English nature employ a variety of people, and there is a variety of ideas amongst employees, they may occasionally have some good ideas, however the general ethos to farm.

This country is about 90% farmland. This includes arable and animal farms. Grazing accounts for s large part farming. Some land in Britain has escaped the ravages farming or has been left un farmed for many years, and is in various states of recovery. These precious few fragments of un-farmd land should be treated with respect and left to the care of nature. However English nature do not think like that, in fact it would appear at there present rate and attitude that they want to eventually turn 100% of British land into farmland. There is no hiding place for nature from English nature, for they will find the tree plants and shrub and will bring chainsaws, strimmers, and scrub clearer's upon it with mighty vengeance, for the crime of being nature itself.

English nature supervised the council in charge of odium common. On odium Common three was natural woodland. The sort of place ideal for birds and insects and a wide variety of wildlife, and not in any way resembling a farm. English nature hated the place for this reason we must assume. So English nature took it upon themselves to swamp Odium common with cattle. English nature claimed those introducing animals! Yes you read right animal’s not large numbers of a species of animal, which is what they should, said (No accounting for English nature employee’s grammar. Or was this how English nature interpret the meaning of animals a single species) would increase diversity. You may well ask what sort of diversity. Diversity of cattle markings. The diversity of the woods will ended is affected by introducing (animal’s?) cows onto the common. Herb varieties will perhaps increase, however this will again be at the expense of other plants such as trees, lichen, birds and insects. The cow that English nature worships so much along with the sheep is not native to Britain. In fact native cattle died out in the bronze age, about 3000 years ago. The common that was usable by the public is now fenced and closed off.

English nature has now achieved 3 of its main goals, crucial to its ideology; farmification of natural land, banishing the native human population, and banning dogs which are actually native to Britain being direct descendants of the native British wolves, unlike the cattle put on the common by English nature.

So it’s the end of another semi-natural woodland in Britain, and another stage closer to turning Britain into 100% farmland.

This is just one small example of the work of English nature in the country, and if this exercise in farmification is being repeated all over Britain then think of the consequences for our woodlands and wildlife.

It would appear that English nature hate trees. Why, well isn’t it obvious, they are not conducive to farming? Except fruit and nut farming, which does support insects and birds such as wyneck, I bet English nature are not to keen on fruit and nits then.

A landowner in the south of England gave an area of woodland to English nature. He thought by doing this he would be doing the right thing, and the nation and the public would benefit from this. He said he gave the land to English nature as woodland, to be kept that way for the public to enjoy. However here lies a warning do not give land to English nature. English natures chainsaw finger became very itchy and they all though what can we to destroy the trees and get away with it with an excuse for the vandalism. Then some bright spark from English nature came up with the idea. Hey why not cut down the trees that have only been here for 2000 years, such as chestnut .why that’ll stop any dastardly birds, mice or squirrels from eating them, owe and it will deter those awful peasants from collecting chestnuts. So English nature set about killing every tree they considered to be non-native. The former landowner was infuriated, as he wanted the woodland to be kept as that woodland. People talked about foxes and birds who had made the place there home, not knowing where to go.

It is so obvious that English nature is run by the aristocracy, their hatred for trees and their pro- farming stance would seem to indicate this.

The wildlife trusts
Just where did this the wildlife trust spring from. Does anybody know, as I haven’t been able to find out? Please if you know let me know. What I do know is that David Bellamy is there celebrity spokesman, they same David Bellamy who opposes wind farms along with billionaire Noel Edmonds. What a pair of conservationist’s they make. When David Bellamy appeared on talk sport, he was very quick to boast about how he ruined box hill for courting couples. This was done by cutting down all the trees (no wonder you can’t purchase boxwood any more). What was the reason for all this vandalism? Well so you could see Darwin’s orchids.

David Bellamy is an ideal choice for the wildlife trust; it would seem with his tree hating credentials well in place, who else could possibly compete.

Conservationists love cutting down trees. One of the wildlife trusts latest escapades, is the flying flock. Nay say what prey is this flying flock? You may well ask? Are they a flock of sheep genetically engineered by a mad conservationist, that can fly around so nothing gets in the way of there grazing. No not yet it anyway; it is a flock of sheep that will be driven around in a vehicle to graze the smallest of sites to oblivion.

