ULEZ and The Impact on Charities.

Whilst the goal of the Ultra-Low Emission Zone or ULEZ zone was to reduce the level of harmful toxic air within a given area. There has been an unmistaken impact of ULEZ on families financially as well as charities which serve their communities. Now whilst clean air is something that we all want for our families, there are still times where the car is crucial whether it be for key works serving the community.

How Charities Support the Community:

Although the public transport system in London is highly effective it is still unable to meet all the needs of its community and is now spilling over into adverse effects on charities. Providing aid for the most vulnerable in society is something that should be a top priority for any local authority and ensuring that works can be taken with the fewest barriers is essential. Often due to the flexibility and innovation of charities and businesses many in our communities have these needs met not just by the public sector but by the private sector.

The Impact of ULEZ

This is where the ULEZ zone particularly impacts the vulnerable, now although some businesses in London and TFL will be able to update their vehicles to reflect the new policies and therefore reduce their emissions charities and small businesses will not be able to do this. This will effectively add greater costs to these organisations. Organisations like Dogs on the Street who are a small charity which serve the homeless residents of London and their pets are one such organisation offering tailored services that these citizens otherwise would not be able to afford. The charity has bespoke services and have specialist equipment on their vehicles to offer these services to the communities and modernising these vehicles will add significant costs to their operation. To adapt to this change that means the donation and fundraising efforts are going towards paying the ULEZ fees rather than into providing crucial support for the residents and their pets.

Scrappage Program Flaws

So, what about the scrappage scheme now whilst the scrappage program offered grant funding for charities or businesses in order to conform with the new charges before they came in the problem lies with purpose refitted vehicles. Specifically having mobile grooming, veterinary and general care vehicles have additional expenses and whilst the grant would go some way to meet these costs it would barely cover the cost of acquisition of a vehicle, and this would often be of an older used model where the battery will also have shown some wearing unlike traditional fuel vehicles which have a longer service life. This scheme has also been closed to new applicants which limits charities making claims for grant funding where the two-year window may have often not allowed the organisation to raise the necessary funds to replace the fleet of specialist vehicles. This two-year window also came at a time when many of the organisations were working flat out to deal with added pressures of Covid-19.

Actions that can be Taken

Now, myself and other activists are calling on the Mayor of London to look again at how his ULEZ zones are still impacting some of the most vulnerable in his community by increasing the financial burden on charities. That is why we are collectively calling on him to review his ULEZ policy for charities who may have been unable to refit or scrap vehicles under the previous scheme. Reopen the scheme to allow for further funding to support specialist sourcing of new efficient vehicles or to provide exemptions. The support for Dogs On The Street from Neil Garratt and Shaun Bailey has been hugely refreshing to see London Assembly members standing up for this charity and others.

Further Reading

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/scrappage-schemes?cid=scrappage-scheme

https://dogsonthestreets.org/london/

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jan/05/londons-ultra-low-emission-zone-good-or-bad-idea

https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/ulez-checker-zone-map-charge-2021-b1944620.html

https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/environment/pollution-and-air-quality/mayors-ultra-low-emission-zone-london

Remember contact your London Assembly members and add pressure onto the Mayor.

https://www.london.gov.uk/people/assembly

Protest are they for Change or just Unnecessary Disruption:

The protests:

In the news we have seen an increase in protestors taking direct action on the M25 with the aim to disrupt drivers to garner media attention to influence change. With the aim to improve insulation of Britains instead of warming hearts the disruption caused has left protestors out in the cold. 

Now I am not against protest or the power of the individual as many of our key moments have come from a small number but many methods are flawed. The 3.5% rule as an example is a principle that so long as 3.5% of the population agree with an action engaging this can influence government decisions. Now to put this into a context the insulate britain protests are headed by a small minority numbering at most a hundred from evidence. Extinction rebellion was in the 1000s and in Leicester BLM had 4000 individuals. 

Now 3.5% of UKs population is 2391190 so many of these protests are a long way off of the influential minority. 

So how can you have an impact?

You must take the population with you or offer a sensible alternative. Many individuals of these groups often scoff when people question their actions or intentions telling people to do their own research but this does nothing but forces people away from their cause. Campaigners that share research provide resources and are able to work with other groups are often more anecdotally more successful with their campaigns. Looking at campaigns such as Anatonias Law for care home reform, the moves made my the Pet Theft Reform team, Finns law, Tuks Law as well as larger organisations to influence changes. These campaigns however have benefited from the benefit of research they then add in the emotional component which brings people with them. 

