Caredig I Natur (CIN)

More trees and green spaces, less waste of money

2012-01-23T11:26:00.004Z

Ceredigion County Council is planning on using Welsh Government funding to make changes to the prom in Aberystwyth. You can see their current plans for the large pot of money here. We''ll summarise our thoughts on some of the ideas below.

Bandstand
It is amusing that the Council show photos of the worst-looking bits of the bandstand as a way of making their case, when the reason they look like that is because Ceredigion County Council neglect the building. Would they look after a new building any better? There's no reason to believe they would. Currently it is a building with some history (built in 1935). It should be repaired, and more importantly, clear permanent information on how to book it and what events are coming up in the next month or so, and costs (with no charge for local, non-profit events). There is no point having a community building and then putting up barriers to its use - the community pay for this, and deserve a better service. Sure, tart the building up a bit, more windows or better natural lighting or eco-features like solar panels. If someone can't make use of what they have then don't let them waste money on some new toy to mismanage.

Street improvements

Strangely, this includes features such as an 'eating & drinking area outside Belle Vue Hotel' - obviously for their customers, from the image above. Hold on a minute - are we talking about using public funds to enhance a private business and those who stay there, whilst making the pavement narrower for Aberystwyth residents? Is that an 'improvement'? An improvement would be some greenery or trees, not favouritism and favours for commercial concerns.

Paddling pool facilities
This suggestion seems like another rush to spend money unnecessarily, but it includes a truly bizarre element - "creation of an artificial beach". Huh? The Council want to spend money making and maintaining an artificial beach - right opposite a real one? Even ignoring the fact that the artificial beach sand would end up blowing everywhere and be yet another maintenance task that the Council would fail to do, there is something so fundamentally screwy about this idea that it must be a joke.

Interactive water feature
Public money to be spent on an interactive water feature. Hold on a minute, Aberystwyth already has some! The main one is called the sea, and it is supported by two others called the Rheidol and the Ystwyth. Let's focus on the amazing things we have and keep them clean and litter-free, not try and copy what some land-bound town has to do to make up for not having the natural features which Aberystwyth does.

Street furniture
The images show lovely and distinctive blue street signs and benches, and sturdy pots for flowers; also curve-edged benches which are ideal for our children to walk over, or free runners to incorporate into their parkour. Great! Oh, that's what the council wants to replace, even though there is nothing wrong with them. Don't they know that the rules are: Reduce consumption, then Repair, then Recycle. Nowhere in the green mantra does it say 'throw things away rather than maintaining them and use resources to replace them with new things performing an identical function'. Keep things in good order, and make sure there are enough, yes - but don't waste money on replacements just for the sake of it.

Sadly, none of the money is proposed to be spent on greening the area to make it look more natural, even though this is an area of outstanding beauty (well, the bits that the Council have yet to allow housing estates, supermarkets or industrial estates to be built on). Often the council seems to go the opposite way, e.g. even covering the bits of soil and grass around trees with red rubber, as if they can't stand having anything natural showing. Or digging up the one green area of bushes near the bus stops so that it can concrete them over as an 'improvement' without sharing the plans with people first. It is an 'improvement' just like the nearby roundabout which stole a green area at the end of Plas Crug and covered it in concrete instead.

Aberystwyth bus stop after the bushes were grubbed up -

it now looks much worse than this!
Apparently they will be covering up most of the soil
with concrete and resorting to plant pots afterwards...

All too often these things smack of waste, or clawing at money which has the stipulation that has to be used for 'new' things, not existing commitments, and as a result projects are dreamed up just as a means of spending that money. There is never any questioning of whether it is really doing any good, and whether it might not be better to counteract increasing costs of public transport, or reducing the tax we pay in the first place. Mis-spent money is just a waste.

We recently heard about further plans to spend a large pot of money (c. £200,000) on building a road between the National Library of Wales and the Aberystwyth University Campus. Of course, this would mess up a green area. Further, there is currently pedestrian access between the two. Any true green agenda promotes walking over vehicle use, but here we see the Welsh Government wanting to build yet more unnecessary roads and make vehicle use easier, the opposite of a green agenda. If the two organisations which want this silly plan to go ahead are that determined to have it then they should pay for it themselves.

Whatever your thoughts on these proposals, you can email Ceredigion County Council and Huw Lewis (the Welsh Housing, Regeneration & Heritage Minister who apparently supports these projects).

A letter in the Cambrian News, Thursday 12th January 2012 -

we agree with many of the sentiments

Mill Street car park - do you object to yet more supermarkets in Aberystwyth?

Don't forget the public meeting about the proposed Aberystwyth Tesco's and Day Care Centre debacle this Thursday, 26th January, 7pm, in the Morlan. See the end of this post for more details.

'Trojan Horse' Tesco criticised in public meeting

2012-01-11T09:55:00.006Z

[Updates at the end of this post.]

On Wednesday 14th December around 40 people attended a snap public meeting organised to give Aberystwyth residents a chance to urgently find alternatives to the Mill Street proposals. The development is expected to see demolition of the existing day centre, possible compulsory purchase orders on houses on Glyndwr road in order to make way for a large Tesco store.

The meeting was initialised by mid and west Wales Green Party in response to the growing clamour of concern about the council backed development. The meeting was the first chance for many to have their views aired publicly. Many of those attending said how they were most critical about the lack of openness and lack of consultation with the council using commercial sensitivity to avoid providing information on the proposals. St Boulevard Road, one participant said, could be a beautiful gateway to the town centre but instead was being turned into a bland runway lined by sheds of shops.

Others present spoke on behalf of elderly family members threatened by the development with the loss of their homes and questioned the thinking behind demolition when there is an apparent housing shortage. The demolition of the day centre was roundly condemned. Further questions were also put on how the impact of moving the day centre would now have on the town library and how there was confusion amongst users at to what the new facilities would now contain.

A vision of a town centre with more independent shops was suggested to make visiting Aberystwyth a better shopping experience, allowing locals and tourists the chance to go into shops that can't be found anywhere else. It was thought that this would be possible if moves were made to tackle landlords' rent and to introduce variable business rates.

Tesco as a store was also criticised for its lack of local produce and for fears on its impact on the Welsh language. One participant described it as a Trojan horse that would destroy Aberystwyth from within and said that it would not create jobs and could even reduce them as small shops like butchers, greengrocers would not be able to compete and would close. They went on to highlight how in such an isolated community new money to spend in the store would not enter the area, pointing out that any spend in Tesco would just be money not spent elsewhere.

Another, larger meeting is going to be organised in the new year, this one will still be open to the public and a special effort is to be made to invite town and county councillors, Mark Williams MP, Elin Jones and regional Assembly Members. Chair of the meeting, Leila Kiersch, summed up the need for the next meeting by saying “They (councillors) may not be able to answer our questions, but we want them to listen. The views and concerns of the local population need to be heard before it is too late to change this development.”

CIN would like to add that we contacted Tesco about Mill Street. They chose to ignore us, obviously believing that 'every little helps' to alienate people. As a way of saying thanks we would like to point people to a Friends of the Earth campaign about supermarkets (which applies equally to Sainsburys' plans to build on greenfield sites in the area), and this site too. Here is a promotional video about Tesco, showing what benefits they would bring to the area.

Let's have some good news

2012-01-04T13:57:00.001Z

To start off 2012 we'll include a few pieces of good news from the last year. All are very different, but each one has some element to be positive about.

Bolivia Set to Pass Historic 'Law of Mother Earth'
"The piece of legislation, called la Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra, is intended to encourage a radical shift in conservation attitudes and actions, to enforce new control measures on industry, and to reduce environmental destruction."
A sign of respect that would sadly never happen in the UK/US.
Ceredigion agrees cruelty-free purchasing policy
"Ceredigion Council have adopted a cruelty-free purchasing policy for cleaning products."
From Alun Williams' blog.
Carrots in the car park. Radishes on the roundabout. The deliciously eccentric story of the town growing ALL its own veg
"The police station carrots — and thousands of vegetables in 70 large beds around the town — are there for the taking. Locals are encouraged to help themselves. A few tomatoes here, a handful of broccoli there. If they’re in season, they’re yours. Free."
A fantastic idea, implemented with great success.
Prince William warns open spaces are 'under threat'
"the prince urges people to preserve fields and parkland as part of a campaign to create or preserve 2,012 open spaces by 2012."
At CIN we're not fans of the fox-hunting royals or inherited privilege, but at least in this case one of them is using his position to raise awareness of this vital issue.

This is just a small sample - are there any others we should add to the list from 2011?

Resolutions

2011-12-28T16:48:00.000Z

Do you make resolutions as the calendar trips over from one year to the next? If you're stuck for ideas and want to get healthier in 2012 then consider some of the following. Note that it is best not to be too ambitious!

Eat more fresh fruit and fewer sweets.
Give the dog an extra walk each day.
Involve friends or family in exercise (sports, walks, games) - then you can socialise and exercise at the same time.
Drink more fresh water each day, avoid tea/coffee/fizzy drinks.
Park the car as far from the work entrance/shops as possible, so you walk more each day.
Use stairs, not lifts or escalators.
Adopt regular exercise, sleep and eating habits.
Walk to your friend's house instead of driving.
Run or cycle to work instead of driving.
Adopt some form of exercise you enjoy doing (you'll be more likely to stick to it).
Go vegetarian or vegan! If you do, then consider joining an organisation that will support you with advice and recipes, such as Viva!, The Vegan Society, The Vegetarian Society, Animal Aid, or PETA.

Badgers vote to cull MPs

2011-12-26T13:23:00.001Z

Badger government ministers are expected to confirm a decision to allow two pilot MP culls to take place next year in England, writes Hard Jackson.

When will they learn?

