Nettles, etc

Capercaillie

https://ec.europa.eu/ireland/news/4.3m-euro-in-eu-life-funding-awarded-to-department-of-culture-heritage-and-the-gaeltacht-to-develop-corncrake-conservation-project_en
Great news for Irish Corncrake!!! Scheme will benefit whole range of species: skylark, meadow pipit, chough, orchids, Irish hare etc!!!

Birdnuts

Capercaillie wrote: »

https://ec.europa.eu/ireland/news/4.3m-euro-in-eu-life-funding-awarded-to-department-of-culture-heritage-and-the-gaeltacht-to-develop-corncrake-conservation-project_en
Great news for Irish Corncrake!!! Scheme will benefit whole range of species: skylark, meadow pipit, chough, orchids, Irish hare etc!!!

Well hopefully it will be designed and run better then the likes of REPS/GLAS which despite a vast spend have delivered very little for our natural heritage

Capercaillie

Birdnuts wrote: »

Well hopefully it will be designed and run better then the likes of REPS/GLAS which despite a vast spend have delivered very little for our natural heritage

Will be a results-based scheme. They were developing marking scheme this year on my farm and other farms on Mullet peninsula. Marks will be scored on early cover areas like nettles/hogweed. Condition of your hay meadow will also be scored. Additional payments for presence of corncrake and how late you mow.

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

A monoculture of ryegrass will not have much insect life compared to a multi-species sward.

As with other monocultures tbh - there can be unintended consequences. Environmental schemes advocating extensive planting of species like hogweed and nettle are also a case in point.

Nettles and hog weed are increasingly being encouraged as they support certain invertebrate species eg aphids, butterfly and moth larvae .

However once planted nettles become pretty much a self perpetuating nitrogen hungry monoculture. Nettles want to shade out all the other plants, and will change their shape and the angle of their leaves (phenoplasticity) in order to do this. Eventually nothing can grow under the nettle because they get all the light.

Deliberate planting of nettles etc serve to reduce local plant biodiversity and are a threat to / loss of other native species of flora and fauna in sensitive areas.

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

As with other monocultures tbh - there can be unintended consequences. Environmental schemes advocating extensive planting of species like hogweed and nettle are also a case in point.

Nettles and hog weed are increasingly being encouraged as they support certain invertebrate species eg aphids, butterfly and moth larvae .

Deliberate planting of nettles etc serve to reduce local plant biodiversity and are a threat to / loss of other native species of flora and fauna in sensitive areas.

The only schemes in Ireland advocating large monocultures of nettles are schemes directly related to corncrake. Corncrake on the verge of extinction of Ireland and a number of farmers (like myself) are paid to create best practice corncrake habitats on their farms (nettle beds, hogweed beds, iris beds, species rich hay meadows). Nettle beds are the most important habitat for corncrake. I have just under 1 acre of nettle bed on 25 acres of species rich meadow, fen, pond. The farm has the highest concentration of corncrake in the Country. Go through a dense nettle bed and it is awash with insects, slugs, snails and they are prey for corncrakes. During the winter large flocks of redwings feed in them. Your suggestion that biodiversity in nettle monocultures are comparable to biodiversity in ryegrass monocultures is totally false and inaccurate.

The only other schemes advocating planting of nettles are schemes like the "Bride project" because their realize the importance of nettles to biodiversity. The nettle beds they are advocating are 2X2 metre nettle beds (hardly extensive). https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/forestry-enviro/environment/every-farmer-should-have-nettles-on-their-farm-to-improve-biodiversity-dairy-farmer-and-activist-38091732.html

However once planted nettles become pretty much a self perpetuating nitrogen hungry monoculture. Nettles want to shade out all the other plants, and will change their shape and the angle of their leaves (phenoplasticity) in order to do this. Eventually nothing can grow under the nettle because they get all the light.

Just to correct another one of your factual errors. Nettles are not Nitrogen dependent but are P dependent.