Take some of Insulate Britains own points:

Their targets of getting central government to change insulation when planning is a district or unitary council issue. A points they are raising is about new homes being built to a standard, yet they do not focus on shoddy developers with documented evidence of cut corners on their builds. They have no strategy to inform house buyers of their rights so they can challenge developers or to work with communities to block inadequate development taking place. This however is also difficult to achieve when they have no firm targets to influence house building targets. So why are they not targeting councils to adopt a higher standard of housing or working with HORNET to influence changes to house building’s standards tackling property developers as they did with leaseholds and as they are still working on with Fleecehold properties.

Issues such as fleecehold properties are an issue that planners (civil servants) do not want to tackle pressure on elected officials in the right way would help to lobby for change. Or better yet get involved to influence the change on the doorstep. The second point they are campaigning for is for government to pay for insulation of old homes to be levelled up to a standard, but without a clear standard this will always be difficult. The green grant scheme had this option but wasn’t well adopted and if the government bring it back in as an incentive businesses or suppliers up the cost or it becomes another tax burden. 

The other reason why many have little sympathy for this particular cause however is strategies are already in place to tackle it. There are green grants households can apply for on existing dwellings particularly for the less well off in society. However rather than promote this change and encourage people to take up the scheme by going to the following link: Simple Energy Advice check your eligibility and see if you can get help.

https://carrcenter.hks.harvard.edu/files/cchr/files/CCDP_005.pdf

https://www.ncvo.org.uk/policy-and-research/campaigning-policy

https://rogers-norton.co.uk/homeowners-given-15-years-bring-legal-action-developers-shoddy-workmanship/

https://www.gov.uk/improve-energy-efficiency

https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/utilities/free-cavity-loft-insulation/

Saving Geronimo

In Summary:

Geronimo was bought by his owner from a bTB negative farm and was imported to the UK by his Owner Helen. Geronimo was tested on a trial testing program by DEFRA (Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs) and the BAS (British Alpaca Society). There are multiple elements taking place in this case as it is has received national interest, the personal bond between Geronimo and his owner as well as the validity of the trial.

The Trial of the Enferplex Test:

The problem with the trial. Now the test in itself may have a place in the sector to benefit cattle and alpacas. The issue is that there has been an issue with the test as part of the trial whilst they included various outcomes to rule out particular errors the problem, occurs with the circumstances of Geronimo. Even though he has been isolated and after coming from a TB free county the test conducted is showing a positive result but we should all be aware that this test is only a trial to see if it detects bTB in camelids as it does in cattle as well as the accuracy. The concern would be as with some of the errors currently found with TB testing post mortem is the only conclusive test identifying TB lesions but if Geronimo is healthy this is a senseless waste of life. This also poses a problem for the government and DEFRA as it would be a PR disaster. Now Geronimo has been vaccinated according to his owner which the tests used in the trial Enferplex would not be able to distinguish from him having the disease. This is where the problem lies for a trial the animal should not have been selected to begin with as there is nothing in the protocols to account for this. Now the backup of this type of test is to utilise the much-contested validity of the skin test which is also primarily used in the cattle which in itself has had its sensitivity questioned and found in camelids the accuracy is less than 20%.

Call for the Actiphage Test:

Now a testing method that does not utilise a method for detecting present antibodies and instead identified the presence of the disease itself is a far more sensible solution. The Actiphage test effectively highlights to the tester if the disease is present by giving a clear DNA signature under testing conditions from a blood sample taken from the subject. This would remove the risk that the animal simply has antibodies due to an immune response that has been supported by a vaccine. If the test proves that there is no TB present then what we effectively have is a case for a test that can be used to identify the status of an animal after the introduction of a vaccine. Then if animals test positive under this test they may be vaccinated but could also be reactors as they have the disease present and would effectively be suffering from the disease. This would offer an option to incorporate testing into a vaccine regime for both cattle and camelids as well as a lifeline for Geronimo.

In Conclusion:

The Actiphage test provides a new tool to potentially safeguard vaccinated animals like Geronimo as we move closer to vaccine trials this is invaluable. Whilst also protecting other stock animals as we measure the effectiveness of the test and validity. Geronimo is potentially paving the way to increase the calibre of the testing method applied in the UK and also offer crucial protection from euthanasia which many including myself feel is morally wrong and scientifically dubious without robust testing.