2011-12-18T17:18:00.001Z

First, the good news - Defra figures show cattle TB is down 37 per cent in Dyfed without killing any badgers (bear in mind this is the county where the killing of badgers has been proposed by the Welsh Government). David Williams, chairman of the Badger Trust said: "Surely any decision to kill badgers cannot now be justified. This reduction in Dyfed is too big, too rapid and too sustained to be ignored [...] Furthermore, Wales as a whole saw a 28 per cent fall over the same periods, again too big to be brushed aside."

However, it is disappointing that bovine TB figures for England show a provisional 6 per cent increase in the number of new TB incidents for January to July, a result of less stringent testing and movement controls in England.

"It is high time to stop arguing about wasting time and money on trying to kill off badgers in the hope of a comparatively tiny benefit over a nine-year period," said Mr Williams. "We need universal annual testing of cattle, effective movement and registration controls and an end to farmers trying to evade them. Firm controls worked supremely well in the past, bringing the annual cattle toll to as low as 628 in 1979. The annual total remained at about 1,000 a year for 20 years - and the 11-year reactive badger culling programme during that time had no effect overall."

Sadly, Caroline Spelman, Secretary of State for the Environment, has decided to proceed with the two pilot culls 'to determine the efficacy and humaneness of the free-shooting of badgers'. Her statement was made after Prime Minister's Question Time on Wednesday 14th December 2011.

When will they learn?

Community meeting about Mill Street developments in Aberystwyth

2011-12-11T14:20:00.000Z

Homes are under threat due to Ceredigion County Council and Tesco wanting to have a huge Tesco store in Mill Street, Aberystwyth. (We're not sure where Aberystwyth Town Council stands on the issue).

A community meeting has been organised for Wednesday 14th December in the Morlan Centre, Aberystwyth, 6-8pm, in order to discuss these proposals and suggest alternatives. What would be better? (CIN would say - turn half of the car park into a green community park with lots of new trees, and keep the Day Care Centre!)

Everyone is welcome.

Tetra Pak recycling in Aberystwyth

2011-12-08T16:45:00.003Z

Tetra Pak waste piles

We've been informed that CK's supermarket in Waunfawr, Aberystwyth, has insisted on the removal of all recycling banks (thanks for contributing to the local community, Mr Supermarket!). Unless Ceredigion County Council can find alternative locations then that is one recycling site in Ceredigion lost.We tried to contact CKs but their online form did not work at all if you typed anything into their comments box. Well done CKs!

That site included Tetra Pak (and glass) recycling, so was important because Ceredigion County Council don't collect either of those in their kerb-side recycling schemes. Hopefully they will relocate the recycling facilities soon. In the meantime there is another Tetra Pak bank in Mill Street car park, opposite Matalan, until that site gets built on by Tesco (thanks for contributing to the local community, Mr Supermarket!).

It's clear that supermarkets aren't really the best thing. What a shame that Sainsbury's want to build on greenfield sites too (thanks for contributing to the local community, Mr Supermarket!).

Tetra Pak cartons are notoriously bad for the environment since they are made of mixed materials which can't be separated (and they have never shown any desire to change that even though there are now fully compostible alternatives to both plastic and foil). All that can be done with them is mashing them up to make other (non-recyclable) products, on the hope that these other products can be sold. If they can't then they all become landfill. Currently all UK Terta Paks are transported to Italy (Lucca) for this process to take place.

18th January 2012, re: Aberystwyth Tetra Pak recycling (see comments below), the County Council said: "the Tetrapak recycling bank is located at Maesyrafon car park, next to the Arriva bus garage, opposite Peacocks. This move will be permanent and we arranging to have a sign in Mill street informing residents of the relocation."

Ethical Consumer

2011-12-04T16:25:00.005Z

Stuck for gift ideas? Maybe an Ethical Consumer subscription could be a good option. Informative and empowering, it enables you to put consumer power into practice. Their subscription includes online access to back issues and reports, providing a wealth of information to enable informed decision making.

Sainsbury's want to muscle in too?

2011-11-18T10:19:00.006Z

What is it with supermarkets? Aberystwyth has a number already, with an Aldi coming in the near future. The other day it was announced that people might be kicked out of their homes for a Tesco; now it turns out that Sainsbury's want to invade the town too, with a huge out-of-town development on a greenfield site. This would destroy a huge green area and lead to more traffic and journeys, and a further pull out of the Aberystwyth town centre.

In a recent fictional poll (which we didn't really conduct), we found that no-one in Aberystwyth was starving to death because they couldn't buy any food in a supermarket or other shop. When asked, none of the fictional people we spoke to said they needed yet more supermarkets to come along and pour down thousands more tons of concrete for a soulless warehouse and more grey car parks. As one made-up person said, "What I want is small independent shops in the town centre, not huge eyesores."

The Cambrian News hints at further strangeness- Aberystwyth University sold the land and tried to hide the details and figures, but apparently they sold it for for a million pounds. The land is now apparently being sold for over thirteen million pounds a few years later (again, the people involved are unwilling to be open about the figures), which seems to be very suspicious that the land could be used to make such a massive profit, and it was sold with no clauses that it needs to be kept for recreational use. As usual Aberystwyth University seemed to be incredibly secretive about its deals: really, what are they hiding if they are doing nothing wrong? Their publicity seems to talk about being part of the local community, but they are unwilling to be open about their deals. Apparently there is a top-secret investigation going on into alleged dodgy dealings. We can't tell you more because Aberystwyth University is keeping the details secret. As such there are at least three theories as to what is being investigated, and why the university is trying to keep it so hush hush.

Since it is the owner of Aberystwyth's Parc Lodge Hotel that is trying to sell the land which would lead to further losses of green space, we can only recommend that visitors to that town don't stay in the Parc Lodge Hotel (which is next to main roads and massive roundabouts and industrial parks anyway, so is hardly the nicest place to stay unless you love McDonalds). We are also disappointed in the developers Conygar for wanting to build on a huge greenfield area that would be much better off being planted with trees and used as a town recreational area.

We should add that people have been trying to make money by building on this land for many years, even though it was identified as recreational land in the Ceredigion Unitary Development Plan.

Update 14 January 2012:
The Cambrian News picked this story up on Thursday 12th January 2012, see below.

Threats to homes

2011-11-15T15:41:00.009Z

Are there enough houses for everyone in Ceredigion? Obviously developers and the County Council think not, since new greenfield spaces keep getting built on or earmarked for houses. Surely it would be madness to knock down homes to make way for yet more shops and car parks?

It could happen in Aberystwyth. On top of which it is patently unfair to force anyone to leave their home, let alone for shopping; to make money for chain supermarkets and developers.

What would be the effect of Tesco on a town which already has supermarkets draining wealth out of the local economy and making things harder for the independent shops that make the town interesting? Have a look at this blog about Ruthin (13 November 2011 post) for an idea of what The Tesco Effect could be.

We tried to contact Tesco about this but - as often happens with companies that refuse to use a normal email address, and instead insist upon some stupid form - their form did not work. Thanks Tesco! 'Every little' goes towards irritating people!

Therefore, thanks to a flaky website, we won't give the Tesco side of this (nor the side of the developer who wants to kick people out of their homes, Chelverton - because they don't seem to have a high-prominence website). Instead we'll point people here.

Update 25th November 2011: One of our contributors sent this in:

"There are also protests about the destruction of the day care centre which was built c.30 years ago as a purpose-specific day care centre for older citizens. See various letters on the Cambrian News website about this. The building will be destroyed and they will be instead going to a basement room (high windows only) in the revamped town hall which will become the new town library."

Update 27th November 2011: See Alun Williams' blog for more on the Day Care Centre.

Identify wildlife

2011-11-11T17:20:00.001Z

A moth of some kind awaiting identification...

iSpot is a website aimed at helping anyone identify anything in nature. Once you've registered you can add an observation to the website and suggest an identification yourself or see if anyone else can identify it for you. You can also help others by adding an identification to an existing observation, which you may like to do as your knowledge grows. Your reputation on the site will grow as people agree with you identifications. As well as being a useful community, this seems to offer great educational potential. If you have used it please let us know what you think in the comments.

Cycle paths

2011-11-08T17:49:00.005Z

In Wales we have a fairly good cycle network and it is improving all the time, opening up options to replace car-culture for something that is cheaper, healthier, environmentally friendly - and fun. We're also lucky that in some cases there is clear provision for different uses.

Unfortunately sometimes people don't observe the distinctions. It is a common complaint from cyclists when pedestrians choose to walk on cycle paths instead of nearby pavement. One example that has been drawn to our attention recently is from Aberystwyth, where there is a route from Plascrug Leisure Centre to Plascrug Park (the route is called Plascrug Avenue - see image above) that has road, pavement for pedestrians, and a cycle path, which should keep everybody happy and safe.

Unfortunately many pedestrians walk on the cycle path rather than the pavement opposite, to the point where many cyclists say it is now simpler to just cycle on the road. It is a shame when a useful resource can be devalued in this way. However, it is not just lone pedestrians, there are also other causes which interfere with the clear delineation of usage.

For example, recently the INTRtri Triathlon Club held an aquathlon on Sunday 30th October. This involved a swim then a running race - and we were told that they chose to use the cycle path for the running section (as opposed to pavement or the cemetery) even though it confuses people about usage, and since the club members are also cyclists they likely get annoyed at pedestrians using cycle paths instead of pavements. Apparently this surprised some participants, and we've heard of people dropping out of the race because of it or being unhappy with the situation. It is a shame, because it is obvious that doing a triathlon (or aquathlon) is an incredibly healthy and positive thing to do, and full credit goes to those that can complete them! (If you live in Ceredigion and want to get fit, I'm sure the club would love to hear from you.)

A more regular disruption comes via Plascrug Community Primary School. A number of cyclists had complained about school staff walking pupils along the cycle path rather than the pavement (one sent the photos below as proof).

Friday 14th October 2011 at 1:35pm - Plascrug Community Primary School staff walking pupils on the cycle path rather than the pavement (front of the group)

Same day and time, rear of the group

Although not illegal, this is bad practice for a number of reasons.

