Naturalist in 'ecological fascist' claim. Well in keeping with CONservation hooligan trends.

How long can we allow the contamination of conservation and
environmental care?

In the wake of recent revelations of nazi style CONservation hooligans
infiltrating conservation in the UK, and with recent nazi style
outbursts from Dr Malcolm Ogilvie on behalf of SNH, RSPB etc
persecuting wildlife and attempting genetic purity measures that even
Himmler would have been proud of, a recent article in EAT makes fine
reading

http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/news/N...A34%3A22%3A480

Naturalist in 'ecological fascist' claim

July 8, 2003 05:32

A TOP naturalist has accused some of his fellow conservationists of
being "ecological fascists" for trying to eradicate foreign plants and
animals that threaten native species.

Richard Mabey, who lives at Roydon, near Diss, claims attempts to kill
off a range of species - including the mink and ruddy duck which both
originate from North America - are akin to attempts by the Nazis to
"purify" Germany in the 1930s.

The language used in the debate, such as the words "alien" and
"invasive", was also a reminder of the Nazi eugenics programme, Mr
Mabey claimed.

His views, expressed in his regular column for BBC Wildlife Magazine,
have upset leading naturalists who said their actions are aimed at
ensuring that a variety of species, often small and weak, can survive.

Bitter rows have broken out in recent years over plans to eradicate or
"control" species which are seen as a threat to native plants or
animals.

One decision, backed by the RSPB, is to go ahead with a cull of the
entire UK ruddy duck population in order to help protect the purity of
the rare Spanish white-headed duck. Another was a campaign to
eradicate hedgehogs from a Hebridean island, to which they had been
introduced by humans after the creatures were blamed for eating the
eggs of rare breeding birds.

Mr Mabey, who is the author of the plant encyclopaedia Flora
Britannica, said that he was not against isolated control measures if
they were carried out with understanding to solve local problems.

However, he was appalled by national eradication programmes because
they conflicted with the evolution of change in nature.

"Nature hasn't the slightest respect for species and racial barriers.
I am totally against the principle that if something has been
introduced into this country from abroad it is dangerous and not in
keeping," he said.

Mr Mabey said he was appalled by the campaigns to eradicate the
Spanish bluebell and Japanese knotweed.

"I understand that people don't want the knotweed taking over the
countryside but when it comes up on a bare parking lot in Ipswich it
is a bonus because of its flowers and its use by indigenous insects,"
he said.

Concern about the Spanish bluebell was misplaced because it enhanced
areas where there were no native bluebell populations.

Many species now regarded as native, including the pheasant, had been
introduced to this country from abroad, he added.

Julian Roughton, director of the Suffolk Wildlife Trust, said the
majority of species "introduced" to the UK were welcome additions to
wildlife diversity.

Some species had caused problems and had to be controlled to prevent
them driving native species to extinction. These included the
Australian swamp weed – now choking the nation's waterways and ponds –
and mink, crayfish and grey squirrel, all imports from North America.

"These animals have spread everywhere and eradication campaigns would
not work but there is a case for culling programmes to control
numbers," Mr Roughton added.

Chris Durdin, RSPB spokesman in East Anglia, said: "After habitat
destruction, the introduction of non-native species is the main reason
for the extinction of native species. All conservationists should be
aware of the dangers in increasing the number of non-native species."

He added: "Where humans have allowed destructive, non-native species
to escape into the environment we should try to put it right, if we
can."

Plantlife, a leading UK conservation charity, said Mr Mabey's argument
was confused because humans deliberately importing plants was not
evolution but "interference".

--

So, you dont like reasoned,
well thought out, civil debate?

I understand.

/´¯/)
/¯../
/..../
/´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
/'/.../..../......./¨¯\
('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
\.................'...../
''...\.......... _.·´
\..............(
\.............\..

You are very confused! But then, ecology is a confusing subject ... one that
is obviously beyond your grasp.