Although the wildlife trust do not graze all their sites as yet, they do largely employ grazing on most of their sites. A typical conservationists unfortunately. Why though did they choose the badger for their logo and not a sheep? If they put a sheep then one has to suppose it would perhaps allure to the truth a bot too much.

The wildlife trusts appear a bit of a mystery. So it may well be the up and coming farmifaication conservation organisation.

Conservation catch phrases
Action plan: Long term action plan: countryside initiative: conservation action plan: countryside management: management: environmental initiative: conserving for the future: conservation today for tomorrow.

What do all these mean? They mean that conservationist want to justify their existence.

The national trust
This particular organisation was set up to save the arastocracy. Since saving the estates and the arastocracy, they have had many years of collecting land. In fact they have obtained so much land, they are now one of the countries largest landowners. Owning large country estates woods farms, rivers, land, and even whole beaches. You name it they own it.

The National Trust and the issue of conservation. If the National Trust are drawn on the issue of conservation, they always seem to claim to be conservationists. This would figure when you look at there record.

The National Trust owns many farms. In fact the National Trust love farms and promotes farming as conservation. This would be quite understandable for the National Trust; remember the National Trust was set up to preserve the aristocracy. May we never forget that after the Watt Tyler uprising amongst many others? The aristocracy decided to replace people with sheep. Throwing people off the land they used to earn their livelihood from. The National Trust would naturally want to continue this tradition. The National Trust has sheep absolutely everywhere, and where there isn’t the National Trust will be planning to put them there. There was classic quote, which featured on the BBC television programme about the National Trust was. The National Trust official who was the stereotypical clone of an employed conservationist when asked this question. “Why do he have to have sheep on the, cant it be wild like it always used to be”. To which the National Trust official answered. “You cant just leave it, its like your garden, you know what happens if you leave your ”. This attitude from the National Trust stereotypical official encapsulates the whole National Trust ethos. Beware of nature; we must-must by all means sheepable, control nature. After all nature must be managed controlled planned and two species are best at that and that is the National Trust partnership of sheep and people.

Constable painted in Dedham in Essex on the river. It is a well-known fact that if a tree obstructed the view he wished he wanted to paint he would omit the tree from the picture, or move the tree to one side in the picture. However the national trust have been massacring trees that have been there since Constables time. They said this was to make the area look more like a Constable painting. This is the usual destroying Britain’s natural heritage for some human heritage that in this case is actually false. Some interesting facts; they refer to the mass felling of trees “selective pruning”.

The National Trust owns most of the land that surrounds Stone Henge. The National Trust has made sure that the place is entirely surrounded by sheep. When stone henge was built their certainly wouldn’t have been sheep surrounding it as there were no sheep in Britain then, also it is quite likely that there would have also been trees there. In the area of stone henge there are some burial mounds, all these are in effect are mounds of earth with people buried under them. The national trusts aristocratic management thought it was so important that these mounds of earth be seen that they had 500 oak trees cut down. The National Trust did not care if they destroyed the ecosystem and the home and food for all the wildlife. After all what is the welfare of our natural environment to the National Trust?

In a way it was a real double whammy for the National Trust. The destruction of 500 oak trees and the ecosystem it supports. With the subsequent deaths of wild animals that would inevitably follow. They have also created another grazing site for sheep.

Par exhalant conservation from the National Trust.
County, borough, and city councils
Lets start with Hampshire county council. In Hampshire there are Holloway’s. Holloway’s are roads that are enclosed by magnificent canopies; these are quite spectacular when you travel through them. In Hampshire there are a lot of Holloway’s with limestone walls. A morone from Hampshire county council, a conservation expert presumably so by now I am sure you have the picture of what a conservation expert is and does. Anyway this morone from Hampshire county council decided the best way to preserve the Holloway’s with the limestone walls was to wait for it owe you know what coming don’t you. Cut down all the trees. So Hampshire county council went ahead where they had juristriction to, cut down all the trees thus destroying as many magnificent Holloway’s as they could. The morone from Hampshire county council even came onto the television on south today; to announce how annoyed he was with any landowners that would not co-operate in the vandalism.