1: Firstly it puts the children at risk. We've heard of cyclists who had to brake suddenly when rounding a bend in the cycle path because the school's pupils were being walked along the cycle path rather than the pavement, which has led to some close calls. There are very good reasons for separating pedestrians from cycle routes. The safety of the children is the larger issue, but it is also a risk for the cyclists. This is a shame because it is an unnecessary danger and could be removed completely by the school adopting good practice.

2: It is an irritation for cyclists. Cyclists aren't meant to cycle on normal pavement because pedestrians need to be kept separate, so it is understandably irksome to find pedestrians walking on cycle paths. When we spoke to other local cyclists we were told that some are put off using cycle paths at certain times of the day because they get swamped with school-related pedestrians. It is a shame because cyclists are making a commitment to greener modes of transport.

3: Some might argue that it also sets a bad example to the children, teaching them to ignore road signage and proper routes.

We contacted the school about this and they defended their policy of walking children on the cycle path. In some ways that seems to create unnecessary risk and inconvenience.

We'd had a few emails about that route so thought we would mention it but the bigger issue is cycle routes across the county. Although Ceredigion County Council usually do a good job in providing cycle routes (more would always be appreciated!) maybe in some cases they need to renew or improve the signage on some cycle routes in the county. In the meantime, and for elsewhere, Sustrans have a useful guide to safe use of shared routes. If you are a pedestrian then please pay attention to where you are walking. And if you are a cyclist be extra mindful of pedestrians on cycle paths - remember that the ding of a bell is a friendly sound and shows consideration, not impatience. Cyclists - also please do make sure you follow signage yourself, dismounting where required. Pushing a bicycle for a bit is still good exercise!

World Vegan Day

2011-11-03T19:59:00.001Z

Tuesday was World Vegan Day - an annual event which has been running on 1st November since 1944! As part of the celebrations there was an event in the UK Parliament which culminated in the World Vegan Day debate introduced by vegan MP Kerry McCarthy.

Bamboo, the wonder material

2011-10-23T14:46:00.001+01:00

Bamboo has long been considered to be an amazingly versatile material. One of the reasons that it is becoming even more popular is because the environmental benefits of bamboo are now more widely known and accepted. It can be processed into a fantastic textile for making clothes from:

"Lightweight, almost silk-like, Bamboo material has a superb natural softness. A material that is ideal for wearing next to the skin, it has antibacterial properties and is naturally hypoallergenic. Also, due to the natural hollow cross-section in the fiber it is 3-4 times more absorbent than cotton and very breathable so it might be your first choice when you want to get sweaty. Add this to the fact that bamboo clothing is naturally anti-static so will not stick to you and that it is 98% UV protective ( this equates to an approximate Sun Protection Rating of 50 ) it begins to look like a miracle fabric."
Muchbetteradventures site

It is no surprise that the material is attracting the attentions of the adventure and sports community, with companies like Bam providing trendy eco-kit for the great outdoors.

The latest news is a UK-made bicycle frame composed of bamboo! They'll be building houses from this material next...

Ideas to improve the world #1 and #2 - Food!

2011-10-16T09:25:00.006+01:00

We are taking part in Blog Action Day 2011 (as mentioned here). The topic this year is food. This also happens to coincide with a new series on CIN - 'Ideas to improve the world'. Suggestions for things that could be changed, whether by governments or by personal action, that would improve the world in some way. We are going to put the first two into this post since both are food-related. As usual, feel free to send us suggestions for things to cover.

#1 - Stop supermarket waste
#2 - Give up animal products

#1 - Stop supermarket waste

Supermarkets waste millions of tons of food a year. All in-depth reports discover a shocking waste.

"major chains dump enough food to feed 6.3million people a year. [...] our check of supermarket bins found that much of the grub they chuck out is not even past its sell-by date. [...] The true cost of this waste is passed on to customers in prices and the environment in landfill, while the supermarkets' profits continue to soar. [...] According to a report by the Sustainable Development Commission, supermarkets throw away 1.6 million tons of food annually." [Source]

"The Government must get tougher with supermarkets if it is to tackle Britain's growing mountain of food waste, a report on Labour's sustainable food policies will warn this week. [...] The warning comes amid growing concern at the amount of food that ends up as landfill rather than on people's plates. Retailers generate 1.6 million tonnes of food waste each year. [...] A separate study by Imperial College for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, found that supermarkets preferred to throw away food that was approaching its sell-by date rather than mark it down in price. "The cost of staff time is greater than the money made on the reduced items," the research found." [Source]

"If four million people in the UK can't afford a healthy diet, why are supermarkets throwing away the surplus food that could make a real difference and stop the homeless going hungry? [...] behind the supermarket shelves is the story the food industry doesn't want you to know about. [...] Seventeen million tonnes of food is being ploughed into Britain's landfill sites every year - all because it's cheaper and easier for the food industry to dump it than give it to those in need. [...] It's a massive waste when you consider that around four million tonnes of this food is perfectly alright to eat - fresh, tasty, and well within its sell-by-date. [...] The wastage is even worse when you consider its worth - if sold in shops, this dumped food would cost around £18 billion." [Source]

This is good news for freegans, who do an excellent job, but that hardly touches the waste involved. (Actually freegans also want the waste to stop, and salvage it publicly as a way of raising awareness and shaming the corporations into changing their ways.) The issue is made worse by the fact that food products from supermarkets are almost always over-packaged, leading to yet more waste.

What are the ideas to improve things?

Complain to your elected representatives. Ask the government to force supermarkets to give away food for free if it is approaching its sell-by-date - either to customers, or staff, or to local organisations such as schools or homeless shelters. The supermarkets would benefit too - it would generate goodwill for them, and also mean they don't have to pay for as much 'waste' to be removed.
Grow your own! If you haven't got a garden then look into allotment availability in your area, and pressure your local council. Then you can make sure nothing is wasted!
Spend less money in supermarkets. Write to them and complain about the waste and tell them why you won't be shopping there any more. There is nothing like lost custom to make an organisation re-think its strategies.
Support charities that are campaigning on these issues.

#2 - Give up animal products

A vegetarian (ideally, vegan) diet is far better for human health, the environment, and world food stocks; it also avoids huge amounts of cruelty to sentient beings. We occasionally report on the overwhelming evidence which supports this claim. Here are some of those posts:

Bear in mind that we only report on a small selection of what passes our way!

What are the ideas to improve things?

Go veggie, or - even better - vegan. You won't regret it! Be part of the solution, not the problem, and have better health and a clearer conscience.
Stop biased subsidies! Complain to your elected representatives about the fact that there are subsidies and tax relief on meat and dairy products, yet healthier non-animal foods are taxed! This is why dairy milk is artificially cheaper than soya or rice milk. Things should be the other way round. Then our taxes would be supporting healthier foods with no discrimination against all the people who are made ill by dairy products or choose not to consume products that inevitably involve cruelty.

'Regeneration' through more shopping?

2011-10-10T09:47:00.005+01:00

Following recent news about 'regeneration' and funding for it, one of our readers has submitted the post below. We are publishing it in its entirety.

"Recent news that Tesco is in the tender of the preferred bidder for the Mill Street building works is not greeted with glee by everyone in Ceredigion. Some people feel that with five supermarkets already (Morrisons, Co-op, Lidl, CKs, Spar, not including Iceland), Aberystwyth is pretty well served on that front providing sufficient choice for shoppers. What would Tesco, or any other supermarket, provide that these don't? It will provide low paid jobs for some people, and competition to all the small, local, independent stores in the town centre.

The Chamber of Commerce apparently said that Tesco and the multi-story car park will provide 'regeneration' to Aberystwyth. Erm, is Aberystwyth really in need of this 'regeneration'? Will it encourage local people to set up businesses in many of the small empty shops that are dotted around the town centre? No, because business rates are far to high for many specialist shops to survive. Will it lead to the empty or derelict housing stock being done up and available for rent? I doubt it. Will it provide an interesting set of options for those who are currently unemployed and seeking jobs? Yes, but low-paid shift work in supermarkets isn't exactly going to be the career choice of many people. There isn't that much else 'wrong' with Aberystwyth that it needs 'regenerating' through a scheme that will mean compulsory purchase of houses to be knocked down (ridiculous when accommodation is at a premium with the badly-managed increase in university students and when the proposal includes housing - why knock down decent housing just to built other housing?); destruction of the valuable Drill Hall used by many in the community; and the creation of a concrete monster sucking the life out of Aberystwyth. The collapsing economies around the world are showing that shopping and spending is not some kind of new holy grail we need to follow, but a capitalist nightmare that is in danger of dragging us all down.

Here's a radical idea though - how about regenerating the heart of Aberystwyth with a nature garden? A wildlife haven schools and community groups could create and look after, teaching kids about plants, animals, nature etc? Providing a green space where people can sit and enjoy looking at greenery and wildlife? With peak oil around the corner (i.e. when the oil starts running out and becoming scarce, and very expensive) basing developments around cars and shopping will look rather short-term and then we'll be wishing we hadn't thought that a supermarket and a multi-story car-park would be a 'good thing'."

Blog Action Day 2011 - Food!

2011-10-08T16:06:00.003+01:00

Blog Action Day is an annual event that unites the world’s bloggers in posting about the same issue on the same day. It aims to raise awareness and trigger global discussion around an important issue that impacts us all. Fellow bloggers - this year Blog Action Day coincides with World Food Day so the topic is food. If you want to take part then just register on the site before 16 October 2011 and do a post about food on that date. Soem of the topics they suggest as possible ones to consider include the following, which fit the green credentials of CIN:

- To be organic or not to be, that is the question.
- Is your hamburger hurting the environment? It takes 24 liters of water to produce one hamburger. That means it would take over 19.9 billion liters of water to make just one hamburger for every person in Europe.
- Vegan, Vegetarian
- How does Fair Trade food help farmers and communities get out of poverty?
- Freeganism – eating the things others throw away.
- The scandal of food waste.
- Growing your own – the joys and heartache of growing what you eat?