Vicarious Function

Very interesting, Capercaillie! Congratulations on the work you have done re conservation of the corncrake. I grew up on a farm in the Midlands and the sound of the corncrake brings back fond memories for me. In my last house in Dublin, I had a nettle bed that took over of its own accord in my back garden. I was fascinated by the amount of "activity" / (biodiversity) that always centered around it. I was especially fond of the bumblebees which made nests both in the lawn and in the wall in the vicinity of the nettles. When moving to my new house, where I am now, I put a root of some nettle in a pot and took it with me, out of sentimentality. Two and a half years later, I still have it. Some people would exclaim: "Madness". LOL! They're welcome to their opinion.

Graces7

Abundant nettles out here after decades of neglect, Abundant bees and also peacock butterflies … I have left one area untouched.

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

The only schemes in Ireland advocating large monocultures of nettles are schemes directly related to corncrake. Corncrake on the verge of extinction of Ireland and a number of farmers (like myself) are paid to create best practice corncrake habitats on their farms (nettle beds, hogweed beds, iris beds, species rich hay meadows). Nettle beds are the most important habitat for corncrake. I have just under 1 acre of nettle bed on 25 acres of species rich meadow, fen, pond. The farm has the highest concentration of corncrake in the Country. Go through a dense nettle bed and it is awash with insects, slugs, snails and they are prey for corncrakes. During the winter large flocks of redwings feed in them. Your suggestion that biodiversity in nettle monocultures are comparable to biodiversity in ryegrass monocultures is totally false and inaccurate.
...
Just to correct another one of your factual errors. Nettles are not Nitrogen dependent but are P dependent.

Not sure how you took any my fairly short comment to be about you - but no matter. And no there is no issue about people being paid with regard to various schemes - however the problem is where such schemes and / or advice is applied without proper environmental diligence

As to your mention of "factual errors" (sic) it might be useful to read what is written btw - it was not stated that nettles were "nitrogen dependent" . The comment detailed and I quote:

once planted nettles become pretty much a self perpetuating nitrogen hungry monoculture.

With nettles any nitrogen in the soil is rapidly taken up into the plant - so yes they are indeed 'nitrogen hungry'.

Nor was it suggested that "biodiversity in nettle monocultures are comparable to biodiversity in ryegrass monocultures". This is my comment.

Deliberate planting of nettles etc serve to reduce local plant biodiversity and are a threat to / loss of other native species of flora and fauna in sensitive areas.

I did not mention "ryegrass" at all. So yes your reply there is indeed 'totally false and inaccurate'.

Also if it were the case that the corncrake was solely dependent on areas of nettles for cover - i doubt that we would not have a shortage of corncrakes for sure. In Ireland nettles remain a abundant and yes a common invasive species.

To reiterate as you seem to have missed the point as with other monocultures - there can be unintended consequences for a wide range of flora and fauna. This is also true of nettles - where locally extensive areas whether planted or left to grow unchecked in previously cultivated areas will - permanently out compete practically every other species of plant and the invertebrates and other species dependent on them. Plants under threat or uncommon are especially at risk. A case on point was an area local to here which was important for a number of orchid species. These have largely disappeared and now replaced by a large area of unmamaged nettles.

Btw that is just one example. A wide range of flora and fauna which are designated locally rare or in danger of regional extinction can be endangered by such monocultures whether planted or otherwise.

The principle issue with areas of invasive and phenoplastic species such as nettle - is that whilst they may be locally valuable to a relatively small number of species - their use and / or spread requires very careful monitoring and management. Something I am not convinced that is happening at present.

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

however the problem is where such schemes and / or advice is applied without proper environmental diligence


The principle issue with areas of invasive and phenoplastic species such as nettle - is that whilst they may be locally valuable to a relatively small number of species - their use and / or spread requires very careful monitoring and management. Something I am not convinced that is happening at present.

An audit done by NPWS on each farm in NPWS Corncrake Farm Plan to ensure any habitat mangaement done for corncrake does not affect any critical animal/plant populations on that farm.

As to your mention of "factual errors" (sic) it might be useful to read what is written btw - it was not stated that nettles were "nitrogen dependent" . The comment detailed and I quote:
With nettles any nitrogen in the soil is rapidly taken up into the plant - so yes they are indeed 'nitrogen hungry'.