Another exercise in conservation vandalism by Hampshire county council is their Shavalsky horse project. These horses are from the Russian Steppe. Where they have actually started to eat themselves out of existence such is their ecologically devastating appetite. This record of ecological destruction had not gone unnoticed by Hampshire county council, who thought wow these horses really must have something going for them, if they can eat any plant is there way and wreak havoc on the long term of an Eco system we must have them. They don’t care how much or whatever they must have them. So Hampshire county council imported some. The Hampshire county councillors even came on to south today, to say what a wonderful conservation job the horses would do. A comment from a Hampshire county councillor was they will eat up any saplings. And as any county councillor and/or conservationist will tell you. We don’t want care about nor need trees they have no place here in Britain.

Hampshire county council and Sandy Point. There is a piece of land on Hayling Island called Sandy Point. This piece of land has become the personal project would be farmer Andrew Parfait. Andrew Parfait is a conservationist in the true conservationist mould. He is a grazeirphile. On the site at Sandy Point, there were trees, bushes, rain deer moss, and brambles. Since Hampshire county council has given control of Sandy Point Hayling Island to Andrew Parfait, he has proceeded to cut down for example silver birch trees, cleared bramble and cut down many other small trees and various scrub related plants. Naturally being a true conservationist he had fires lit on various occasions, on fact his partner in conservation Peter Durnell. Who also hates trees left a fire to get out of control and the fire brigade had to be called. The site covers 6 acres 1 cow per 6 acres is overgrazing; however Andrew Parfait has arranged for 6 cows to be placed on the site. So yet another area of land which was not subject to the damage of grazing has been turned into a farm. Well done Andrew you’re a true conservationist. Each year at Sandy Point more and more scrub and trees are destroyed to engineer land more suitable for grazing. Another ordinary agricultural field to add to the daily telegraph favoured patchwork of fields that dominate the British Isles. Well done again Andrew will cone Hampshire county council.

Portsmouth city council and Portsdown Hill. Portsdown Hill comes under the jurastriction of Portsmouth City Council. Portsdown Hill was known for having a lot of wild flowers, and in particular orchids. Portsmouth City Council. Decided enough was enough these flowers don’t belong there and are far to pretty for the people. Portsmouth City Council decided that as cows had not been there for 40 years they would have to put them there. Why one may wonder. The answer is probably, well just because you should, we must have cows, let not a place be without sheep or cows for it has to be a conservationist told them so. Portsmouth City Council has put cows all the way along the hill no matter how steep or how word or eroded they must be everywhere. Portsmouth City Council has put out signs to show what cows do and the few tings they consider they do that are useful i.e. supporting dung beetles; well that must be alright then there is a sign so it must be conservation. Ask yourself this; why are there no signs to show how cows compact soil and how they are not even native to Britain, and all the other damage they do which will undoubtedly impacted upon bird nesting sights. The decrease in plants that produced seeds that could have fed the birds. Go to the top of Portsdown Hill and look inland, all you will see is patchwork of fields including cow fields. So why did Portsmouth City Council think that they need to extend these even further? Perhaps they considered that an area of land supporting threes bushes and flowers, was in direct conflict to the farming ethos. We must knock the land into a farm immediately, well teach it to become a farm, how dare it defy us and the farmifaication plan advised to us by the conservationist.