"Malcolm" <brutalAttak@ToughGuy.net> wrote in message
news:8b9ce42ff3f0a8b3a29c96f0c7474fb9@free.teranew s.com...
> How long can we allow the contamination of conservation and
> environmental care?
>
> In the wake of recent revelations of nazi style CONservation hooligans
> infiltrating conservation in the UK, and with recent nazi style
> outbursts from Dr Malcolm Ogilvie on behalf of SNH, RSPB etc
> persecuting wildlife and attempting genetic purity measures that even
> Himmler would have been proud of, a recent article in EAT makes fine
> reading
>
>
>
http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/news/N...ne&Category=Ne
ws&ItemId=IPED07+Jul+2003+23%3A34%3A22%3A480
>
> Naturalist in 'ecological fascist' claim
>
>
> July 8, 2003 05:32
>
> A TOP naturalist has accused some of his fellow conservationists of
> being "ecological fascists" for trying to eradicate foreign plants and
> animals that threaten native species.
>
> Richard Mabey, who lives at Roydon, near Diss, claims attempts to kill
> off a range of species - including the mink and ruddy duck which both
> originate from North America - are akin to attempts by the Nazis to
> "purify" Germany in the 1930s.
>
> The language used in the debate, such as the words "alien" and
> "invasive", was also a reminder of the Nazi eugenics programme, Mr
> Mabey claimed.
>
> His views, expressed in his regular column for BBC Wildlife Magazine,
> have upset leading naturalists who said their actions are aimed at
> ensuring that a variety of species, often small and weak, can survive.
>
> Bitter rows have broken out in recent years over plans to eradicate or
> "control" species which are seen as a threat to native plants or
> animals.
>
> One decision, backed by the RSPB, is to go ahead with a cull of the
> entire UK ruddy duck population in order to help protect the purity of
> the rare Spanish white-headed duck. Another was a campaign to
> eradicate hedgehogs from a Hebridean island, to which they had been
> introduced by humans after the creatures were blamed for eating the
> eggs of rare breeding birds.
>
> Mr Mabey, who is the author of the plant encyclopaedia Flora
> Britannica, said that he was not against isolated control measures if
> they were carried out with understanding to solve local problems.
>
> However, he was appalled by national eradication programmes because
> they conflicted with the evolution of change in nature.
>
> "Nature hasn't the slightest respect for species and racial barriers.
> I am totally against the principle that if something has been
> introduced into this country from abroad it is dangerous and not in
> keeping," he said.
>
> Mr Mabey said he was appalled by the campaigns to eradicate the
> Spanish bluebell and Japanese knotweed.
>
> "I understand that people don't want the knotweed taking over the
> countryside but when it comes up on a bare parking lot in Ipswich it
> is a bonus because of its flowers and its use by indigenous insects,"
> he said.
>
> Concern about the Spanish bluebell was misplaced because it enhanced
> areas where there were no native bluebell populations.
>
> Many species now regarded as native, including the pheasant, had been
> introduced to this country from abroad, he added.
>
> Julian Roughton, director of the Suffolk Wildlife Trust, said the
> majority of species "introduced" to the UK were welcome additions to
> wildlife diversity.
>
> Some species had caused problems and had to be controlled to prevent
> them driving native species to extinction. These included the
> Australian swamp weed - now choking the nation's waterways and ponds -
> and mink, crayfish and grey squirrel, all imports from North America.
>
> "These animals have spread everywhere and eradication campaigns would
> not work but there is a case for culling programmes to control
> numbers," Mr Roughton added.
>
> Chris Durdin, RSPB spokesman in East Anglia, said: "After habitat
> destruction, the introduction of non-native species is the main reason
> for the extinction of native species. All conservationists should be
> aware of the dangers in increasing the number of non-native species."
>
> He added: "Where humans have allowed destructive, non-native species
> to escape into the environment we should try to put it right, if we
> can."
>
> Plantlife, a leading UK conservation charity, said Mr Mabey's argument
> was confused because humans deliberately importing plants was not
> evolution but "interference".
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> So, you dont like reasoned,
> well thought out, civil debate?
>
> I understand.
>
> /´¯/)
> /¯../
> /..../
> /´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
> /'/.../..../......./¨¯\
> ('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
> \.................'...../
> ''...\.......... _.·´
> \..............(
> \.............\..

