I admit to having been instantly triggered, and jumping in on the side of the ponies. However. I think that's because my rage levels are currently at critical.
It seems as if understanding the problem is completely out of fashion. Not a requirement.
From the communities around commons to data centres, to wars - the whole flaming world appears to be managed by people who have a theory. Never been there, never done that, don't know the people involved, don't care. But they have the power to extrapolate their dumb ideas into "guidance", or buildings, or missiles.
Thanks for the attribution of the saying - it was usually heard on a Sunday morning.
The Dartmoor situation is an example of the rule of unintended consequences. The academic folks writing the plan have never ‘got their hands dirty’ so they are unable to see or know the full facts and the impact of a change. Nature is very complex and the Commons have evolved over many generations. The problem is that they are not created new and scientifically, so they miss the knowledge and experience of hundreds of people over many years.
It is not ‘progress’ just to make things look better on paper. Nature does not work that way.
Thanks Grandpa, I think you’re spot on about unintended consequences. When plans are written by people who haven’t had to work with land and weather and animals, they can look beautifully coherent on paper while missing the lived reality. I call it ‘spreadsheet thinking’.
Nature is complex, and commons like Dartmoor are not blank canvases. They’re working landscapes that have evolved over generations, with a lot of local knowledge baked into how they function.
I’d add too that healthy nature and biodiversity often looks messy. There isn’t a neat, tidy way to manage it or enhance it, and no machine can look at a grassland and reliably decide what needs leaving and what needs cutting. That kind of “management” is exactly where we risk simplifying the life out of a place. Holistic grazing with animals is one of the few tools we have that can respond to that complexity, because it’s dynamic and selective in a way a plan on paper never is.
Thank you for this well thought out and detailed post. It's so important that we don't over simplify these things. Humans must learn to sit with complexity before rushing for 'fixes'.
Thank you, I really appreciate you saying that. Over simplification is so tempting because it gives us something to do and someone to blame, but it usually creates the next problem down the line.
I’m trying to write in a way that makes room for complexity without turning it into paralysis. We still need action, but better action comes from sitting with the trade offs first, and being honest about what we know, what we don’t, and who carries the costs of the “fixes.”
Interesting read - thank you. We are trying to get access to a bit of woodland just next to our garden. It sits outside the nearby SSSI but is treated as part of it by locals. It has been neglected for many years and is full of bramble,bracken and balsam. To me it is a no brainer to put pigs in there to clear it. I saw the rhs using pigs at Bridgwater to clear ground and it has worked extremely well. How sad that this wasn’t recognised.
In the mind of a bureaucrat there is no problem that cannot be solved by "guidance" and an extra form or two, preferably completed in triplicate. Whether they are of any real relevance or not is immaterial.
I admit to having been instantly triggered, and jumping in on the side of the ponies. However. I think that's because my rage levels are currently at critical.
It seems as if understanding the problem is completely out of fashion. Not a requirement.
From the communities around commons to data centres, to wars - the whole flaming world appears to be managed by people who have a theory. Never been there, never done that, don't know the people involved, don't care. But they have the power to extrapolate their dumb ideas into "guidance", or buildings, or missiles.
I just despair, really.
I completely understand Jackie I fell for the Times headline too! What is this world coming to though…
Thanks for the attribution of the saying - it was usually heard on a Sunday morning.
The Dartmoor situation is an example of the rule of unintended consequences. The academic folks writing the plan have never ‘got their hands dirty’ so they are unable to see or know the full facts and the impact of a change. Nature is very complex and the Commons have evolved over many generations. The problem is that they are not created new and scientifically, so they miss the knowledge and experience of hundreds of people over many years.
It is not ‘progress’ just to make things look better on paper. Nature does not work that way.
Grandpa
Thanks Grandpa, I think you’re spot on about unintended consequences. When plans are written by people who haven’t had to work with land and weather and animals, they can look beautifully coherent on paper while missing the lived reality. I call it ‘spreadsheet thinking’.
Nature is complex, and commons like Dartmoor are not blank canvases. They’re working landscapes that have evolved over generations, with a lot of local knowledge baked into how they function.
I’d add too that healthy nature and biodiversity often looks messy. There isn’t a neat, tidy way to manage it or enhance it, and no machine can look at a grassland and reliably decide what needs leaving and what needs cutting. That kind of “management” is exactly where we risk simplifying the life out of a place. Holistic grazing with animals is one of the few tools we have that can respond to that complexity, because it’s dynamic and selective in a way a plan on paper never is.
Thank you for this well thought out and detailed post. It's so important that we don't over simplify these things. Humans must learn to sit with complexity before rushing for 'fixes'.
Thank you, I really appreciate you saying that. Over simplification is so tempting because it gives us something to do and someone to blame, but it usually creates the next problem down the line.
I’m trying to write in a way that makes room for complexity without turning it into paralysis. We still need action, but better action comes from sitting with the trade offs first, and being honest about what we know, what we don’t, and who carries the costs of the “fixes.”
Interesting read - thank you. We are trying to get access to a bit of woodland just next to our garden. It sits outside the nearby SSSI but is treated as part of it by locals. It has been neglected for many years and is full of bramble,bracken and balsam. To me it is a no brainer to put pigs in there to clear it. I saw the rhs using pigs at Bridgwater to clear ground and it has worked extremely well. How sad that this wasn’t recognised.
In the mind of a bureaucrat there is no problem that cannot be solved by "guidance" and an extra form or two, preferably completed in triplicate. Whether they are of any real relevance or not is immaterial.