Nettles can grow continuously without any N application. P levels are used up by nettles, unless supplementary P is added the nettle beds will be taken over by grass. Nettles are not N "hungry" as you say....

Nor was it suggested that "biodiversity in nettle monocultures are comparable to biodiversity in ryegrass monocultures". This is my comment. I did not mention "ryegrass" at all. So yes your reply there is indeed 'totally false and inaccurate'.

Your original post referenced the single line which is

A monoculture of ryegrass will not have much insect life compared to a multi-species sward.

Your whole reply was to this quote comparing it to nettle/hogweed monocultures.

Also if it were the case that the corncrake was solely dependent on areas of nettles for cover - i doubt that we would not have a shortage of corncrakes for sure. In Ireland nettles remain a abundant and yes a common invasive species

Main limiting factor for corncrake recovery in Ireland is lack of early cover: hogweed/nettle. In corncrake areas there is a severe shortage of both sufficiently large and good quality nettle beds.

To reiterate as you seem to have missed the point as with other monocultures - there can be unintended consequences for a wide range of flora and fauna. This is also true of nettles - where locally extensive areas whether planted or left to grow unchecked in previously cultivated areas will - permanently out compete practically every other species of plant and the invertebrates and other species dependent on them. Plants under threat or uncommon are especially at risk. A case on point was an area local to here which was important for a number of orchid species. These have largely disappeared and now replaced by a large area of unmamaged nettles.

There are less than 50 acres of nettle monoculture planted in NPWS Corncrake farm plan scheme in Ireland. Highest concentrations of corncrake in the Country are in these farms. Are seriously saying that by planting 50 acres of nettles in the whole Country is a threat to biodiversity in Ireland? Should we get rid of these nettle beds and let the corncrake become extinct?

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

An audit done by NPWS on each farm in NPWS Corncrake Farm Plan to ensure any habitat mangaement done for corncrake does not affect any critical animal/plant populations on that farm.

Again the issue with regard to nettles is not unique to your particular situation or simply receiving grants for growing nettles. I did not refer to corncrakes - you did. But yes Nettles are increasingly a problem in uncultivated areas and
as an increasingly Ill considered panacea to local diversity

Nettles can grow continuously without any N application. P levels are used up by nettles, unless supplementary P is added the nettle beds will be taken over by grass. Nettles are not N "hungry" as you say....

Again where was that said???? No - N application was mentioned - but yes nettles are nitrogen hungry and will use previously applied and available N to aggressively establish and out compete other vegetation. Not just me saying that either btw

http://www.transitionsta.org/2018/12/meadow-making-guardbridge-community-garden/

https://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/our-work/campaigning-change/nitrogen

https://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/about-us/news/road-verge-marauders

Your original post referenced the single line which is Your whole reply was to this quote comparing it to nettle/hogweed monocultures.

Again misreading is not helpfull - the comment detailed any and all monocultures including nettles. Please reread if in any doubt.

Deliberate planting of nettles etc serve to reduce local plant biodiversity and are a threat to / loss of other native species of flora and fauna in sensitive areas.

Main limiting factor for corncrake recovery in Ireland is lack of early cover: hogweed/nettle. In corncrake areas there is a severe shortage of both sufficiently large and good quality nettle beds.There are less than 50 acres of nettle monoculture planted in NPWS Corncrake farm plan scheme in Ireland. Highest concentrations of corncrake in the Country are in these farms. Are seriously saying that by planting 50 acres of nettles in the whole Country is a threat to biodiversity in Ireland? Should we get rid of these nettle beds and let the corncrake become extinct?

Rather than taking this discussion down the usual route - suffice to say that such monocultures whether deliberately planted or allowed to spread through poor management can and do result in sensitive local habitats becoming overrun and local biodivesity being negatively affected. None of that is hard to understand tbh and no I'm not referring to corncrakes but rather the use of monocultures of highly aggressive species such as nettles etc as some type of magic fix for widespread diversity.

