Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
The state of nature
Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment
Author 
 Message
Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Sat May 23, 15 5:40 pm    Post subject: The state of nature  Reply with quote    

Quote:
State of nature in the EU: biodiversity still being eroded, but some local improvements observed

Biodiversity Policy instruments
The majority of habitats and species in Europe have an unfavourable conservation status despite significant improvements for many species in recent years, according to a new technical report published by the European Environment Agency (EEA) today.


Source

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 34457
Location: yes
PostPosted: Sat May 23, 15 11:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

i will read that later

from a very subjective point of view over last 50 yrs ,this might well be the anthropocene extinction but garden novelties or useful things which have been crop or delight go feral, as well critters and plants hitch hike on global trade,etc ,etc
humans have relocated a lot of species to new habitats where they or their descendants might thrive ,adapt or interact .

call me back in say twenty million years and we will see how things are developing.

Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 10131

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 9:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Certainly in the UK we seem to have two extremes. There are those that try to maintain of improve habitats, like most Downsizers, and those that see a bit of ground without houses and regard it as 'waste' land, even if it is an important habitat or good farming land.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Mistress Rose wrote:
Certainly in the UK we seem to have two extremes. There are those that try to maintain of improve habitats, like most Downsizers, and those that see a bit of ground without houses and regard it as 'waste' land, even if it is an important habitat or good farming land.


Which reminds me...

Farmer turns down 275m for his land

Mistress Rose



Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 10131

PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 9:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Good for him and hope other landowners support him. Not far from here we are threatened whti a 7000 house development. I assume they can buy the land, but it has been deemed 'sustainable' even though it almost certainly isn't. By having another 700 houses in our village in one place we are hoping that other developments will not be built, although with the current 'presumption to allow' ideas I am not at all certain.

It is not just the area lost to housing, but it puts a strain on everything round it; roads, countryside, hopitals etc.

Where do all the people come from, as these massive developments are not all 'affordable' or social housing, which will give those without homes somewhere to live.

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 34457
Location: yes
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote    

in some places he would need a very trustworthy close protection team.

i respect folk who turn down vast riches cos they dont like the developers plans (or whatever)

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 8407
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Rob R wrote:
Mistress Rose wrote:
Certainly in the UK we seem to have two extremes. There are those that try to maintain of improve habitats, like most Downsizers, and those that see a bit of ground without houses and regard it as 'waste' land, even if it is an important habitat or good farming land.


Which reminds me...

Farmer turns down 275m for his land
Sounds like a lot of money but 500k an acre when you can pay anywhere from 100 to 200k for a single plot with outlying permission & I'd say it's underpriced.
He'll sell when he's offered 500m.

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Tavascarow wrote:
Rob R wrote:
Mistress Rose wrote:
Certainly in the UK we seem to have two extremes. There are those that try to maintain of improve habitats, like most Downsizers, and those that see a bit of ground without houses and regard it as 'waste' land, even if it is an important habitat or good farming land.


Which reminds me...

Farmer turns down 275m for his land
Sounds like a lot of money but 500k an acre when you can pay anywhere from 100 to 200k for a single plot with outlying permission & I'd say it's underpriced.
He'll sell when he's offered 500m.


It didn't have planning permission.

The only thing you can say with any certainty is that you'd sell at 500m if you were in that position.

Ty Gwyn



Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 4087
Location: Lampeter
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

If it did`nt have planning permission,a developer offering 275M has information from somewhere it will get planning.

Tavascarow



Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 8407
Location: South Cornwall
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Ty Gwyn wrote:
If it did`nt have planning permission,a developer offering 275M has information from somewhere it will get planning.
Indeed.

onemanband



Joined: 26 Dec 2010
Posts: 1473
Location: NCA90
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Tavascarow wrote:
Ty Gwyn wrote:
If it did`nt have planning permission,a developer offering 275M has information from somewhere it will get planning.
Indeed.


Farmer probably won't get the full 275m until permission is granted. He'll get say the market value and the rest upon permission.

I read that in last weekends DM.
IIRC developers wanted to buy half his land but permission refused. They are more confident of a bigger 10000 house scheme with shops and schools and stuff, so then offered 275m for the lot.
Given the housing shortage I don't know if that was a noble or a selfish thing the farmer did. Yes there are brownfield sites and other options to building on fields, but ultimately we are going to have to build on some fields.

onemanband



Joined: 26 Dec 2010
Posts: 1473
Location: NCA90
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

dpack wrote:
in some places he would need a very trustworthy close protection team.


George Peppard and his chums ?

Rob R



Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 31902
Location: York
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

onemanband wrote:
but ultimately we are going to have to build on some fields.


They should start by doing up all the millions of empty shells stood rotting

Jamanda
Downsizer Moderator


Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 34917
Location: Devon
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Rob R wrote:
onemanband wrote:
but ultimately we are going to have to build on some fields.


They should start by doing up all the millions of empty shells stood rotting


He's not wrong.

onemanband



Joined: 26 Dec 2010
Posts: 1473
Location: NCA90
PostPosted: Sun May 24, 15 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote    

Jamanda wrote:
Rob R wrote:
onemanband wrote:
but ultimately we are going to have to build on some fields.


They should start by doing up all the millions of empty shells stood rotting


He's not wrong.


He is - well his figures are.
600k empty houses of which 200k are long term empty.
Agree it's a start, but those 200k is just one years housing need - what then ?

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Conservation and Environment All times are GMT
Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright 2004 marsjupiter.com