If you cover any of those topics let us know - we'll link to you as well. Or if you don't have your own blog then we're happy to host posts on that date, elevating you to honorary guest blogger for the day. Just send us your text and name.

We've been nominated!

2011-10-04T20:39:00.003+01:00

The CIN blog was nominated for the category of ‘Best Political Blog’ in the Wales Blog Awards 2011 - and has been shortlisted as one of three finalists for that category of the awards! This is excellent news. The prestigious awards were set up to help encourage people to blog, and to highlight those who do it well, so all the writers who contribute to CIN are honoured to have got this far. The judges are making their minds up and will announce the results at an awards ceremony in Cardiff at the end of October. There is also a 'People's Choice' award where you can vote for the single blog you like the most, with a deadline for votes of 21 October. Vote here (at the end of the post). We're grateful to everyone who has supported us and voted for us so far, and to anyone who does in the future. However there are loads of excellent blogs shortlisted so we won't ask everyone to vote for us - look at all those on shortlists and vote with your heart (we have even promoted one of the other finalists in the past). There are so many excellent blogs in Wales that whoever wins, we're sure it will be well-deserved. Diolch yn fawr!

Bunk Beds at Aberystwyth University

2011-09-27T16:23:00.003+01:00

The press and students have referred to it as the 'Bunk Bed Situation' and 'Bunkgate'. Basically this year Aberystwyth University accepted more students than they could house (and also more students than they were meant to - which can lead to fines of £3,700 per student). As a 'solution' the university has decided to add bunk beds to single rooms so that it can cram in two students per room, and actually increase profit for the institution at the same time. How? By only reducing the cost for each student by a third (£55 per week as opposed to the single-occupancy charge of £88.96) it means that they will then be making more profit per room than they would with single occupancy, even though students get less than half a room in some cases (e.g. there is apparently only one desk per room, so if both students have desktop PCs only one can set it up, the other doesn't get any space at all).

From their FAQ:
"What is in a bunk room? A bunk bed (or in some cases two single beds), a desk, desk chair, bedside lamp, bedside cabinet, wardrobe, bookshelves, two under-bed storage boxes, wi-fi or two internet access points."

"How big is a bunk room? The size of the rooms vary from one property to another, however all bunk rooms are essentially a standard single study bedroom with a bunk bed or two single beds."

According to the FAQ students aren't told in advance who they will share with share with, it is random.

As readers can imagine, students are not happy with this situation. The end of this post includes various (anonymised) comments posted on the university's Facebook sites (and other Facebook sites such as 'Angry/Homeless Aberystwyth Students') by concerned students as proof of this.

Why is this relevant to the environment? Simply because the university chose to knock down accommodation halls in Llanbadarn Fawr - without community consultation - rather than renovate them, in an example of gross waste. Llanbadarn Fawr campus is as near to Penglais Campus as the new halls the university is building on greenfield sites so the arguments about centralisation are nonsense. How many of the students currently squashed into a 'bunk room' would have been happy to have had their own room, within easy walking distance of their lectures? They could have done if only the university hadn't chosen to knock down one of their halls, then chosen to close Pantycelyn Hall too, then disingenuously claimed that the lack of accommodation was not their fault...

Interestingly, according to a quote given to the BBC, there have been no complaints. Maybe the quotes above all count as endorsement?

Moving Planet

2011-09-13T16:37:00.003+01:00

On the 24th September there will be a global day of climate action (organised by 350.org).

"Moving Planet is a worldwide rally to demand solutions to the climate crisis. Come on bike, on skates, on a board, or just on foot."

Moving Planet Aberystwyth, 10.00 till 2.00
Meet at Barclays, Sgwar Owain Glyndwr

"Come by bike, on skates, on a board, or just on foot. Come with your neighbours and your friends, your family and your co-workers. Come and be part of something huge. It's time to get moving on the climate crisis."

There will be a stall and the future sea level in Aberystwyth will be illustrated - apparently much of Aberystwyth will be underwater in the future. If you can, wear a costume with a green/sea related theme. Think dolphins, submarines, snorkels, mermaids, seals etc! There will also be a cycle ride.

Aberystwyth University Sports Centre expansion

2011-09-02T11:37:00.003+01:00

Aberystwyth University again. We mentioned plans to build on another green field space back in June (see the 'Yet more building plans' section of this post). A blog follower sent us this image yesterday - that was a green field area by the Sports Centre running track.

Carmarthenshire blogger

2011-08-06T16:14:00.004+01:00

We have regularly criticised Ceredigion County Council for their bad decisions with regard to planning - allowing building on greenfield sites, promotion of road building schemes etc. It was interesting to see that other counties in Wales have councils which behave in questionable ways.

The value of nature

2011-07-26T17:50:00.005+01:00

A common argument against protecting the natural environment is that 'it costs too much'. The idea being that humans make more profit by destroying it. Obviously that is the argument favoured by the exploiters.

A recent report has been published which shows that the argument above is spurious; that protecting our forests and open spaces has financial value.

"The UK's parks, lakes, forests and wildlife are worth billions of pounds to the economy, says a major report. The health benefits of merely living close to a green space are worth up to £300 per person per year, it concludes. [...] Some figures emerge with precision, such as the £430m that pollinating insects are calculated to be worth, or the £1.5bn pricetag on inland wetlands, valued so high because they help to produce clean water."

Read more about it here.

The view of CIN is mixed on this. Without doubt, anything that could help to prevent another natural environment from being cut down, drained, despoiled or built on is useful. Every tool helps, and to the idiots who see everything in financial terms this may be considered and therefore help. On the other hand the natural environment has intrinsic value too. Benefits that can't be costed and value to beings other than humans. It is ridiculous that human civilisation has regressed to the point that everything is seen as being in relation to us, owned by us, with the only question being, "What will we do with this?" Just because we have the power to do something does not mean that we have the moral authority to. Any educated child knows the difference between "Can I?" and "May I?" One of the final sections of the BBC article makes a good point though:

Ian Bateman, an economist from the University of East Anglia who played a principal role in the analysis, said that putting a single price on nature overall was not sensible. "Without the environment, we're all dead - so the total value is infinite," he said.

Nant y Moch wind farm

2011-07-09T16:17:00.006+01:00

Many people have heard of the controversy that the proposed Nant y Moch wind farm presents. On the one hand it would produce renewable electricity and is far better than nuclear; but on the other hand it will lead to c.285 ha of tree felling, access roads through forests, road widening, impact on rights of way and bike trails, damage to land and habitats, creation of on-site electricity sub-station, and will affect a historic landscape (though to be honest that seems to be the least important issue, since the original landscape would have been fully forested, not the bare hills of today).
The wind farm would have 64 turbines, most of which would be 146 metres high, covering a site of 4780 ha. The case for the development can be found on the developers' (SSE Renewables) website here; the opposition is mostly led by the Cambrian Mountains Society. SSE Renewables are currently running a consultation on the proposed wind turbine near Nant y Moch/Plynlumon/Talybont, and the closing date for responses is Friday 15th July. Respond to: eluned.lewis@sserenewables.com or Eluned Lewis, SSE Renewables, Room 101, Y Plas, Machynlleth, SY20 8ER. Though bear in mind that SSE Renewables stands to make a huge profit if the scheme goes ahead, so they are not going to retract the plans however much opposition there is.

The Cambrian Mountains Society say:

"It is important to appreciate that this is not an opportunity for formal objection to the proposal. The developers are obliged to consult, and in theory they may change what they do in response to the feedback they get. ... Later SSE will produce a full and formal application to the IPC backed by a detailed Environmental Statement. Only then will it be possible to consider the proposal in full, and only then will it be possible to make formal Objections to the IPC, who will either issue a development consent order, or refuse to do so."

Either way, if you have feelings one way or the other, best to state your views, even if it's a brief email to SSE - but keep a copy and use it for the formal consultation later as well.

Some issues to consider

The proposed site has otters and water voles, bats, and lots of other special wildlife and habitats e.g. peatbogs, lichens. Construction could last 2.5 years and public rights of way could be closed in the area (4780 ha) during that time. The proposed access route through Nant Y Arian forest includes widening areas that include some of the mountain bike trails.
Many people are against the proposal because of: the huge scale and size of the wind farm proposed; destruction to local habitats and trees; road widening necessary to transport all the parts and the resultant destruction of previously unspoilt green areas; destruction of the environment around access sites e.g. at Bwlch Nant y Arian; negative impact on cycling routes through the site area, including temporary and permanent closure and moving of cycle trails; negative impact on environment in general for walkers including temporary closure of public rights of way; negative impact on whole landscape.

What are the alternatives?

The future is in microgeneration. Construction of small local generation renewable energy for local communities. This would include solar water heating, solar electricity and wind turbines.
More single turbines at localised sites. There are many schools and other institutions that could host these in every village and town.
Solar panels could be installed on all large institutions e.g. university buildings, local hospital, schools, council buildings, etc, as well as home generation.
Siting such infrastructure in ‘urban’ areas is far more acceptable than placing it in areas that are considered of national environmental and historic significance.
Planning to curb population growth (and the consequent increased demand for energy) is the issue politicians are too cowardly to face.

Have your say about the forests

2011-07-08T17:43:00.005+01:00

A few months ago the government were convinced to abandon their plans to sell our forests. However the forests could still be at risk. When the government abandoned their forest sell-off plans, they said they'd set up an “independent panel of experts” to help decide the future of our woodlands. Now, the panel is up and running. They’ve said they want to hear ideas from thousands of us about the best way to protect our beautiful forests.

The panel has just started work, but they answer to the same minister who cooked up the plans to sell the forests in the first place. So although the panel could make sensible plans for our woodlands’ future, they could be under pressure to rubber-stamp more sell-offs. Together, we can stop that happening.