"Malcolm" <brutalAttak@ToughGuy.net> wrote in message
news:8b9ce42ff3f0a8b3a29c96f0c7474fb9@free.teranew s.com...
> How long can we allow the contamination of conservation and
> environmental care?
>
> In the wake of recent revelations of nazi style CONservation hooligans
> infiltrating conservation in the UK, and with recent nazi style
> outbursts from Dr Malcolm Ogilvie on behalf of SNH, RSPB etc
> persecuting wildlife and attempting genetic purity measures that even
> Himmler would have been proud of, a recent article in EAT makes fine
> reading
>
>
>
http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/news/N...ne&Category=Ne
ws&ItemId=IPED07+Jul+2003+23%3A34%3A22%3A480
>
> Naturalist in 'ecological fascist' claim
>
>
> July 8, 2003 05:32
>
> A TOP naturalist has accused some of his fellow conservationists of
> being "ecological fascists" for trying to eradicate foreign plants and
> animals that threaten native species.
>
> Richard Mabey, who lives at Roydon, near Diss, claims attempts to kill
> off a range of species - including the mink and ruddy duck which both
> originate from North America - are akin to attempts by the Nazis to
> "purify" Germany in the 1930s.
>
> The language used in the debate, such as the words "alien" and
> "invasive", was also a reminder of the Nazi eugenics programme, Mr
> Mabey claimed.
>
> His views, expressed in his regular column for BBC Wildlife Magazine,
> have upset leading naturalists who said their actions are aimed at
> ensuring that a variety of species, often small and weak, can survive.
>
> Bitter rows have broken out in recent years over plans to eradicate or
> "control" species which are seen as a threat to native plants or
> animals.
>
> One decision, backed by the RSPB, is to go ahead with a cull of the
> entire UK ruddy duck population in order to help protect the purity of
> the rare Spanish white-headed duck. Another was a campaign to
> eradicate hedgehogs from a Hebridean island, to which they had been
> introduced by humans after the creatures were blamed for eating the
> eggs of rare breeding birds.
>
> Mr Mabey, who is the author of the plant encyclopaedia Flora
> Britannica, said that he was not against isolated control measures if
> they were carried out with understanding to solve local problems.
>
> However, he was appalled by national eradication programmes because
> they conflicted with the evolution of change in nature.
>
> "Nature hasn't the slightest respect for species and racial barriers.
> I am totally against the principle that if something has been
> introduced into this country from abroad it is dangerous and not in
> keeping," he said.
>
> Mr Mabey said he was appalled by the campaigns to eradicate the
> Spanish bluebell and Japanese knotweed.
>
> "I understand that people don't want the knotweed taking over the
> countryside but when it comes up on a bare parking lot in Ipswich it
> is a bonus because of its flowers and its use by indigenous insects,"
> he said.
>
> Concern about the Spanish bluebell was misplaced because it enhanced
> areas where there were no native bluebell populations.
>
> Many species now regarded as native, including the pheasant, had been
> introduced to this country from abroad, he added.
>
> Julian Roughton, director of the Suffolk Wildlife Trust, said the
> majority of species "introduced" to the UK were welcome additions to
> wildlife diversity.
>
> Some species had caused problems and had to be controlled to prevent
> them driving native species to extinction. These included the
> Australian swamp weed - now choking the nation's waterways and ponds -
> and mink, crayfish and grey squirrel, all imports from North America.
>
> "These animals have spread everywhere and eradication campaigns would
> not work but there is a case for culling programmes to control
> numbers," Mr Roughton added.
>
> Chris Durdin, RSPB spokesman in East Anglia, said: "After habitat
> destruction, the introduction of non-native species is the main reason
> for the extinction of native species. All conservationists should be
> aware of the dangers in increasing the number of non-native species."
>
> He added: "Where humans have allowed destructive, non-native species
> to escape into the environment we should try to put it right, if we
> can."
>
> Plantlife, a leading UK conservation charity, said Mr Mabey's argument
> was confused because humans deliberately importing plants was not
> evolution but "interference".
>
>

I agree with quite a lot of what Mabey is saying, but not his description of
people involved in eradication programmes as 'fascist' - zealots, maybe

BAC wrote in message ...
>
>I agree with quite a lot of what Mabey is saying, but not his description
of
>people involved in eradication programmes as 'fascist' - zealots, maybe

The bit I have most problems with is Mabey's (apparently quoted) statement:

>> I am totally against the principle that if something has been
>> introduced into this country from abroad it is dangerous and not in
>> keeping

-which is, of course, an utter misrepresentation of the real
conservationist position (to the point where if he had said it of any
particular individual or organisation they could probably have sued him for
libel).

"Olwyn Mawr" <david@trochos.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:besmkh$6bu$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> BAC wrote in message ...
> >
> >I agree with quite a lot of what Mabey is saying, but not his description
> of
> >people involved in eradication programmes as 'fascist' - zealots, maybe
>
> The bit I have most problems with is Mabey's (apparently quoted)
statement:
>
> >> I am totally against the principle that if something has been
> >> introduced into this country from abroad it is dangerous and not in
> >> keeping
>
> -which is, of course, an utter misrepresentation of the real
> conservationist position (to the point where if he had said it of any
> particular individual or organisation they could probably have sued him
for
> libel).
>

Sorry, David, I don't follow that. I appreciate his view that 'non-natives'
should not automatically be assumed to be 'dangerous' etc., is contrary to
mainstream current beliefs/policies, (e.g. the recommendation of application
of the 'precautionary principle' in deciding what to do about 'aliens') but
why should that be a libel? Isn't it his personal opinion, and fair comment?