Sources and Further Reading:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9879245/Standoff-Geronimo-continues-alpacas-owner-demands-appropriate-bovine-TB-testing.html

https://www.fwi.co.uk/livestock/health-welfare/livestock-diseases/bovine-tb/farmers-and-vets-hope-alpaca-case-raises-bovine-tb-awareness

https://tbhub.co.uk/tb-in-non-bovine-animals/camelids/

http://apha.defra.gov.uk/external-operations-admin/library/documents/tuberculosis/TN191.pdf

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-58158054

https://1gov.uk/petition-to-save-condemned-alpaca-geronimo-secures-almost-80000-signatures/

https://www.bas-uk.com/british-alpaca-society-calls-for-urgent-talks-with-defra-amidst-fears-for-the-future-of-voluntary-btb-testing-in-the-uk/

https://tbhub.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Factsheet_gamma_test_TB_hub.pdf

https://tbhub.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Phage_factsheet_13.02.2020_TB_hub.pdf

Mind Your Head

Further to my earlier article about mental health today marks the start of the Mind Your Head campaign.

The Yellow Wellies group rightly has highlighted some key points about farmers mental health. Now some issues which they have isolated would be challenging to control or resolve. Now whilst there are specific agricultural loans to help with the business or equipment needs this, unfortunately, is often at a great interest rate as well as which when coupled with other stressors. Some of these stressors can be highly varied from the direct impacts such as the financial impacts on the business to the secondary elements such as one which livestock farmers face. Livestock farmers often face increased opposition to both the changing diets of the masses that has caused abuse and heated debates on both sides. However, whilst both sides of the debate have valid points and passionate views only one directly impacts their livelihoods. Now whilst this debate will likely be on going for a number of years as it one about ideology. Some positives have been drawn from it alternatives to different movements such as Reganuary which puts a focus on a more sustainable form of agriculture. Now rather then discuss this movement in this article the reason for highlighting it, is that this is a way for the industry to champion better practice by highlighting innovations as well as supporting the local businesses. This can also be seen with concerns between farmers and others who use the countryside or visit farmers lands. With an increased amount of walkers in the countryside farmers can be drawn into conflict when dogs are off lead distressing stock. If the stock animals are distressed or attacked by the dog the farmer has the right to shoot the dog but this can be deeply distressing either by seeing the damage a dog can do to the stock or through shooting the dog. Neither is an option that the farmer wants to pursue however it is something which does often happen with a lack of understanding of the environment.

Now when looking at stress in farmers it is important that all actions are taken to reduce stress. Finding people to talk with whether that be online or those in local support group by engaging in conversation and offloading some of the stress recognising they are not alone. Making sure that those that work on farms especially for those whose lives and work focus on the land need somewhere else to focus such as going off site, exploring a hobby or a trip. Making sure you also take the chance to regularly exercise and follow a suitable routine. 

Now campaigns such as Fit to Farm also highlight characteristics about the various roles which are often not explored. The working hours which farmers often do can be up to 65 hours per week this is comparable to the 56 hours per week doctors do. Now not all farmers have this type of working environment but for those who do it should be rightly recognised the pressures they face. Especially at busy periods like harvest where they are flat out for days and hours at end. Now because of working and living on site taking leave from your family farm can be a far flung fantasy for some it is not as simple as leaving your home for holiday for those who business needs require careful monitoring but are tied to a fixed location. Many entrepreneurs or professionals can take their work with them and therefore find some release this is arguably the same for large companies but a challenge for the small family farms. Now respondents to the survey by the Fit to Farm campaign have outlined areas they need help in would it not be the best time for the communities to rely around them and support their efforts. 

We also need to remember what great resources we have available to support us and those within our community. YANA specifically targets mental health in farming whilst the Yellow Wellies looks at farm safety follow the links below to find out more about their work and how to support them. Together we Can.

https://www.fwi.co.uk/farm-life/health-and-wellbeing/fit2farm-farmers-weekly-campaign-to-improve-farmers-health#tabs-1

https://www.yanahelp.org

http://yellowwellies.org/StressManagementBooklet_0319/StressManagementBooklet_0319/?page=23

Biodiversity is the World Now Waking Up

With the recent Biodiversity summit addressing the needs of wildlife are we finally waking up to Natures needs? Alternatively, is this another global initiative where we sign up to different arbitrary targets which the countries of the world will not meet?