We’ve got until the end of July to answer their questions about the woodlands. If you can take two minutes to answer the panel's questions then a flood of messages will show the panel that the public wants our forests protected, not sold off to private companies. The questions the panel are asking aren't complicated and you don't need to be an expert to answer them. Anybody who cares about the forests can have a say. Find the questions here.

UK badger persecutors again

2011-07-05T10:17:00.003+01:00

The press reports that Caroline Spelman, the Environment Secretary, will recommend that badgers be culled in England in a misguided attempt to curb bovine tuberculosis (bTB). However the slaughter of thousands of healthy badgers will not make a significant difference to the incidence of bTB yet will, in some instances, make the situation worse.

There has been conclusive scientific evidence, the result of the near 10-year £50 million taxpayer-funded research programme by the Independent Scientific Group (the ISG), that killing large numbers of badgers would have no meaningful impact on the spread and control of this disease, that culling badgers would have no meaningful effect on the control of bTB and that farmers should concentrate on improved cattle controls. In the last decades of the 20 century bTB began to increase following a marked relaxation of movement controls introduced, the intensification of dairy farms and the growing trend towards large herds and over wintering them in sheds and barns. These are the issues that need to be resolved, and badgers should not be used as a scapegoat.

The Badger Trust has put together a Q&A factsheet here, and Badger Watch have suggested action here.

More pressure on greenfield sites in Aberystwyth

2011-06-25T17:37:00.006+01:00

Depressing news - more greenfield sites under threat for housing. As one of the comments on Alun's blog points out (and we have also stated numerous times), population is one of the key problems that leads to demand for housing and therefore loss of precious greenfield sites forever. All this on top of the Aberystwyth University post!

Aberystwyth University dissections

2011-06-20T19:07:00.004+01:00

In our last post we briefly mentioned the animals killed or experimented on at Aberystwyth University. Since then a few students have contacted us complaining about the cruelty that they felt was involved. One student sent details of how they were forced into doing animal dissection at Aberystwyth University against their will. We have included (with permission) an anonymised version of their email below which shows the embedded cruelty behind closed doors.

"It was a horrendous ordeal ... I was pressured into doing it, along with my peers, and threatened that I would fail the practical if I didn't - hence also failing the module, and as a compulsory module it would mean I would be unable to complete the degree that I’d already spent thousands of pounds on. We were being forced to do dissections or lose 15% of our grade, or told to change degree schemes.

I contacted many organisations such as PETA, VIVA and Interniche for help, hoping that if we could make a stand it would pave the way for future generations and we could save the lives of hundreds of mice and fish and other creatures.

This was one response:

“I am forwarding your email to InterNICHE (the International Network for Humane Education) and to another friend who is very experienced in this area, who should be able to help you find the best methods to cover your particular course without harming animals. The InterNICHE website also has a large amount of information about conscientious objection, and on the research that has been done showing that learning outcomes from alternatives are at least as good as those from harmful animal use”.

However, no matter how much I objected, and even when I produced some alternative virtual dissections for the lecturers to consider, they simply said it is too costly and I was laughed out of the office. The emailing and resistance continued for a couple of months. It was a horrible time for me. A very sad time. I also tried speaking to other lecturers to find out the policies and was told that 'hopefully' they will get a licence from the home office to breed their own mice etc, to kill and dissect at university. All I could do was pray this did not happen. Oh and according to your stats or the origin of these animals, the lecturers must have been lying to me, they assured us nothing had been killed for the purpose of the lab work."

Not all education is good. That which tries to justify the use of other species in this way only teaches people that they should try to quash their compassion, a lesson which should shame any organisation.

Aberystwyth University super bundle

2011-06-11T12:12:00.031+01:00

Many apologies to all the people who have sent text and photos in over the last few months about Aberystwyth University - we do look at everything we are sent but sometimes are just too busy to post it all. Nonetheless we're incredibly grateful to our roving reporters and supporters. Sadly we've had lots of complaints about Aberystwyth University building on greenfield sites in the past - skim through some previous posts on the subject. We get so many emails on this subject that it is obviously one of huge concern, as is the issue of overdevelopment in general. We have decided to feature some of the things we have been sent, though this risks becoming another large blog post! After all, Aberystwyth University rates as awful on environmental grounds - 111th out of 138 universities in the new People & Planet report (see summary in The Guardian). This is not surprising if you look at some of the topics we have covered in previous posts, which is only a selection of what we receive, which in turn is only a selection of the things the university is doing. So much is hidden or behind closed doors that if it was included as well things would look even more bleak. Anyway, on with the summary of news we have been sent about the University's continued building projects, animal killing and high salaries to the top dogs... Apologies if some of it is a bit out of date now, we only have so many volunteers and hours in the day...

Building on greenfield sites
One supporter submitted some FOI requests to the university in February. Their first request was asking how many trees and bushes the university has cut down each year for the last 5 years and the area of greenfield sites built on for university business (departments, car parks, accommodation etc) for the last 5 years. The response from Aberystwyth University was:

"Under section 1(1)(a) of the Act I can confirm that the University does not keep records of the number of trees or bushes that are cut down."

Is it any wonder that they do so badly on green issues? They don't even record this kind of vital data. In which case they have no way of knowing the rate at which they are destroying green spaces. It shows what a poor state the university management is in. They also said:

"The University has not built anything on Greenfield sites in the last 5 years. The University has built on Penglais Campus but this is not classed as a ‘Greenfield’ site."

As our previous posts show, the university HAS built on a wide range of greenfield sites and continues to do so. Penglais Campus has woods and parks and grassed areas and meadows - all of which are greenfield sites. It is very convenient for the university that they change the definition of 'greenfield areas' to exclude their own 'greenfield areas'. This type of dishonest spin is part of the reason so many people are angry at the university.

New accommodation blocks elsewhere in Aberystwyth
In March 2011 it was announced that the university was going ahead with a £45 million new development of accommodation for 1000 student units located on land immediately behind Pentre Jane Morgan, to start in autumn 2012. This had already been predicted by other local bloggers.

This is where the new halls will go, opposite the car park mentioned below. Bye bye green spaces. Hello concrete and traffic.

Note that we are not against accommodation for students. We are against the stupidity and waste of money and resources in knocking down halls in one place, then building new ones elsewhere on greenfield sites. There is a shortage of housing for the students because the university chose to knock down halls (Llanbadarn Campus) rather than repair them. Obviously the university can't plan a budget and leave aside a figure for maintenance. Instead they knock them down then go to WAG and say they need accommodation and ask for funding, and WAG stupidly agrees. Aberystwyth University mismanagement created this situation, why should it get bailed out by tax payers again? All because of some stupid decision to centralise on Penglais campus. The greatest idiocy is that it will take just as long to walk to Penglais departments from the new building site as from Llanbadarn Campus!

At the very least they should re-build on the site of the old halls on Llanbadarn Campus instead of destroying a huge greenfield site. Otherwise we are seeing a huge waste of money and resources at a time when people are losing their jobs. This is what happens when decisions are made by highly-paid university officials (see later for a note on their salaries).

University waste: from the Cambrian News, Thu 3 Feb 2011, page 4

New accommodation blocks on Penglais Campus
The university is going to move car parks and build more halls on Penglais (despite having knocked down halls rather than repair them on Llanbadarn Campus). Planning application A100874 for 'Erection of 60-bed student accommodation block, together with associated works' at 'Cwrt Mawr, Penglais Campus'. Approved Subject to Conditions 24/12/2010. This was not discussed with the wider community, another decision from behind closed doors with these applications sneaking through.

The planning application - note the huge area that will be built on. Inevitably the university will then make new car parks elsewhere on campus, as it has done in the past, so more green areas lost. Tip: check planning applications with this clunky 'interactive mapping tool'

On a satellite view it is easy to get an idea of all the trees and green area that will be built on.

The view from the road showing the mature green area that will be destroyed. Not so nice for the people who live around there.

Work in progress, 20th June 2011

20th June 2011 - expanding the concrete sprawl

April - University digs up another field
A student sent this to us. They emailed the university Estates department as follows, but never got a reply.

To: Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 4:28 PM Subject: Softball Hello, I was with some friends heading to the sports centre and we passed the patch of land between Pantycelyn and the big car park and noticed it has all been dug up. What is happening to that green area? We've played softball there in the past since it was such a nice spot surrounded by bushes.

This is typical of Aberystwyth University - you rarely see a planning notice for anything, certainly not with any detail in, then suddenly fields have been dug up or built on. See images below, all from during April. There are some beautiful green areas around there, it looks like the university has plans to expand onto those now. Update 15 June 2011: see comments below for news on this. If the University Estates department actually replied to emails then things like this could be resolved much more quickly.

Yet more building plans - this time the University Sports Centre
Yes, there is yet another building project going on.

See this green area, part of an area already built on three times extended? The university intends to build on that last green space.

Here is the planning notice about it.

More construction past the TFTV building
We were sent these photos from 31 March 2011 - we're not sure what is going on here but lots of bushes and trees appear to have been cut down by the university.

Huge carpark on greenfield site
A huge carpark of 200 spaces was built on fields for the joint use of Bronglais Hospital and Aberystwyth University opposite/just after Pentre Jane Morgan hall.

This is what the site looked like before it was built on

This is what it looks like now. A huge waste of money, destroying large green spaces for a car park, and promoting anti-environmental car use. Apparently there are plans for ANOTHER car park here.

New medical centre
We were told that the new medical centre, which is destroying a huge greenfield area and cutting into the nature reserve/woods has links to the university and the land may have been sold off by the university. Unfortunately we could not get a reply from Aberystwyth University's Estates Department. As usual our email for clarification was ignored. The area is opposite Bronglais Hospital, on Penglais Road, planning ref A050737 for 'Erection of medical centre, creche & new site access' by Gaufron Healthcare.