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

Rather than taking this discussion down the usual route - suffice to say that such monocultures whether deliberately planted or allowed to spread through poor management can and do result in sensitive local habitats becoming overrun and local biodivesity being negatively affected. None of that is hard to understand tbh and no I'm not referring to corncrakes but rather the use of monocultures of highly invasive species such as nettles etc as some type of magic fix for widespread diversity.

nettles are not an invasive species in Ireland...........

Again the issue with regard to nettles is not unique to your particular situation or simply receiving grants for growing nettles. I did not refer to corncrakes - you did. But yes Nettles are increasingly a problem in uncultivated areas and
as an increasingly Ill considered panacea to local diversity

Nobody is saying nettles are panacea to all local diversity........

Again where was that said???? No - N application was mentioned - but yes nettles are nitrogen hungry and will use available N to aggressively establish and out compete other vegetation. Not just me saying that either btw

http://www.transitionsta.org/2018/12/meadow-making-guardbridge-community-garden/

https://www.yara.co.uk/crop-nutrition/novel-crops/nettle/

Well done you googled a couple of articles. I actually grow crops of nettles, so safe to say I know what I'm talking about.

Are seriously saying that by planting 50 acres of nettles in the whole Country is a threat to biodiversity in Ireland? Should we get rid of these nettle beds and let the corncrake become extinct?

Maybe you might answer the question..........

magicbastarder

so are we saying that people with land and the will available should not try to plant nettles to help corncrake?
i don't know Capercaillie from Adam, but i would guess that if he's one of the leaders in the country in catering to an endandered species, he's hardly going to endanger other species in the process.

regarding plants spreading through 'poor management', and the comment that they are a 'self perpetuating hungry monoculture', are you saying that once they become established, nothing else can take hold through natural means? i've never heard of nettles being talked about in this fashion, i.e. that they are an invasive thug.

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

nettles are not an invasive species in Ireland...........

Where was the reference to 'Ireland' in that comment? Plants can still be invasive and native. Yes nettles are indeed indiginous but they will aggressively invade and colonise. I would expect as a farmer you would understand that.

Nobody is saying nettles are panacea to all local diversity........}l

Nettles are being increasingly pushed as being 'wildlife friendly ' and allowed to spread. They are far from this - see above links for details.

Well done you googled a couple of articles. I actually grow crops of nettles, so safe to say I know what I'm talking about.

Purely as a foil to the dismissal of what was stated previously ...

And as to any 'question' - again I made no mention regarding your corncrakes btw. I'll leave you with that.

gozunda

magicbastarder wrote: »

so are we saying that people with land and the will available should not try to plant nettles to help corncrake?
i don't know Capercaillie from Adam, but i would guess that if he's one of the leaders in the country in catering to an endandered species, he's hardly going to endanger other species in the process.

regarding plants spreading through 'poor management', and the comment that they are a 'self perpetuating hungry monoculture', are you saying that once they become established, nothing else can take hold through natural means? i've never heard of nettles being talked about in this fashion, i.e. that they are an invasive thug.

Nope didnt mention corncrakes - rather the promotion of monocultures such as nettles in supposedly supporting wildlife etc. They do but in a very limited way and can be detrimental and an aggressive species which out compete other flora and fauna and reduce local diversity

Again articles here on some of the problem with nettles

"Thuggish species like nettles and brambles have become more prominent, at the expensive of smaller species." See:

https://nerc.ukri.org/planetearth/stories/239/

Also:

http://www.transitionsta.org/2018/12/meadow-making-guardbridge-community-garden/

https://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/our-work/campaigning-change/nitrogen

https://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/about-us/news/road-verge-marauders

Capercaillie

magicbastarder wrote: »

so are we saying that people with land and the will available should not try to plant nettles to help corncrake?
i don't know Capercaillie from Adam, but i would guess that if he's one of the leaders in the country in catering to an endandered species, he's hardly going to endanger other species in the process.

regarding plants spreading through 'poor management', and the comment that they are a 'self perpetuating hungry monoculture', are you saying that once they become established, nothing else can take hold through natural means? i've never heard of nettles being talked about in this fashion, i.e. that they are an invasive thug.