We are aware of our fundamental need to understand nature from an academic point of view preparing the next generation of scholars to conserve our natural world, helping us address how to live with it. When linking this to other academic disciplines such as agriculture and food production, we have to understand how we both produce the resources we need sustainably. However, what do we need from nature other than what we produce, such as; the living and non-living environment.

A leading issue, however, is although many of us are becoming increasingly aware of our impact on nature, we need to do more seventy-five percent of the Earth's surface has been directly affected by human needs and endeavours leaving nature only small pockets of unaffected areas left. Many scientists argue to this degree that we are in the next mass extinction of our planet. Once an exceedingly large number of the world's animals and plants have gone extinct in short succession, this has led to the classification of a Mass Extinction. The planet has already gone through five, and we are arguably in the sixth due to human impacts. The question then that the UN biodiversity report aims to prevent is the rapid extinction of many of these species within the next decade.

Now, why is this fundamentally we do not live sustainably within the environment you only have to look at recent events such as starting to move toward a low plastic world but then once face-masks became the norm an equally damaging incarnation replaced the old litter. Often the lack of care taken for our planet will vary well have far-reaching impacts if we do not have the care to act soon, and this varies from the individual citizen to the large corporations. Now alongside a duty of stewardship for our planet, we have to reflect on both trends which are impacting the Earth the loss of forests as well as valuable topsoil due to desertification and deforestation. This accompanied with 2020s most talked about crisis the coronavirus has highlighted how interconnected we are to the fragile ecosystems of the world, and we ignore the signs at our peril. By often trading in exotic animals and low standards of biosecurity and welfare, we increase the risk of zoonoses and disease emergence.

Now in the case of some animals, if they can adapt, they may well survive the impacts we have had on their populations such as the African Elephant which has displayed changes in the tusk length due to natural selection now favouring short tusked individuals due to increases in poaching of the long tusked individuals. Now whilst plants and animals that we use are abundant in terms of their number, we use relatively small varieties focusing on select families of plants and animals for given functions. This is because they fit our demands for them. However, we also do not know what other discoveries await us, and we must ensure that we leave ourselves the opportunity to do this as a move toward a more sustainable direction. To delve into more detail of how we can do this, we must address both sustainable measures, locally, nationally and internationally.

Covid, the Countryside and Cities a Changing Landscape.

With the start of the academic term with the impending return of learners to the classroom in a different environment to what they are familiar with. I am reminded of conversations I have had with friends and colleagues about the reluctance to return to the office. Now for many this likely started with the premise of being safer at home and then evolved into a growing realisation that working from home can offer its own benefits. For many it has saved time on the sufferable commute that many experience. It has provided its own flexibility around child care but this has been double edged for parents as well as care providers. In many areas the lack of travelling restored that sense of community and return of the neighbourhood as new tribes formed. Some people have also been far more productive at home the downside of which is those whose jobs rely on that fixed location have seen the backlash. 

In these changing times when industries begin to reflect and change with many recognising the cost benefit, mental health benefits and environmental positives we also need to remember that this is not completely beneficial. Some areas will face graver consequences from a changing working system then others as some businesses rely on the office for their survival. 

Some of the general benefits:

You are truly independent your work space is truly your own you can set it up to be at your most productive and could allow greater creativity. You can get more work done on the whole you spend less time commuting and engaging in the office drama. You’ll learn to excel in various forms of communication whether it be social media, zoom, or the forms of content delivery.

Some of the downsides:

Switching or rather lack their of it does your mental health no favours to not have an off switch it is better for your productivity and well being if you are able to effectively time manage you will ensure a greater success in your role. Sometimes you may feel you that you are not informed of the recent or ongoing developments. In some cases this could impact those seeking career growth maybe at a disadvantage if the talent market does not move with employee and work place demands. We also need to remember that our infrastructure is not ready for a profound shift utilities and other necessary provisions are not as robust in all areas of the country and this would have a consequence for productivity. Alongside the questions around productivity and the noticeable pros for the environment if we get used to this new environment we have to remember our own mental health. People need to switch off from their devices and the detachment of working elsewhere and taking a break when at home is more difficult when your office is your home. This is not mentioning how the housing market could be affected as city and commuter belt living see a decline will the rural countryside soar. 

