Seeing the Changes 2037

A few more flowers. Tormentil (Potentilla erecta) in Loughor and Foxglove (Digitalis purpurea) on Swansea outskirts.

Soccer Versus the Environment?

Whitewebbs Park was initially sold to London's Enfield Council almost 100 years ago. The sale was intended to benefit recreation for the public living in the area. Eventually, a golf course (bad move) was put on the site. When the golf course fell into disuse, the park was effectively re-wilded . The area now boasts 80 bird species, 9 species of bats, Great-crested newts and badgers. And these are just the big animal species. The park currently fulfills the recreation needs of substantial numbers of people and helps the environment. The High Court have now ruled against a challenge to Enfield Council's plan to lease half the park (for large amounts of cash) to Tottenham Hotspur football club. The club want to build a new women's and girl's academy on this green-belt site (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/article/2024/may/25/court-bid-to-prevent-spurs-leasing-rewilded-london-golf-course-fails). The folk challenging the Enfield Council plan fear that public parks across London are put at risk by this High Court ruling. Councils want more money for their services and it's important to increase female exercise. Having said that, the academy would have very limited public access and valuable environments would disappear. Surely, Tottenham Hotspur can afford to find space for an academy on a 'brownfield' site? This looks like environmental vandalism!

Saving the World By Maximising Baby Production?

The DNA of all sexually-reproducing organisms, impels them to maximise offspring production. This is clearly evident in the thinking of American 'Pronatalists'. They appear convinced they are saving the planet by having as many babies as possible. Pronatalists argue that, if they did otherwise, the world would eventually become full of old people, with nobody to care for them (https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/may/25/american-pronatalists-malcolm-and-simone-collins). The difficulty, however, is that the planet is hardly short of people. There are more people alive today, than all the folk in recorded history. In deed,one can argue that Homo sapiens has been too successful for its own good. Studies have shown, that a single child in the US/Europe, generates circa 58.6 tonnes of carbon dioxide each year. Some folk have even argued that the best way to fight the climate crisis is for couples to give up having children (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/20/give-up-having-children-couples-save-planet-climate-crisis). Fairly obviously, human 'greenhouse gas' emissions depend on, where an individual is born and their lifestyle. Things are complicated by a widespread (and growing?) antipathy, in many quarters, to substantial numbers of migrants. It's all really a question of 'balance'! American pronatalists are certain to make the climate crisis worse.

What's In a Critter's Name? 101. Wheatear

Predictably, this bird's name is from the Old English 'wheat' (white) and 'ear' (arse). Basically, a 'white rump'!

What's In a Critter's Name? 100. Pig

Basically, from the Proto-West-Germanic 'piggo' or 'puggo', terms for a piglet. In Middle English, a 'pigge' was a young animal, whereas adults were 'swgn'. Eventually, age didn't distinguish.

What's In a Critter's Name? 99. Horse

The Old English 'hors', can be traced back to the Latin 'currere', meaning 'to run'.

Now, Ask Nicely?

The UK's Freedom of Information Act is supposed to give individuals and organisations access to government-held data. The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) is tasked with ensuring the public have their requests answered in a timely manner. Organisations are supposed to be 'transparent'. That's not currently the case with the UK's Environment Agency (EA). The EA is tasked with protecting the environment. The EA's officials sometimes 'bury' information requests, because they are "worried about revealing the true state of what is going on" (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/24/uks-environment-agency-chief-admits-regulator-buries-freedom-of-information-requests). This was confirmed, at a recent meeting of the UK River Summit by the EA chief. It's evident that the UK's rivers are in a parlous state. This is, as a consequence of pollution from agriculture, industry and privatised Water Companies. The chief suggested that Freedom of Information requests from NGOs and individuals might get better responses, if they lowered 'tone' of their requests. In one sense, the reticence of Environment Agency staff to Freedom of Information requests is understandable. The UK Government fund them and aren't keen to confirm that Environment Agency funding and powers are currently inadequate to protect our rivers. They can (and do) 'punish', by further reducing funding. There is, however, little point to an organisation tasked with protecting the environment, if it won't provide data to confirm what's evident to NGO's and concerned individuals. The ICO is warning the Environment Agency of its responsibilities. They should, perhaps, also remind the polluters and the government of theirs! It becomes difficult to ask nicely, when it's clear that officials want to hide the truth from you.