Photos sent by a supporter: view from Pantycelyn, across Penglais Hill to the new medical centre

The building site

Animal experiments / killing
Another FOI request asked for details of how many animals had been used in experiments and vivisection or killed by the university each year for the last 5 years. It was stated that this would include fish and farm animals (e.g. experiments in using new modified animal feeds at IGER/IBERS); animals used in dissection (e.g. as part of teaching by Biological Sciences); and animals killed or sold for slaughter by the university farms. The university was asked to provide as much detail as possible for each year: types of animal, purpose etc. This is an important topic, since universities in Wales use taxpayers money to fund all sorts of cruel and unnecessary experiments, whilst doing their best to keep these dirty secrets from the same taxpayers, hiding details of what is done, where, and by whom.

The response from the university in March 2011 only went back a few years, they said they did not have accurate data from before that. Very convenient for them, but it raises huge questions about how poorly these things are regulated, and even what is being done with our money.

Most of the cruelty comes about due to the work of the University's Institute of Biological Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS). It should be noted that not only does the university have incomplete records on what it does, but it also "only records information on animal experiments conducted under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 ... IBERS does conduct research using animals that is not covered by the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986" - which therefore excludes a lot of data. As a result all the information below is an underestimate, and the actual figures could be many times higher.

Table 1. Number of animals used in each of the last three years conducted under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 - excludes many other animals

Species	2008	2009	2010	Total
Cattle	80	209	91	380
Sheep	90	12	16	118
Mice	10	143	124	277
Poultry	0	0	40	40

The university also kills or dissects animals as part of teaching. They do not keep full records on this and only provide an estimate, which - as with the other figures - is a minimum amount, not a maximum. An example of some of the other animals killed or used in this way in the period that was asked about:

120 Green Hydra bought in from scientific supplier
120 Mussels [Mytilus Edulis] collected from seashore
50 Common starfish [Asterias reubens] bought preserved from scientific supplier
100 Lugworm [Arenicola marina] bought preserved from scientific supplier
100 Snails [Helix aspersa] collected locally
100 Shore crabs [Carcinus maenas] collected locally
110 Dogfish [Scyliorhinus canicula] bought from local fisherman
110 Bullfrogs [Rana] bought in preserved from scientific supplier
110 Chicks [Gallus domesticus] bought in preserved from scientific supplier
110 Rats [Rattus norvegius] bought in preserved from scientific supplier
50 Mackrel [Scomber scombrus] bought frozen from fishmongers

Obviously the university could use more advanced methods that don't use real animals, as schools should too, but they insist on promoting cruelty. One current student told us that Aberystwyth University is one of the few universities that does not allow an alternative to animal dissection on some courses, and she was forced to do it. This is a good example of institutionally embedded cruelty.

There is more. The university has farms which sell "livestock into the human food chain through conventional licensed abattoirs". If you want an idea of what that involves then watch this video. Again, the university haven't recorded all the data, yet just in the last few years they have sent over 7000 animals to their deaths.

Table 2. Numbers of beef animals and lambs sold into the human food chain by the commercial Farms of IBERS - not complete figures

Year	Beef animals	Lambs
2008	180	2600
2009	240	2100
2010	320	1650

Going back to the point about research, we are seeing huge waste here. For example see this December 2010 university announcement. £3.9 million for this stupid research? The answer is clear without spending all that money - don't mass-farm animals, cut meat out of your diet, and we could be healthier and more civilised and save a chunk of money.

Salaries
One supporter was interested in the salaries of the "top ten most highly paid positions in the university (vice chancellor etc) along with any perks associated with the role such as housing, pension contributions etc. Role titles and salaries are sufficient, not personal names."

This is interesting at a time when the university has decided to charge the maximum of £9,000 for student tuition fees. The university's response is below and they said "these figures cover the Vice-Chancellor, 5 other members of the Senior Management Team and 4 professors". However the information excluded perks (such as the Vice chancellor being given a small mansion in the woods to use as they wish) and expenses so this is an underestimate.

Top ten annual salaries at Aberystwyth University (with pension, excluding perks, expenses, training etc):
£90,608.90
£91,550.03
£100,035.52
£101,739.05
£106,047.43
£109,935.08
£114,449.20
£124,463.94
£135,189.09
£228,147.13
Total for ten staff: £1,202,154

It is less of a surprise now that Aberystwyth University chose to charge students the maximum amount.

We're not the only ones concerned about those running the university voting themselves high salaries. From the Cambrian News, Thu 3 Feb 2011, letters page 16

One day it would be lovely to do blog posts about the university which showed it was cancelling building projects and instead creating more green spaces and woods; was adopting openness and giving people a say in what it did; and turning its back on cruelty to animals. That would be so much nicer for us. We much prefer positive news. One can but dream.

Update 17 June 2011: it is interesting that this post has already had over 300 views from around the world.

Increased pressure to reverse the cruel badger cull

2011-06-02T13:28:00.006+01:00

Joyce Watson, Labour AM for Mid and West Wales, recently sent the letter below to John Griffiths, the new Minister for Environment and Sustainable Development in the Welsh Government. It concerns the former Rural Affairs Minister’s decision to carry out a cull of badgers in west Wales. Thankfully because Plaid Cymru's Elin Jones lost her post there may be an opportunity for positive change, and Elin's plans for cruel and unscientific culls may be overturned. Anyone who cares about badgers will be pleased with the content of the letter.

Dear John,

I am writing to congratulate you on your appointment as Minister for Environment and Sustainable Development. I know that you will bring the same force of direction and diligence that you applied to your role in the previous administration of Wales.

Now we have our new Labour administration, I believe it is important for us to look afresh at decisions made by the previous One Wales administration and to set new priorities.

I must ask you to revisit the previous Rural Affairs Minister’s decision to carry out a cull of badgers in west Wales.

While there are strong feelings on both sides of this debate, a mass cull of a protected species would only be justified if it could be proved that such action would eliminate or substantially reduce the incidence of TB in cattle. I do not believe that this case has been proved.

When the previous Minister launched the consultation on the badger cull order, she stated that through culling alone she expects ‘to have reduced bovine TB in cattle in the area by approximately 22%’, preventing an estimated 83 confirmed herd breakdowns that would otherwise have occurred in the absence of culling badgers in the area.’ But as the Badger Trust have pointed out, an extrapolation of the last two years’ figures, for 2008 and 2009, for Dyfed means that there will be 6,255 breakdowns over 10 years. Therefore, 83 over that period would be 13 in a 1,000, which is not substantial in my opinion.

What we have seen is a reduction in incidences of TB in cattle through improved cattle-side measures. The figures published for the period between January and November 2010 show a reduction of 34 per cent over the equivalent period in 2009. Since 2008, the proportion of cattle slaughtered in west Wales is down by a projected 41 per cent.

This significant improvement has been achieved through improved surveillance, improved cattle disease controls and a regional approach without any badgers having been destroyed.

I urge you to build on the success of the cattle-side measures and to investigate the efficacy and practicability of a wildlife vaccine – an injectable badger vaccine is already available, and this has been shown in laboratory and field trials to reduce badger infectivity by 74 per cent.

I also urge you to heed the findings of the Independent Scientific Group. The Group’s final paper on the results of the randomised badger culling trial found that there is no long-term benefit of badger culling on the incidence of bovine TB in cattle. The paper concludes:

‘Our findings show that the reductions in cattle TB incidence achieved by repeated badger culling were not sustained in the long term after culling ended and did not offset the financial costs of culling. These results, combined with evaluation of alternative culling methods, suggest that badger culling is unlikely to contribute effectively to the control of cattle TB in Britain.’

Good luck in your new post and I look forward to working closely with you on this and other matters, for the benefit of west Wales.

Yours sincerely,
Joyce Watson AM/AC

Flowering Elbows (to go with green fingers)

2011-05-27T14:34:00.002+01:00

We just want to promote an interesting website that we came across recently, Flowering Elbow. They are:

"a small group of people based in Mid-Wales, dedicated to imagining and making better futures. Futures that are rich with creative energy, in which we are empowered to invent, think innovatively and playfully experiment. We will devise solutions to problems big and small and inspire and enable others to do so. Flowering Elbow is committed to progressive environmental and social policies, which, in particular, encourage the re-invention and re-use of materials."

A good partner to CIN then, their website is full of ideas for re-using or making things, go and see!

Nature reserve at Clarach

2011-05-22T17:36:00.003+01:00

Stuck for somewhere to go this summer? How about visiting Coed y Cwm nature reserve woods near Clarach? This was established last year but we didn't report on it at the time. Make the most of these special places, and post any thoughts or experiences from this new 25 acre reserve in the comments below.

Huntsman in West Wales found guilty of battering a pensioner

2011-05-10T11:48:00.005+01:00

Huntsman Huw Green pled guilty at Haverfordwest Magistrates’ Court after being charged with battery against a 75 year old man who was observing the hunt at the time. It shows that violent pastimes (hunting) attract violent people (such as Huw Green).

Mr Green was fined a paltry £55, a £15 victim surcharge and ordered to pay £100 in costs.

Bullfighting campaign

2011-05-07T14:05:00.002+01:00

The excellent League Against Cruel Sports continues with their bullfighting campaign, now backed by Ricky Gervais.

Farmer lets his cows starve to death

2011-05-03T22:06:00.001+01:00

Just came across this - another example modern animal farming compassion.

Badger action in Aberystwyth

2011-04-12T17:37:00.018+01:00

We have been asked to promote a free screening of the short but powerful Pembrokeshire Against the Cull film "Why we believe culling badgers is a really bad idea" at The Morlan Centre, Morfa Mawr, North Parade, Aberystwyth (Next to Spar) on Wednesday 13th April at 7pm. All welcome.