Now the environmental benefits:

When you work from home, you are closer to your own amenities you can cook at home rather then rely on shops or restaurants locally. This can cut down on your own expense as well as your waste throughout the day. You can save energy the less energy wasted the less pollution your impact has regulating your house is far cheaper and more cost effective then making the office temperature uniform for a variety of needs of the individuals in your office. The same for energy usage as you can choose what rooms are being utilised and which rooms are not working. On top of this the commute by saving money, fuel and time on the commute you effectively can use this time elsewhere as well as reduce your impact on the planet. Whilst we are moving towards greener forms of travel electric vehicles still have harmful supply chains and combustion fuels are being moved away from. These types of vehicles are also likely to become more expensive as the demand for electric vehicles increase whilst the incentives also increase. Cycling for many is still not likely to be a viable alternative many of our roads are not designed to accommodate cyclist outside of the outskirts of the city.

Now what would this mean for our urban areas how would they survive and what changes can we expect. Now cities are still going to remain a centre for knowledge and cultural sharing but as with the changes in the high street they would need to evolve. With people spending less time in the working day in town centres and cities they would likely need to either change their working hours or what they offer. Now one solution to this would be flexible working where shops and convenience areas are open later in the day at particular times which can attract not the commuter but specific shoppers. Now whilst historically people often flocked to cities following periods of change like Covid this could be a different opportunity to change our way of working due to the benefits of the digital age. The question is could cities be made better by this opportunity could we see investments in the arts, theatres and museums where these centre of the arts return to centre stage of our society. Cities certainly will benefit from transport networks which favour cycling, walking and restrictions on the car could enable better opportunities to move around our cities making use of the roads whereas outside of peak times these roads can be returned to cars and vans to restock shops, bars and restaurants. We can also add in areas for wildlife and greater green spaces which take onboard innovations in the urban landscape such as planting more trees on our paths, wildflower verges and better use of brownfield sites as well as green spaces. Yet for cities to not only survive but thrive we should but our residents first focusing on social and environmental cohesion. Cities should take on board urban planning that takes a more inventive approach looking at the example of the Dutch in terms of wildlife corridors to continue to allow nature a home in the city environment. Make our towns and cities stand on their own highlighting the factors that makes them unique and distribute the relevant sectors to the correct areas to share the wealth across the country making the most of the unique characters of these places. The pandemic has demonstrated the importance of cities' capacity to overcome challenges but they need to embed this into the health of their city ensuring that public services are structurally at the heart of their communities but equally ensuring they have the capacity to cope with a crisis. Countries need to recognise the importance of various sectors voluntary, public and private noting where they fit together and what skills can be learnt from them. To enable a green and robust urban and rural link the roads and other transport links need to reflect this ensuring that cars are focused to areas where they park and get to the areas of the city they need to via park and rides. Cycle routes which are safe and effective for the public to use ensuring their safety and security. Look at other systems that can be employed which cities such as Manchester, London and Blackpool have utilised such as metro links, trams and trains combined with effective routes for walking and cycling. Showcase what is the best practice in your local area and share this with your community.

https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/pros-cons-of-working-from-home

https://www.capital-ges.com/the-environmental-benefits-of-remote-working/ 

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/05/01/future-of-cities-urban-life-after-coronavirus-pandemic/

Water Management Lessons Learnt from Day Zero

Water Management is critical for effective management both in our locality, nationally as well as on a global water. 

Firstly for those who have done their research you will have probably come across Day Zero which relates to a point in a cities management where it runs out of water which it can provide to its population. 

Now water is this fantastic resource that everything relies on a depends on but to much or to little can cause problematic situations to arise. In the UK last week we had some of the heaviest downpours of the recent year in quick succession leading to flooding in areas which have faced drought conditions for a prolonged period. Now the water courses and drainage basins receiving a much needed resupply was crucial for the flora and fauna of these areas. The question is how do we best manage these water courses in our local areas. 

Sarni, (2020) writes that Day Zero as a principle is flawed this concept is something that will be discussed further in the article. Initially the concept comes out of a situation in 2018 in Cape Town where after continual droughts for 3 years. The aim was to ration the water available to the community. Yet the warning of being wasteful with water was enough to change the consumers habits. Now whilst they did not have to restrict water, there was a lack of strategy with this action and more a lucky perfect storm of circumstances. Statistically as our climate changes and historic data is less reliable than it has been. This also highlights a problem that we need to address, is complacency until the challenge is staring us in the face we often do not adjust our habits until we have to a proactive approach is necessary to conserve the resource. Continued population growth is likely to increase demand not only abroad but in the UK as well as we see an increased demand for water both in agriculture and residential purposes. Other industries also need to reflect on water usage the fashion and textile sector is also seeing step changed to a more conservation focused to water management particularly some denim producers. Sarni (2020) particularly highlights that as demand for water increases the impact on those in our society will be more profound. 