Nettles will only spread if P in very high. I have 18 acres of species rich hay meadow, no nettles will grow in them because the P is very low. The nettle beds are beside the hay meadows and do not spread into the meadow. Nettles are not an invasive species unlike rhododendron/japanese knotweed which will spread all over the place- a true invasive species.

magicbastarder

but all of those articles are about the problem of excess nitrogen in soils. nettles don't *cause* that. they may benefit from it, of course, but it seems to be a case of the sins of the father being visited upon the son?

anyway, since the nettle *is* a species which certain native animal and other species benefit from, i genuinely don't understand the complaint, as nettles haven't taken over the country, and not even close to it. they provide occasional hotspots for those other species to colonise.

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

Nope didnt mention corncrakes - rather the promotion of monocultures such as nettles in supposedly supporting wildlife etc. They do but in a very limited way and can be detrimental and an aggressive species which out compete other flora and fauna and reduce local diversity

Again articles here on some of the problem with nettles

http://www.transitionsta.org/2018/12/meadow-making-guardbridge-community-garden/

https://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/our-work/campaigning-change/nitrogen

https://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/about-us/news/road-verge-marauders

The links you give show the problem with high fertility in soil, not the plants (nettles/hogweed) themselves.

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

And as to any 'question' - again I made no mention regarding your corncrakes btw. I'll leave you with that.

You have waffled on about the dangers to biodiversity by "invasive" nettles. Why not answer the question

Are seriously saying that by planting 50 acres of nettles in the whole Country is a threat to biodiversity in Ireland? Should we get rid of these nettle beds and let the corncrake become extinct?

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

The links you give show the problem with high fertility in soil, not the plants (nettles/hogweed) themselves.

They do and also show how nettles are nitrogen hungry as detailed and was the point being made.

nitrogen-hungry thugs 

http://www.transitionsta.org/2018/12/meadow-making-guardbridge-community-garden/

But if that's not enough heres another.

"Thuggish species like nettles and brambles have become more prominent, at the expensive of smaller species."

https://nerc.ukri.org/planetearth/stories/239/

gozunda

magicbastarder wrote: »

but all of those articles are about the problem of excess nitrogen in soils. nettles don't *cause* that. they may benefit from it, of course, but it seems to be a case of the sins of the father being visited upon the son? anyway, since the nettle *is* a species which certain native animal and other species benefit from, i genuinely don't understand the complaint, as nettles haven't taken over the country, and not even close to it. they provide occasional hotspots for those other species to colonise.

No that is not a 'complaint' btw. It is well known that species such as nettles which are nitogen hungry can use that adaption to aggressively out compete other species. Again looking at locally important and sensitive areas where rare and uncommon species are at risk from aggressive and other invasive species.

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

They do and also show how nettles are nitrogen hungery as detailed and was the point being made.



http://www.transitionsta.org/2018/12/meadow-making-guardbridge-community-garden/

But if that's not enough heres another.

"Thuggish species like nettles and brambles have become more prominent, at the expensive of smaller species."

https://nerc.ukri.org/planetearth/stories/239/

Well done on your google searches

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

You have waffled on about the dangers to biodiversity by "invasive" nettles. Why not answer the question

Lol - Whilst you misquoted numerous comments despite that being pointed out and being provided references which do identify nettles as "thuggish" and "invasive" species and "nitrogen hungry" as you refused to believe otherwise. Why then would I answer something I made no reference to?

I would suggest you simply reread the comments with a little more comprehension
I'll leave you at that.

magicbastarder

gozunda wrote: »

Nooe that us not a 'complaint' btw. It is well known that species such as nettles which are nitogen hungry can use that adaption to aggressively out compete other species. Again looking at locally important and sensitive areas where rare and uncommon species are at risk from aggressive and these and other invasive species.

again, i think you're confusing cause and effect. and the particular effect at hand - nettles - does not seem to be a major issue.
in fact the last time i saw a large stand of nettles, it was swamped with what i think were peacock caterpillars.

gozunda

magicbastarder wrote: »

again, i think you're confusing cause and effect. and the particular effect at hand - nettles - does not seem to be a major issue.
in fact the last time i saw a large stand of nettles, it was swamped with what i think were peacock caterpillars.