Back to Hampshire county council again. Ashford hangers are just past Petersfield. This is an area of woodland, well some of it is, and as to whether it remains so with the actions of Hampshire county council remains to be seen. Hampshire county council has cleared part of this, and put up ring net fencing; owe how inevitable, for what! Well yes you’ve guessed it sheep. Fields and fields with sheep already scour Ashford Hangers. Conservationists can never ever have enough sheep and cows. There is something, which is called edge effect, which is effective up to 25 metres into a wood. Trees shade and shading various in woods. Around the edge of the woods the light gets in this is the edge effect. The amount of this light that gets into the woods affect species of flora that grow and this in turn affects the fauna. The woods are very small at Ashford Hangers, and they support rare plants. So when Hampshire county council decide to clear an area of this already small woodland and turn it into a woodland meadow, all the woodland surrounding the clearing will be subject to this edge effect. This will affect all the plants that are uniquely suited to these woods. No doubt Hampshire county councils expert conservationist will suggest even more grazing until the woods is no longer a woods, and just resembles the fields around it.
If you know of conservationists working for any organisations which vandalise the countryside let me know. Stephen.Rowe@lycos.com Tagging Animals Introduction Whenever a wildlife programme and/or a magazine programme featuring articles about wildlife, they very often seem to involve the tagging of animals. I often wonder if there will be an animal left in the wild that doesn’t have some sort of tagging or radio collaring. Why may be some day it will become obligatory for all wildlife to be marked by humans. There was some meeting organised in Portsmouth, where some pervert got up to speak and let everyone know that he was very interested in the environment, and how he was doing a PhD. This involved catching dolphins and tagging them, he talked about how their hearts were racing when he caught them, before tagging them. Very clever, doesn’t it make you wonder how many dolphins died of heart attacks from this? Great way to show your appreciation of the environment. The vice of tagging is very comprehensive now; there is hardly an animal that remains safe from the taggers. There are perverts ready to show off and boast about their latest feat of animal molestation, and to how they have managed to tag a creature thought previously un-tagable. Birds are the obvious and most familiar victims of tagging. Bird ringing being the most familiar, however this has been extended to placing radio transmitters and even cameras to wild birds. Placing rings on birds is not only immoral it causes great discomfort and in some cases causes the loss of a leg and death by constriction of blood flow, birds have also been caught up by rings and starved to death. Some of the methods of catching bird also cause’s harm and death. Nets are laid out and attached to large rods of metal, which are placed in tubes with explosives. When the sadists are ready they will detonate the explosive and the net will go over some of the birds. During this process a lot of birds will be killed outright and others will suffer fatal injuries and will be dispatched with a smile by the ringers, others will die later on. Anybody who has tried to get near any bird knows how sensitive there hearing is, so you can only imagine what 140db(140 decibels would be the noise produced by such an explosion) would do to birds hearing? If you guessed it would cause some permanent dame you were right, and just how many birds will die from predation because they cant hear. Also some of the birds will die from the shock of being mailed about by the sadistic ringing. Another method of collecting birds is to place out huge nets, which catch birds mainly on migration. Many birds die outright from the impact of hitting these nets. Others are fatally killed by the net strangling them. Others will die later from injuries sustained from the net. Most horrific of all and a real testament to the mentality of those that ring; some will die of the cold and starvation from being left in the nets to long. Nice people bird ringers. Large collar transmitters have been fitted to polar bears, Serengeti wild dogs, bears, foxes and lions. The list of mammals goes on. What exactly do you have to do to get a radio collar onto a mammal, as the chances of it waiting around long enough for you to fit it are pretty slim. Answer you have to shoot it with a gun and a syringe containing PCP, this is a highly lethal drug as has been shown from humans who voluntarily take it because they are drug addicts. However the conservationists see no moral argument against forcing drugs upon the wildlife of the world. Fish have also become the victim of radio collar tagging. A extremely horrific method is used on sharks; firstly they are caught on extremely large hooks in their mouths then they are hauled into the boat with a fish hook, then a hole is made in its fin and a tag and transmitter fitted to it. A shark is an extremely hydrodynamic fish, so this process not only cases grate damage to the shark when catching and fitting it, it would probably impair manoeuvrability. Penguins have been tagged on there tiny wings. The morons who were tagging these poor little creatures knew full well that there was a problem with penguins being caught up by these rings as at the time of the tagging they asked some plastic design expert if he could invent a safer method of tagging. However whist he was designing it didn’t stop them from tagging the penguins in the meantime. Well what’s a penguin’s life compared to the importance to somebody’s research project? Somebody even made tagging salmon part of a university research project. A salmon only has delicate skin, so it is unimaginable what damage and pain a tag would cause to it. Damage is also caused to fish when handled, so how many died later on. Snakes! Yes snakes have also become the victims off radio collar tagging, this evolves catching a snake