Edmond, (2020) points out that part of the problem is rapid urbanisation. Urban areas can both displace water and if not correctly planned prevent water being conserved. Planning urban areas with water conservation tools such as water less sanitation where possible. Better habits for conserving water and recycling of grey water. Vancouver increases the cost of water at different times of the year to reduce excessive consumption this is a measurable increase not overtly affecting core needs for water. Levying this against excessive uses such as key businesses or even residential. Australia uses water efficiency management strategies on high use buildings similar to other forms of gradings to improve efficiency and effective use. Both Dubai and Ireland have looked at education to embed water conservation at the heart of education. 

By designing our urban and rural planning systems to collect and store water more effectively to both enable better drought reduction as well as safer by avoiding water build up on roads. By having roofs which collect excess water and slows the rate the water enters the water course as well as where feasible using water storage systems like boreholes or miniature reservoirs which store the excess water. This coupled with earlier points made about trees in earlier articles can better protect our urban areas and provide better access to the community to flood protection and water availability. 

https://www.eco-business.com/opinion/the-myth-of-day-zero-what-we-got-wrong-with-water/

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/08/cape-town-was-90-days-away-from-running-out-of-water-heres-how-it-averted-the-crisis/

https://www.fromthegrapevine.com/innovation/rethinking-urban-planning-create-water-sensitive-cities

Reintroducing Apex Predators

With other projects and groups actively participating with the aim to reintroduce Apex predators of yesteryear to our countryside. One argument for reintroducing these species is that it offers a return to wildlife management of historic predator and prey relationships. The reason we are at this impasse is because the predators were often removed or hunted due to predation of livestock. Now whilst their os arguments for and against the reintroduction of these animals is that they could open this risk up again. 

Whilst proposing arguments for predators like the bear, wolf and lynx all of various issues in themselves as each comes with different risks the argument for the ecological benefit has been well established. Apex predators will keep prey animal populations to a manageable number as the rate of which prey animals reproduce unhindered by predators can impose other issues on local landscapes. The herds of deer left unchecked and without management can prevent trees and hedgerows regrowing by consuming or trampling on saplings. Whilst a more sustainable population has less of impact as their footfall is reduced. This can also have a benefit on arable crops as it prevents deer grazing on these valuable crops saving farmers cost either from lost crops or management systems to deter the deer. The benefit of keystone species that have a direct and indirect impact on the environment changing its ecological profiles. The question should the historic predators return or do our environments learn to cope with planned management of wildlife by humans which can be costly. 

Now looking at it from the opposite points of view these species are often a greater risk to pets and to livestock farms. In terms of pets some small dogs and cats are at a greater risk as they can pose an easier target for predation but these animals can be protected by responsible ownership in high risk areas. With livestock works undertaken with livestock guardian breeds of dog could prove the answer for protecting and deterring predators as most species of predator will not risk dogs encase of injury. The main issue for the UK however, is allowing the animals to establish a territory as when they are contained, both types of animals can be managed more readily when we look at larger geographic regions including towns and cities with various barriers this can cause a greater conflict with people. We need to also remember that they might not have the desired impact on deer number reduction as well as by proxy the restoration of the trees would not be a certainty.

The other added benefit of using livestock guardian breeds such as the kuvasz is that these breeds can also potentially protect stock from other dogs that enter the farmland. The benefit of the guardian breed is they can act as a strong deterrent for both the apex and would-be predators the breeds chase off and deter the animals whilst living with the stock viewing them as a pack. The dogs do this naturally and act as a stable addition to your stocks security. 

In Suffolk we are looking more at how we can reintroduce a natural predator the lynx as well as other former species like the bison and pelicans. The argument should be can we live with the animals, does it offer us a better alternative and lifestyle and does it offer a safeguard for our planet. Projects WildEast may see a greener landscape across the county and if we move towards plans with nature at its heart learning from the likes of dutch to provide wildlife corridors over roads like the A14 to prevent isolated populations. In the future I will be looking at wildlife corridors as well as rewilding initiatives to look at their feasibility.

https://www.conservationjobs.co.uk/articles/wolf-reintroduction-in-scotland/

https://www.wildeast.co.uk

https://www.morningagclips.com/the-benefits-of-livestock-guardian-dogs/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-31813207