The issue as in the instance of a local area detailed previously which supported various species of orchids - becoming overrun with nettles. Specifically local diversity and especially rare and uncommon species - where aggressively invasive species like nettles which out compete other species and cause flora and fauna to become scarce

That is derailed in the previous link which details the role of "Thuggish species like nettles and brambles have become more prominent, at the expensive of smaller species."

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

The issue as in the instance of a local area detailed previously which supported various species of orchids - becoming overrun with nettles. Specifically local diversity and especially rare and uncommon species - where aggressively invasive species like nettles which out compete other species and cause flora and fauna to become scarce

That is derailed in the previous link which details the role of "Thuggish species like nettles and brambles have become more prominent, at the expensive of smaller species."

Biggest threat threat to orchid rich meadows in this Country is rampant intensification of agriculture. Reseeding with ryegrass, increased rates of fertilization, overuse of slurry....

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

Biggest threat threat to orchid rich meadows in this Country is rampant intensification of agriculture. Reseeding with ryegrass, increased rates of fertilization, overuse of slurry....

Thats your opinion - for enough. However the Irish Biodivesity Data centre has also highlighted significant risks to existing areas rich in wildflowers (including many species of orchids) from afforestation and land abandonment. Very much as in the example given.

New Home

Mod: I've moved these from Nature in the News to their own thread.

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

Thats your opinion - for enough. However the Irish Biodivesity Data centre has also highlighted significant risks to existing areas rich in wildflowers (including many species of orchids) from afforestation and land abandonment. Very much as in the example given.

Main threat is intensification of agriculture. Would you not agree that agricultural intensification has caused severe damage to species rich meadows?

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

Main threat is intensification of agriculture. Would you not agree that agricultural intensification has caused severe damage to species rich meadows?

As detailed the National Biodiversity Centre has highlighted afforestation and land abandonment as significant areas of concern with regards to native flora. Imo areas which rich are in native flora tend not to be the same areas where much of the more intensive style agriculture is undertaken.

The areas currently rich in native flora are often viewed as marginal in relation to agriculture and also tend to the first which are afforested or abandoned. I know of several areas in my locality which would have been deemed to have good diversity but both the planting of commercial forestry and the overgrowth of previously species rich grassland has resulted in the loss of flora and fauna in those areas. Certainly other areas of agricultural land in this area haven't got anymore or less intensive than previously.

Capercaillie

:eek:

gozunda wrote: »

As detailed the National Biodiversity Centre has highlighted afforestation and land abandonment as significant areas of concern with regards to native flora. Imo areas which rich are in native flora tend not to be the same areas where much of the more intensive style agriculture is undertaken.

The areas currently rich in native flora are often viewed as marginal in relation to agriculture and also tend to the first which are afforested or abandoned. I know of several areas in my locality which had would have been deemed to have good diversity but both the planting of commercial forestry and the overgrowth of previously species rich grassland has resulted in the loss of flora and fauna in those areas. Certainly other areas of agricultural land in this area haven't got anymore or less intensive than previously.

Ireland has seen huge rise in intensification all over the Country. You might have heard about Food harvest 2020 and Food Wise 2025 or that fact that milk quotas have been abolished (you should google it). Teagasc advise farmers to reseed if <60% of meadow sward is perennial ryegrass.

In my area (marginal land) rampant unchecked (illegal) drainage/reseeding taking places a countless species rich meadows have been lost.

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

:eek:
Ireland has seen huge rise in intensification all over the Country. You might have heard about Food harvest 2020 and Food Wise 2025 or that fact that milk quotas have been abolished (you should google it). Teagasc advise farmers to reseed if <60% of meadow sward is perennial ryegrass. In my area (marginal land) rampant unchecked (illegal) drainage/reseeding taking places a countless species rich meadows have been lost.

