www.ukbutterflies.co.uk

The Shift from "Big Government" to "Big Society" is simply a breach of the contract between the people, and those who were elected by them to manage our society. We elect politicians to take decisions on national matters, which need national coordination, for the benefit of the nation - not to abrogate that responsibility for running society back to the people who voted for them to take those decisions!
When ideology and policy are encompassed in a political catchphrase like "Big Society", I really worry for our country and the things we hold dear.
You can probably guess what that may be like if we imagine the Victorians in the19th Century, where poor-relief, education, health, etc were a matter of "philanthropy" and "charity", not a universal right for all citizens in the UK as it is now.
This is where "Big Society" ultimately leads as Government sheds the responsibility for our basic human rights.....

It does have a whiff of hand washing about it....

I think it is simply one more way for the Government to save public money. No other motive at all.

Dave

I have only just found this thread as I do not read all forums. I feel I must make a strong defence of Centre Parcs, if you had seen the delight on childrens faces when the ducks & swans come knocking on the patio door you would appreciate what a splendid introduction to nature & woodland CP is. I was fortunate enough to go to Sherwood CP the first winter it opened & it literally changed my life. Came straight back home & started swimming lessons. That ultimately lead me to go snorkeling in many exotic places around the world, Red Sea, Maldives & Samoa to name but a few. All Cp's have natural areas & the ambience is superb in my opinion. I have lost count of the number of times we have been now. Last june we used Longleat CP as a base to visit Collard Hill on 2 days for the large blue & will be back at Sherwood in early december. There will never be a vast quantity of CP style developements because it does not make ecconomic sence.
On the wider point, if too many dammfool people & politicians had not lived beyond their & the Country's means we might not have to sell off "the family silver" to pay off the Country's debts. Eric

Thanks for these replies and comments. They've helped me understand the situation a little better - I don't trust the papers to give me insightful judgments on these things!

Guy

Hi Eric,

The woods around Longleat look quite interesting, if you are thinking of a return visit. I only started exploring them late last summer when there were plenty of Purple Hairstreaks and common woodland butterflies to be seen. I have not visited the Center Parcs woodland but it has a fine species list http://www.centerparcs.co.uk/company/en ... rflies.jsp (though I would doubt that the Duke and Marsh Fritillary still occur there). The SSSI woodland nearby used to hold White Admiral and SPBF not so long ago, and I have to check next summer if they are still there. I live in hope of finding Wood White and Purple Emperor in the woods on the Wiltshire/Somerset border - they should be good, as they are on the same geological formation as the Bernwood butterfly paradise near Oxford - but it is a huge area to cover and I never have the time for a proper look.

I signed the petition.... not really sure about who is organizing it but it is something at least.

Charles

Ditto!
N

Signed and shared.

Lee

Pete Eeles wrote:While the Forestry Commission don't always get things right, they do understand the relevance of conservation. My concern is that this understanding will be lacking in any organisation or individual that purchases woodland for whatever purpose. The thought of Center Parc-style sites horrifies me; their main objective is to make money (like any business), not conserve. Let alone golf courses and the like.
The amount of "spin" in quite incredible: "We are looking to energise our forests by bringing in fresh ideas and investment" and "by putting conservation in the hands of local communities".
I've yet to see any forest that needs energising, or any local community looked upon for their conservation expertise.
Oxymoron of the day: "Sustainable development". The only sustainable development is *no* development
Cheers,
- Pete

I quite agree Pete. BC has many local projects with the Forestry Commission in many areas:
http://www.butterfly-conservation.org/d ... PageId=223
Like many organisations, they may not be perfect, but as a national body, the Forestry Commission can coordinate best-practices throughout their extensive holdings of critical butterfly and moth habitats. I too shudder to think of a multitude of commercial and other groups that may end-up owning or being responsible for all those habitats, with the inevitable consequences all too apparent.
I have requested a statement on this subject from BC's Bernadette Noakes, Conservation Officer, via the comment section of that BC web-page. So far I have had no response.

I do think Butterfly Conservation needs to take a stance, it is just so important. Or is this all too political, so all it does is try to minimise the inevitable damage?

Is that what our Conservation organisations should be doing?
Campaigning for enforceable minimum national standards of habitat management?
.... or picking-up the pieces afterwards and saving what it can?

From a personal perspective, if the latter is the attitude, we might as well all go home now, because in 50 years there ain't anything left to save...
N

NickB wrote:Is that what our Conservation organisations should be doing?
Campaigning for enforceable minimal national standards of habitat management?
.... or picking-up the pieces afterwards and saving what it can?

I'm with you, Nick, but surely we should be campaigning for enforceable maximal standards of habitat management... There should, in my opinion, be a legal duty of care to manage a valuable habitat so as to maximise its worth, not merely meet a minimal standard.

Guy

I have just edited that to "minimum" there being none at present...
Thanks Guy
N

Overlapping posts - for some reason it doesn't always tell me I'm doing that! Whatever - I know exactly what you mean and you are, of course, right.

Guy

...I'm off my soap-box now...
N

A lot of BC's conservation money comes from central government. It's understandable if they have a reluctance to bite the hand that feeds them.

Matsukaze wrote:A lot of BC's conservation money comes from central government. It's understandable if they have a reluctance to bite the hand that feeds them.

...and the money that comes from "central government" comes from where exactly?
That's right - you and I, through your taxes and hard-won livings; it is YOUR money that the government spends on your behalf.
So when your representatives in government are proposing to do something that is completely at odds with what has been achieved with conservation money under a previous government policy, you should all just keep quite ......

Matsukaze wrote:A lot of BC's conservation money comes from central government. It's understandable if they have a reluctance to bite the hand that feeds them.

The hand that feeds them. Come on Matsukaze, you know BC do what they do, because successive governments have allowed the wholesale destruction of the UK's wildlife habitat.

Like any conservation body, BC may receive money in the form of grants, (that they have to apply for), from the government, that hardly makes them bedfellows.

Regards Gruditch

Gruditch wrote:

Matsukaze wrote:A lot of BC's conservation money comes from central government. It's understandable if they have a reluctance to bite the hand that feeds them.

The hand that feeds them. Come on Matsukaze, you know BC do what they do, because successive governments have allowed the wholesale destruction of the UK's wildlife habitat.

Like any conservation body, BC may receive money in the form of grants, (that they have to apply for), from the government, that hardly makes them bedfellows.

Regards Gruditch

Unlike M&S, whom we happily get into bed with, for their money?

Yep, and if a forest near you, becomes one of the surplus to requirements, Forestry Commission sell offs, then no doubt you will be the first person imploring BC buy it. Then your be glad of that money.



Regards Gruditch