	#1
Malcolm	Naturalist in 'ecological fascist' claim. Well in keeping with CONservation hooligan trends. How long can we allow the contamination of conservation and environmental care? In the wake of recent revelations of nazi style CONservation hooligans infiltrating conservation in the UK, and with recent nazi style outbursts from Dr Malcolm Ogilvie on behalf of SNH, RSPB etc persecuting wildlife and attempting genetic purity measures that even Himmler would have been proud of, a recent article in EAT makes fine reading http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/news/N...A34%3A22%3A480 Naturalist in 'ecological fascist' claim July 8, 2003 05:32 A TOP naturalist has accused some of his fellow conservationists of being "ecological fascists" for trying to eradicate foreign plants and animals that threaten native species. Richard Mabey, who lives at Roydon, near Diss, claims attempts to kill off a range of species - including the mink and ruddy duck which both originate from North America - are akin to attempts by the Nazis to "purify" Germany in the 1930s. The language used in the debate, such as the words "alien" and "invasive", was also a reminder of the Nazi eugenics programme, Mr Mabey claimed. His views, expressed in his regular column for BBC Wildlife Magazine, have upset leading naturalists who said their actions are aimed at ensuring that a variety of species, often small and weak, can survive. Bitter rows have broken out in recent years over plans to eradicate or "control" species which are seen as a threat to native plants or animals. One decision, backed by the RSPB, is to go ahead with a cull of the entire UK ruddy duck population in order to help protect the purity of the rare Spanish white-headed duck. Another was a campaign to eradicate hedgehogs from a Hebridean island, to which they had been introduced by humans after the creatures were blamed for eating the eggs of rare breeding birds. Mr Mabey, who is the author of the plant encyclopaedia Flora Britannica, said that he was not against isolated control measures if they were carried out with understanding to solve local problems. However, he was appalled by national eradication programmes because they conflicted with the evolution of change in nature. "Nature hasn't the slightest respect for species and racial barriers. I am totally against the principle that if something has been introduced into this country from abroad it is dangerous and not in keeping," he said. Mr Mabey said he was appalled by the campaigns to eradicate the Spanish bluebell and Japanese knotweed. "I understand that people don't want the knotweed taking over the countryside but when it comes up on a bare parking lot in Ipswich it is a bonus because of its flowers and its use by indigenous insects," he said. Concern about the Spanish bluebell was misplaced because it enhanced areas where there were no native bluebell populations. Many species now regarded as native, including the pheasant, had been introduced to this country from abroad, he added. Julian Roughton, director of the Suffolk Wildlife Trust, said the majority of species "introduced" to the UK were welcome additions to wildlife diversity. Some species had caused problems and had to be controlled to prevent them driving native species to extinction. These included the Australian swamp weed – now choking the nation's waterways and ponds – and mink, crayfish and grey squirrel, all imports from North America. "These animals have spread everywhere and eradication campaigns would not work but there is a case for culling programmes to control numbers," Mr Roughton added. Chris Durdin, RSPB spokesman in East Anglia, said: "After habitat destruction, the introduction of non-native species is the main reason for the extinction of native species. All conservationists should be aware of the dangers in increasing the number of non-native species." He added: "Where humans have allowed destructive, non-native species to escape into the environment we should try to put it right, if we can." Plantlife, a leading UK conservation charity, said Mr Mabey's argument was confused because humans deliberately importing plants was not evolution but "interference". -- So, you dont like reasoned, well thought out, civil debate? I understand. /´¯/) /¯../ /..../ /´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸ /'/.../..../......./¨¯\ ('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...') \.................'...../ ''...\.......... _.·´ \..............( \.............\..