Yes thank you for the lecture. I am more than aware. The point is that areas which are already being farmed - are the areas of least value with regard to locally rare flora and fauna and biodivesity. Fields have been reseeded here for many years so no great change here either way.

Areas used predominantly for agriculture have not become more intensively farmed than previously in my experience. Plus I would also say that LU/HA are down compared to 10 or 20 years ago and most farmers I know have put effort into planting native species and encouraging wildlife.

However surrounding marginal areas which are of value with regards to biodiversity are increasingly being afforested or not being actively farmed. Those are the areas which are currently under threat.

Tbh If there believe there is illegal activity ongoing in your area - you may best report it.

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

Yes thank you for the lecture. I am more than aware. The point is that areas which are already being farmed - are the areas of least value with regard to locally rare flora and fauna and biodivesity. Fields have been reseeded here for many years so no great change here either way.

Areas used predominantly for agriculture have not become more intensively farmed than previously in my experience. Plus I would also say that LU/HA are down compared to 10 or 20 years ago and most farmers I know have put effort into planting native species and encouraging wildlife.

However surrounding marginal areas which are of value with regards to biodiversity are increasingly being afforested or not being actively farmed. Those are the areas which are currently under threat.

Tbh If there believe there is illegal activity ongoing in your area - you may best report it.

If stocking densities are the same why have so many nitrates derogations been issued? You might want to look up what nitrates derogations means. The dairy herd has increased rapidly and land management has become even more intensified. Look around at the destruction of hedgerows and the worsening water quality issues, only 1% water catchment areas are of pristine quality.

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

If stocking densities are the same why have so many nitrates derogations been issued? You might want to look up what nitrates derogations means. The dairy herd has increased rapidly and land management has become even more intensified. Look around at the destruction of hedgerows and the worsening water quality issues, only 1% water catchment areas are of pristine quality.

Nope no need to look up nitrate derogations or anything else on above. Overall cattle numbers are down from previous. Around here livestock numbers are down overall from a couple of decades ago for sure. What had increased is the overall human population (up by nearly 2 million in the same period across the country) . Pressure on water sources and point source discharges also have had a significant impact on water quality. This is well known.

Yes dairy numbers have gone up but not in all areas and predominantly in those areas already intensively farmed. Yes nitrate regulations have been tightened up and thats a good thing as far as I'm concerned. I have referred to what is going on the ground here. And no use resorting to gross generalisations. But if wish to argue with the National Biodiversity Centre with regards be my guest. I have no issue with people being paid to grow nettles btw - I do question the general lack of knowledge or wildlife expertise taken from the back of cornflakes packets or similar.

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

Nope no need to look up nitrate derogations or anything else pontificated on above. Overall cattle numbers are down from previous. Around here livestock numbers are down overall from a couple of decades ago for sure. What had increased is the overall human population (up by nearly 2 million in the same period across the country) . Pressure on water sources and point source discharges also have had a significant impact on water quality. This is well known.

Yes dairy numbers have gone up but not in all areas and predominantly in those areas already intensively farmed. Yes nitrate regulations have been tightened up and thats a good thing as far as I'm concerned. I have referred to what is going on the ground here. And no use resorting to gross generalisations. But if wish to argue with the National Biodiversity Centre with regards be my guest.

You seem to deny effect rampant agricultural intensification has had on rare fauna/flora/biodiversity. However you are critical of schemes which promote nettle bed creation in extremely small localized area, because they are a threat to biodiversity???? Double standards..........

EPA list agriculture as main threat to water quality in this Country.....

I have no issue with people being paid to grow nettles btw - I do question the general lack of knowledge or wildlife expertise taken from the back of cornflakes packets or similar.

I have the highest concentration of corncrakes in the Country breeding on my farm. NPWS used my farm in application for the EU Life project which got 5.9 million for corncrake conservation. Norwegian government wrote a report on corncrake conseravtion using example of my farm as best practice conservation. I must have gotten my wildlife expertise off a mighty good box of cornflakes!!:D

New Home

Mod: Lads, discuss away, but please cut the bickering.

lordgoat

Capercaillie wrote: »

You seem to deny effect rampant agricultural intensification has had on rare fauna/flora/biodiversity. However you are critical of schemes which promote nettle bed creation in extremely small localized area, because they are a threat to biodiversity???? Double standards..........