cutting it open and inserting a huge tube into it. The morone doing this said "owe well they eat things this big, so it wont cause any discomfort. May be he should try it for himself. Fitting this huge radio transmitter not only involves cutting it open and great pain and discomfort it must cause infection from pathogens on the transmitter and from the wound itself and what if the snake gets snags where it its stitched up. Even insects are being tagged now; this is the latest use of microelectronics tagging insects. One fortunate incident was when a life long polar bear tagger who regularly shot tranquillise into polar bears so he could collar and test them what for, well the effects of pollution. This is typical conservationist propaganda, as if he were concerned about pollution, he would not be so keen to pollute them directly with tranquilliser. Some of these bears were suckling young, so the effects from the tranquilliser are very likely to be passed onto the young. Anyway this storey has a happy ending, as this morone was killed when searching for polar bears to molest in his helicopter. Mind you there were probably people volunteering to take his place as soon as he hit the ice. What is the response to all this tagging? The response from people in the television wildlife documentary business is a complete and unquestioned acceptance of tagging. You would think that tagging an animal was a natural process in life like a bird learning to fly. Nowadays an un-tagged animal must be considered un-natural. All animals should be wearing a ring and radio collar. Sir David Atenborough whenever he witnesses the collaring of any animal, just looks on grinning unquestioning. Bill Odie one of Britons leading ornithologists produced a bird programme. On this programme he showed bird ringing. A morone was featured ringing a goldcrest. A ring was fitted that was so tight it could easily restrict the bird’s circulation, if there is any swelling of the foot. The ring also weighed a gram which is a lot of weight for a bird to carry around all its life, and when you think of the long journeys that birds take, it could well result in a fatal loss of energy. As mentioned previously about the penguins. This was as close as it ever got and the scant disregard shown by the researchers who absolutely insisted that until the designer could come up with a safer plastic ring the penguins just had to keep on the rings that would endanger their lives. This sums up there mentality. In Florida the authorities actually asked some perverts over from the British ornithological survey. The British ornithological survey specialise in killing deafening and ringing birds which they have refined to a advanced sadistic level. The Florida authorities asked them to come over to molest their previously un-molested birds. Owe it is so assuring to know Britain leads the way in bird molestation and killing. Where is this all leading. If you mention the subject of ringing birds and radio collaring, it will quickly become obvious that the public know nothing about the topic, and/or they will believe the story spun by the tagging perverts that it is an invaluable tool for conservation, or another great conservation quote. It is a grate weapon in the battle for conservation of the animals. Another very predictable conservationist answer would be it allows us to plan for conserving birds and animals for the future. A grate one to get the public on there side would be. Without the information provided by these studies into migration and animal patterns in movement we will not be able to preserve them for the future. The truth is that these tagging ringing exercises are to satisfy the curiosity and to simply amuse those that do it. Somebody somewhere in the academic world wants this information either to complete their PhD, or to submit their name to a research paper and make their name in science at the expense of their victims. This is what is at the heart of these ringing projects. Hunting trophies for ringers. There are the people who like to go out and do this ringing in their part time, as a hobby. This makes them feel important. They will be able to tell people all how important they are as they ring birds and what good conservationists they are. Why cant these people get a life and take up a hobby or do something useful for society or the environment. The information that is gained on for example bird migration patterns, and the associated data might seem interesting. However it does not provide any evidence that could be obtained by other less intrusive methods, which would obviously not be as entertaining for the bird molesters. The information that is collected on other animals is often just a repeat of what is already known. For example there was a pervert who was radio collaring foxes. Just what more do you need to know about foxes now. In general animals such as birds display obvious migration patterns for example they arrive settle then depart. They can be seen doing this by observation. There are also methods to monitor numbers. Conclusion Ringing and radio collaring will not save any species in general. And those that do the tagging will not be on the front line protesting for the protection of animals. Owe they might write a letter or something. However it will be a very polite one, lest they not offend any capitalists who may be making a lot of money out of environmental exploitation, and of course who may well be funding animal tagging. I didn’t see the British ornithological survey protesting will banners and mounting any grate challenge when the Cardiff barrier went up. Tagging and ringing will not save or conserve animals. The only time when they are of any use is when and animal may be threatening the human or animal population and the case has to be proven. The other reason may be when humans threaten animals and the tagging may well lead to information as to whom where and when, harmed or killed the animal in question. This case may have some justification. The ring and radio collar for plain amusement and frivolous and unnecessary scientific research should not be carried out. Any questions E-mail me stephen.rowe@lycos.com