined illegal poacher trade - not about humane culling

You also seem to ignore, despite referencing - that Botswana is reintroducing elephant HUNTING and trophy sale, while disarming the poaching wardens? Not unavoidable humanitarian culling/herd management?

 

You reference a bull elephant destroying some stuff while on a rampage - so why was the elephant on a rampage? and SURELY there are far better mechanisms for manage and culling occasional rogue elephants without reintroducing hunting and trophy marketing.

.. let alone raging against other countries who exercise their right to choose NOT to be party to those in hunting and trophy market

 

Edited April 5 by tobyjugg2