EPA list agriculture as main threat to water quality in this Country.....

I have the highest concentration of corncrakes in the Country breeding on my farm. NPWS used my farm in application for the EU Life project which got 5.9 million for corncrake conservation. Norwegian government wrote a report on corncrake conseravtion using example of my farm as best practice conservation. I must have gotten my wildlife expertise off a mighty good box of cornflakes!!:D

Great thread, the amount of good information you give out that's generally ignored for point scoring is appreciated by the rest of us that are reading for good facts and information.

A great achievement Capercaille overall for your farm though.

If there's ever a report done on your place be sure to stick a link up to any articles etc.

gozunda

Capercaillie wrote: »

You seem to deny effect rampant agricultural intensification has had on rare fauna/flora/biodiversity. However you are critical of schemes which promote nettle bed creation in extremely small localized area, because they are a threat to biodiversity???? Double standards. EPA list agriculture as main threat to water quality in this Country I have the highest concentration of corncrakes in the Country breeding on my farm. NPWS used my farm in application for the EU Life project which got 5.9 million for corncrake conservation. Norwegian government wrote a report on corncrake conseravtion using example of my farm as best practice conservation. I must have gotten my wildlife expertise off a mighty good box of cornflakes!!:

'Deny'? Eh? Nope - do read again. As detailed just a lot of the intensification has clearly occured where the most intensive agriculture is already practised. And nothing negative about nettle payments etc rather that any monoculture whether weed or cultivated can have serious unintended consequences for native flora and fauna as already given in detail and highlighted by the National Biodiversity Centre. Much of which appears not to be appreciated tbh such as land abandonment and the threat of afforestation to such areas. In this area the biggest single change of land use has been commercial afforestation over the last 20 years. Nothing else comes close. But of course well done to all those etc who put efforts into wildlife conservation countrywide. Btw I didn't mention corncrakes so not taking of what is said generally above as being particular to your situation btw. Wildlife conservation is a bigger issue than any of us imo.

Btw the EPA do not list agriculture as main threat to water quality in this country - the EPA has stated that the most serious threat to water quality of lakes and rivers in Ireland is eutrophication arising from municipal sewage and agriculture activities as already correctly detailed but they also list "impacts to the physical habitat conditions including excess sediment (hydromorphology), and pressures from forestry activities". 
Also see
https://www.epa.ie/researchandeducation/education/educ/cleanwater/ With municipal sewage pollution now being a major problem countrywide https://www.epa.ie/water/uww/wwater/

Capercaillie

gozunda wrote: »

'Deny'? Eh? Nope - do read again. As detailed just a lot of the intensification has clearly occured where the most intensive agriculture is already practised. And nothing negative about nettle payments etc rather that any monoculture whether weed or cultivated can have serious unintended consequences for native flora and fauna as already given in detail and highlighted by the National Biodiversity Centre. Much of which appears not to be appreciated tbh such as land abandonment and the threat of afforestation to such areas. In this area the biggest single change of land use has been commercial afforestation over the last 20 years. Nothing else comes close. But of course well done to all those etc who put efforts into wildlife conservation countrywide. Btw I didn't mention corncrakes so not taking of what is said generally above as being particular to your situation btw. Wildlife conservation is a bigger issue than any of us imo.

Btw the EPA do not list agriculture as main threat to water quality in this country - the EPA has stated that the most serious threat to water quality of lakes and rivers in Ireland is eutrophication arising from municipal sewage and agriculture activities as already correctly detailed but they also list "impacts to the physical habitat conditions including excess sediment (hydromorphology), and pressures from forestry activities". 
Also see
https://www.epa.ie/researchandeducation/education/educ/cleanwater/ With municipal sewage pollution now being a major problem countrywide https://www.epa.ie/water/uww/wwater/

Well we both now agree that agriculture a major threat to water quality. We will leave it at that.....