Other Aberystwyth events

Saturday 16th April. Street stall in Aberystwyth town centre (outside Siop y Pethe) 11am to 2pm. The group will be distributing leaflets encouraging voting for anti-cull candidates as well as the current PAC information leaflet. Get copies of all the leaflets here - please consider putting them in your window.
Wednesday 27th April. Street stall in Aberystwyth town centre, as above. 11am to 2pm.
Saturday 30th April. Silent procession through Aberystwyth (complete with grim reaper!) , starting from Elin Jones's constituency office (Plaid Cymru offices) in Pier Street at 11:30 and ending outside the WAG building in Boulevard Saint Brieuc. Please dress in black and/or white and bring flowers. This will be a peaceful and dignified event. Be one of the million against the cull! Update 30th April: The event was huge success with over 50 people taking place in a peaceful procession. One source of amusement was when the procession passed a group of heckling Plaid Cymru supporters: one of the young children of a Plaid Cymru councillor yelled out "Save the badgers!", obviously a very sensible and compassionate child. Sadly he was shouted at by his Plaid Cymru parents when they should have been proud of him...

The group need help and support with all these events. Please contact them if you can give any time, even if only for one event or even if only for a short period. They can make a real difference to the election result. It would only take a 6% swing to oust Elin Jones, for example! Email them at info@dyfibadgergroup.org.

The film can also be seen below.

Crooked cattle farmers

2011-04-08T19:17:00.005+01:00

'Zero grazing' systems - the latest farming trend

The Welsh Assembly Government has used every dirty trick in the book it push badger killing through - ignoring science, ignoring the results of consultations, publishing false information. Read previous posts with the badgers label for details. The truth is that TB was falling due to stricter measures being imposed on farmers and transport. Guess what? Some farmers have been flouting these regulations and defrauding the public in order to increase their profits. The more this has been investigated, the more widespread the fraud has been found to have spread. The result is an increase in TB - not caused by badgers, but selfish and cruel cattle farmers. Read about it here, and keep an eye on the Badger Trust website. When politicians come to your door, make sure tell them what you think of them if they support killing badgers.

In brief: the fraud was uncovered in The Times following investigations by Trading Standards officers who found that some farmers had been keeping dairy cows that have tested positive for TB on the farm and by swapping ear tags have sent less productive cows for slaughter. This fraudulent, criminal activity means that some farmers receive full compensation, paid for by the taxpayer, for animals that are worth a lot less and furthermore are keeping diseased animals on the farm risking spreading the disease within the farm and to neighbouring farms. But this is not the only fraud that has been occurring. In February the owners of the largest dairy herd of 900 cows in the west country were heavily fined for moving cattle under TB restrictions. In the same month a farmer was also heavily fined for moving cattle in breach of TB regulations after admitting to 87 offences and he also asked for a further 102 offences to be taken into account. His son also admitted eight separate offences and asked for 29 others to be taken into consideration.

Ceredigion Animal Rescue and Education

2011-04-02T16:19:00.003+01:00

With the closure of Ty Agored, are there any other animal rescue centres in West Wales? Yes! Here's one that focuses on dogs - Ceredigion Animal Rescue and Education. Their website shows the costs involved in getting a dog 'up to scratch' for re-homing - donations to them are always welcome, as well as re-homing a dog if you can, or volunteering to help out in other ways. Their site includes some happy endings. Ways you can help (from their site):

Can you help transport any dogs? Either just to the vet and back or maybe further?
Could you join the rota for taking phonecalls?
Could you visit the dogs in kennels and walk them?
Could you help out in the shop in Cardigan (or donate anything to it)?
Could you help by fostering a dog?
Would you like to become a member?
Can you make a donation?

See their site for more information on any of these.

Don't vote for badger killers

2011-03-28T21:30:00.006+01:00

Click this image then download and print it as a poster for your window

Our last post had a lot of news about badgers and suggestions for things you can in light of the upcoming wildlife slaughter. The incidences of bovine TB continue to drop without any badgers having been killed.

Pembrokeshire Against the Cull said:

"The latest Bovine tb statistics issued by DEFRA show a decline of 45% in cattle slaughtered due to Bovine tb in West Wales over the last two years. This is by far the most sustained and significant reduction seen for many years.

The introduction of annual testing, pre movement testing, then 6 monthly testing in the IAA together with hitting targets for quicker removal of infected cattle has brought bTB levels down significantly without culling any badgers.

This is a clear downward trend which should not be put at risk by a badger cull which we believe could cause an increase in bovine tb cases in our area. This is excellent news for farmers and taxpayers. If a badger cull had gone ahead last year Elin Jones would have been claiming that culling works, these figures show that the truth would have been very different."

As we covered last time, in the recent Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) 'consultation' on badger killing there were 13,431 responses: more than 11,300 were against a cull. Yet the voice of this massive majority is being ignored by Elin Jones and WAG.

The WAG elections are on 5th May. Politicians want your vote. Ask them about their policies on badger killing. Point out that all the scientific research has clearly proved that killing badgers increases the spread of Bovine Tuberculosis. Remind the candidates that bovine tuberculosis has been decreasing in Wales for over two years due to stricter controls and measures on cattle movements and testing. Put up our poster above. Culling is not needed.

We have written to all of the AMs. So far only Labour have replied, and they are a mixed bag - though at least they did reply. Alun Davies the Labour AM recently wrote to us saying that he supports the killing of badgers, despite the unscientific nature of the cull and all the evidence against the efficacy of one. On the other hand Joyce Watson is also a Labour AM and she is a voice of reason against a cull. In a letter to one of our supporters she wrote:

"I have opposed these proposals from the outset and I have not altered my position since I voted against the cull in 2009. As you will know, the Minister for Rural Affairs issued a written statement on 9th March introducing the Badger (Control Area) (Wales) Order 2011, which will come into force on the 31st March and which will make legal the destruction of badgers within the west Wales Intensive Action Area (IAA). This is despite recent improvements in TB figures following the implementation of measures designed to reduce cattle-to-cattle transmission. As you point out in your letter, the evidence in support [of] the effectiveness of a cull is contentious and open to (mis)interpretation. It is my view that culling badgers at the same time as introducing a suite of cattle-side measures cannot help clarify ‘what works’. And I have put this argument to the Minister on numerous occasions. I have also expressed my serious concerns about the information disseminated by the Government in conjunction with the consultation, particularly the since retracted claim made in a leaflet that was sent to 26,000 homes that previous trials had shown culls could reduce TB in cattle by as much as 50% in six months. Despite this misinformation, figures show that of the 13,413 consultation responses received by the Welsh Assembly Government, only 2,110 were in favour of a cull. For these reasons I supported the actions of my colleagues Lorraine Barrett, Irene James, Peter Black and Jenny Randerson, who tabled a motion to annul the Badger Order 2011. Unfortunately, the motion was defeated in a Senedd vote on Wednesday 23rd March. I remain opposed to the cull, however, and I will continue to express my opposition both inside and outside of the National Assembly for Wales."

Many in the Welsh Assembly Government are undemocratic wildlife killers

2011-03-20T17:46:00.006Z

Many of you may now know that Elin Jones has, once again, ignored science and the voice of the public, and has decided to kill badgers in Wales.

She took the decision after the 'consultation' - inverted commas because the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) just paid lip service to the theory of consulting. Not only were the questions so badly written that a primary school child could have spotted the bias towards the pro-killing brigade, but the greatest affront is that of the 13,431 responses, more than 11,300 were against a cull - yet the voice of this massive majority is being ignored by Elin Jones and WAG because it does not fit the decisions they had already made to renew their attack on Welsh wildlife in an attempt to win votes from a subset of farmers. If you want to see the responses people made to the consultation they can be viewed here. The decision by the Minister can also be viewed on the same page - in Annex 1 Summary. That document outlines how many responses there were.

Is it any wonder that many people feel disenfranchised by modern politics? A small group with vested interests (Elin Jones is from an animal farming background, the same group that wants to kill badgers) go ahead and do what they wish, ignoring any fact which does not fit in with their plans. Facts such as the vast majority of people opposing a cull.

The PAC group (Pembrokeshire Against the Cull) has excellent advice and information on their website and blog. The Badger Trust are also actively looking into the legality of the cull.

The main things to note are:

The killing will start from 31st March when this law comes into effect.
Badgers will be killed in the intensive action areas of Pembrokeshire, Carmarthenshire and Ceredigion. Forced entry will be made on all land. This will be incredibly intimidating for landowners, who will face armed and anonymous killers who gain entry to land against the their wishes through force and police threats.
The WAG elections are on 5th May. AMs in your area will want your vote. Ask ALL the parties and individual AMs what their policies are on badger culling. You may find that your local AM, or prospective candidate is anti-cull, although their party is pro-cull - notable examples include a few Lib Dems like Peter Black who is totally opposed to the cull, whilst Lib Dems in England are supporting localised killing. It is vital that the political parties and all prospective AMs understand that they will not get your vote if their party or their candidate is pro-killing. The PAC website has more information on lobbying your AMs. If you see prospective AMs canvassing in your local town, don't avoid them, go up to them and ask them for their position on badger killing.
Peter Black has tabled a debate - 23rd March - in the Senedd before the Assembly is dissolved prior to the elections. Contact AMs prior to this so they know how you feel.
If you are financially in a position to do so, PAC and the Badger Trust would welcome donations to help fight the cull. They got the last Welsh one stopped in the high courts, and let's hope this one can be stopped too.
There have been significant reductions in the incidence of bovine tuberculosis in Wales over the last two years - this is due to the much stricter controls and measures on cattle movements and testing. Culling is not needed.
Write to Elin Jones, Rural Affairs Minister. Every email or letter has to be answered within 17 working days of receipt. The more letters and emails she receives it will show her how strongly people feel about this. Email her here or write to her at the address here.

Further craziness ensues from the fact that Elin Jones has decided to enact cattle control measures at the same time as the cull. How will she separate one factor from the others? She won't. Because in that situation she won't be able to. And therefore she will falsely attribute any lower bovine TB rates to the cull, not to the real reason: restrictions on transporting cattle around Wales. If they were serious about bovine TB they would also prevent huge-scale intensive dairy farms, which make it so easy for diseases to spread. However that would reduce profits for some of their supporters, so will not happen.