	#2
Age	Re: Naturalist in 'ecological fascist' claim. Well in keeping with CONservation hooligan trends. You are very confused! But then, ecology is a confusing subject ... one that is obviously beyond your grasp. "Malcolm" <brutalAttak@ToughGuy.net> wrote in message news:8b9ce42ff3f0a8b3a29c96f0c7474fb9@free.teranew s.com... > How long can we allow the contamination of conservation and > environmental care? > > In the wake of recent revelations of nazi style CONservation hooligans > infiltrating conservation in the UK, and with recent nazi style > outbursts from Dr Malcolm Ogilvie on behalf of SNH, RSPB etc > persecuting wildlife and attempting genetic purity measures that even > Himmler would have been proud of, a recent article in EAT makes fine > reading > > > http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/news/N...ne&Category=Ne ws&ItemId=IPED07+Jul+2003+23%3A34%3A22%3A480 > > Naturalist in 'ecological fascist' claim > > > July 8, 2003 05:32 > > A TOP naturalist has accused some of his fellow conservationists of > being "ecological fascists" for trying to eradicate foreign plants and > animals that threaten native species. > > Richard Mabey, who lives at Roydon, near Diss, claims attempts to kill > off a range of species - including the mink and ruddy duck which both > originate from North America - are akin to attempts by the Nazis to > "purify" Germany in the 1930s. > > The language used in the debate, such as the words "alien" and > "invasive", was also a reminder of the Nazi eugenics programme, Mr > Mabey claimed. > > His views, expressed in his regular column for BBC Wildlife Magazine, > have upset leading naturalists who said their actions are aimed at > ensuring that a variety of species, often small and weak, can survive. > > Bitter rows have broken out in recent years over plans to eradicate or > "control" species which are seen as a threat to native plants or > animals. > > One decision, backed by the RSPB, is to go ahead with a cull of the > entire UK ruddy duck population in order to help protect the purity of > the rare Spanish white-headed duck. Another was a campaign to > eradicate hedgehogs from a Hebridean island, to which they had been > introduced by humans after the creatures were blamed for eating the > eggs of rare breeding birds. > > Mr Mabey, who is the author of the plant encyclopaedia Flora > Britannica, said that he was not against isolated control measures if > they were carried out with understanding to solve local problems. > > However, he was appalled by national eradication programmes because > they conflicted with the evolution of change in nature. > > "Nature hasn't the slightest respect for species and racial barriers. > I am totally against the principle that if something has been > introduced into this country from abroad it is dangerous and not in > keeping," he said. > > Mr Mabey said he was appalled by the campaigns to eradicate the > Spanish bluebell and Japanese knotweed. > > "I understand that people don't want the knotweed taking over the > countryside but when it comes up on a bare parking lot in Ipswich it > is a bonus because of its flowers and its use by indigenous insects," > he said. > > Concern about the Spanish bluebell was misplaced because it enhanced > areas where there were no native bluebell populations. > > Many species now regarded as native, including the pheasant, had been > introduced to this country from abroad, he added. > > Julian Roughton, director of the Suffolk Wildlife Trust, said the > majority of species "introduced" to the UK were welcome additions to > wildlife diversity. > > Some species had caused problems and had to be controlled to prevent > them driving native species to extinction. These included the > Australian swamp weed - now choking the nation's waterways and ponds - > and mink, crayfish and grey squirrel, all imports from North America. > > "These animals have spread everywhere and eradication campaigns would > not work but there is a case for culling programmes to control > numbers," Mr Roughton added. > > Chris Durdin, RSPB spokesman in East Anglia, said: "After habitat > destruction, the introduction of non-native species is the main reason > for the extinction of native species. All conservationists should be > aware of the dangers in increasing the number of non-native species." > > He added: "Where humans have allowed destructive, non-native species > to escape into the environment we should try to put it right, if we > can." > > Plantlife, a leading UK conservation charity, said Mr Mabey's argument > was confused because humans deliberately importing plants was not > evolution but "interference". > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, you dont like reasoned, > well thought out, civil debate? > > I understand. > > /´¯/) > /¯../ > /..../ > /´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸ > /'/.../..../......./¨¯\ > ('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...') > \.................'...../ > ''...\.......... _.·´ > \..............( > \.............\..

	#4
Olwyn Mawr	Re: Naturalist in 'ecological fascist' claim BAC wrote in message ... > >I agree with quite a lot of what Mabey is saying, but not his description of >people involved in eradication programmes as 'fascist' - zealots, maybe The bit I have most problems with is Mabey's (apparently quoted) statement: >> I am totally against the principle that if something has been >> introduced into this country from abroad it is dangerous and not in >> keeping -which is, of course, an utter misrepresentation of the real conservationist position (to the point where if he had said it of any particular individual or organisation they could probably have sued him for libel).