Aber Students Against Cuts

2011-03-16T21:18:00.007Z

In the past we have criticised Aberystwyth University for two issues. The main one is its continuing hollow lip-service to environmental issues, whilst acting like any other selfish organisation - for example, we will soon be covering their plans to build on a huge greenfield site, even though they have a brownfield site that would serve the purpose just as well.

The second issue is the contempt that the university has for the wider community. As an example, we have contacted the Estates Department many times over the years, asking for clarification on different issues. They have never replied to any of our emails. Another example is that a lot of information is kept hidden by the university (number of trees cut down, animals killed in labs etc) unless you go to the trouble of making a Freedom Of Information request - and even then you are generally just told that the information is either not recorded, or can not be given out (if you get an answer at all). No-one is consulted about Aberystwyth University decisions such as whether or not it is a stupid idea to centralsie on Penglais Campus.

This latter culture of 'behind closed doors' annoys everyone. The university does not consult or give people the chance to influence decisions. The topic is mentioned a number of times on this new site by Aber Students Against Cuts. Our last post was about history lessons. This one is about human relations. Until openness and transparency are real outcomes, rather than just empty words, there will continue to be opposition to this apparent arrogance on the part of a publicly-funded body.

Aber Students Against Cuts are holding a 'Free University' on Friday 18th March at the Morlan Centre open to everyone. The programme of events will be running between 10am and 6:30pm. The event will also be a chance to discuss, in the company of students, non-academic staff and local residents, the impact of the latest funding cuts on the University and the wider
community.

The day will be run around three main themes:

1) "What is Free Education? What Are Our Aspirations for Higher Education?"
2) "The Economics of Cuts: Is There An Alternative?"
3) "Campaigning Beyond the University: Are We All In This Together?"

There will also be a discussion session at 1pm on the topic entitled "Effective Campaigning Against Cuts" attended by Jon Antoniazzi (guild president) and Elin Jones AM as well as representatives of UCU and Aber Students Against the Cuts.

For any queries or suggestions, please email aberstudentsagainstcuts@gmail.com.

History lessons

2011-03-13T14:12:00.008Z

Time for a blast from the past. One of the CIN writers dug up an essay they had written over 18 years ago, in February 1993. After initially laughing at how badly written some of it is, the question formed: have things improved much since then? Knowing the environmental problems we faced 18 years years ago, what has human society done to improve matters? In the interest of fostering debate we have decided to post the old piece below. Feel free to email us with thoughts or comment on this post.

DISCUSS SOME OF THE PRINCIPAL WAYS IN WHICH CONTEMPORARY SOCIETIES DAMAGE THE EARTH'S NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND BRIEFLY OUTLINE IDEAS THE GREEN MOVEMENT HAS PUT FORWARD FOR PREVENTING THESE.

In the first part of the essay I will look at the ways in which society damages the environment, then this will be followed up with a look at what preventative measures the green movement believes are needed.

First I will look at the general problem of waste, which is produced by nearly everything we do. It can be solid (thrown onto tips), liquid (enters sewers/watercourses) or gas (goes into the atmosphere). All can cause pollution.

Often waste is dumped in seas and rivers from industry, farms and houses in massive concentrations, poisoning them - and therefore the fish and animals that depend on them. In 1990, 4,680 km of British river were classified by the National Rivers Authority as badly polluted. As human and livestock populations grow the problem will get worse. An example from industry is the release of poisonous chemicals such as mercury and cadmium, which become concentrated in fish, that are eaten by other animals, and the chemicals kill animals at the top of the food chain.

Greenpeace ran a 'No Legal Pollution' tour recently to highlight this problem. They emphasised that pollution kills animals - in 1988, 18,000 common seals in the North Sea were wiped out by a virus. Organochlorine burdens in their bodies were thought to have contributed to the disease. Some seals contained such high levels of poisonous chemicals that the carcasses were classified as toxic waste.

Solid waste from industry and domestic sources is generally not recycled. It is just dumped in quarries or the beds of drained lakes, which rapidly fill up. Often dangerous chemicals are leached out by the rain which then enters water supplies. Also decay produces methane gas (which can ignite). Toxic materials often find their way onto tips illegally as well. This is because there are acute disposal problems for chemical, pharmaceutical and radioactive waste.

Radioactive waste from power stations is a vast problem - where can it go? It always pollutes, and lasts incredibly long lengths of time. The danger was illustrated when the Chernobyl explosion contaminated western Europe.

Gaseous waste comes in three main forms:

i> Carbon Dioxide (CO2) derives from burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas). It is burnt in cars, power stations, and industry mainly. It is a non-poisonous natural chemical, but we produce so much by burning fossil fuels that the amount in the atmosphere has grown and is still growing very fast. CO2 tends to trap the heat of the sun in the atmosphere, like a greenhouse - hence 'greenhouse effect/gases'. This raises Earth's temperature and affects the climate - and therefore agriculture - causing a rise in sea levels as oceans expand and ice caps melt, which leads to widespread flooding.

ii> Acidic gases such as sulphur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen come from combustion of impurities in fossil fuels. The gases mix with water in the atmosphere to create acid, which falls as 'acid rain'. It can travel large distances, and even pollute other countries. Output is so large that Britain alone produced over 6 million tonnes of acid gases in 1988. Acid rain acidifies rivers and lakes, killing fish, birds and some other animals. It can affect human health in high concentrations. It also acidifies soil, and kills trees by lowering their tolerance to disease and parasites.

iii> Ozone-destroying gases come from aerosols, the manufacture and breakdown of foams, refrigerators, air-conditioning units, and solvents. Ozone is similar to oxygen, but unstable and likely to become oxygen if it interacts with other elements. It is mainly high in the atmosphere (20-50 km up), and acts as a shield, stopping ultraviolet radiation from reaching the surface of Earth. But artificial gases such as CFC's (chlorofluorocarbons), can reach that part of the atmosphere as they are long-lived, and turn ozone into oxygen. So holes appear in the ozone layer, and they are getting bigger all the time. The high-energy radiation then getting to the surface can cause skin cancer in most animals. Even a 10% decrease in ozone would produce well over 100,000 cases of skin cancer and 1.75 million cases of eye cataracts throughout the world every year (United Nations Environment Programme report). That does not include the effect on animals, and the disruption to the marine food chain by killing plankton, a basic food source. Millions of tonnes of CFC's are on their way into the atmosphere even now. CFC's are also greenhouse gases.

Cars are used heavily in contemporary societies, and cause problems related to gaseous emissions. There are more cars every year, which not only uses more resources to make and fuel them, but produces more pollution. Road building destroys the natural environment (e.g. the extension of the M6 in the Staffordshire area will destroy large parts of a wood). Also the problem is compounded by 60% of car drivers exceeding the 70 mph upper limit, thereby increasing fuel consumption, emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and nitrogen oxides (Department of Transport).

Resource depletion is another problem. With economic growth we consume more and more energy, minerals etc. Yet they are only a finite resource. It is not clear when shortages will be felt, be they will be one day.

War certainly damages the natural environment and there is always one going on. The amount of damage one bomb can do is phenomenal - the amount of forest destroyed in the Vietnam War was massive. Sometimes environmental damage is done on purpose, such as the oil-fields of Kuwait, burnt in the Iraqi retreat in 1991. This irresponsible act caused massive damage to land, sea, and air throughout Kuwait, Iran and along the Saudi coastline. 50% of the land surface in Kuwait is coated in a black layer of oily soot. The vegetation is destroyed by this and many ecosystems will never recover.

Because contemporary societies often use dangerous substances lots of damage occurs when accidents do (e.g. oil spills). Greenpeace recently concentrated on the Braer tanker which ran aground, spilling oil on to the Shetland coast. The spill threatens thousands of seabirds and mammals still.

Agriculture is a damaging practice. Natural habitats are destroyed to create land for farming, thereby destroying the places where wildlife would live such as hedges and small woods. Also farming leads to increased use of fertilizers and herbicides, which enter watercourses and rivers. They are designed to be harmful, so kill animals and fish, and often end up in our drinking water. Also intensive agriculture drains the land and leads to desertification, as well as contributing to deforestation.

Deforestation is a widespread problem. The destruction of rainforests is also the destruction of wildlife habitats. Deforestation destroys an estimated 50,000 species a year in tropical forests alone: "So acute is the loss that species are being wiped out before we even know they exist" - Jean-Paul Jeanrenaud, a WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature) Forest Conservation Officer. The most recent report by the United Nations' Food and Agricultural Organisation says that 17 million hectares of rainforest a year are being destroyed. The World Bank claims this is an underestimate, the real figure may be 24 million hectares if forest degradation is added to outright loss. And up to 50 million hectares if we also include non-tropical forest. Jean-Paul Jeanrenaud also said "If the destruction continues at the present rate, tropical forests will be wiped out in 40 years". The UK alone has lost 50% of its native woodland in the last 50 years. Deforestation causes climatic change, and leads to soil erosion. This means there is more likely to be famine and drought.

Animals are further threatened by hunting and shooting. Rare animals are sought after more, and therefore likely to be made extinct, as many species have been done in the past. A current species threatened with extinction - though only one of many - is the black rhino. It has suffered a 96% decline since 1970, there are less than 500 left in Zimbabwe. Rhino horn is worth a lot to Taiwanese, Korean and Chinese markets where the horn is used for medicine. The situation is so desperate that conservationists are now even trying de-horning - at a cost Of $1000 per rhino - to prevent them being killed for their horn.

Staying on the topic of animals, we find other ways in which they are exploited, leading to a degradation of the natural environment. Fur farming has definite, adverse effects on the environment. North American mink were first imported in 1929, and escapes were soon reported. In 1957 it was officially announced that they were breeding in the wild. They are now irreversibly part of our fauna. This causes problems as they often carry diseases from fur factories to our wild species such as otters. Mink only threaten Wildlife in areas which have been degraded and polluted by man and therefore which cannot support as many populations of animals; unfortunately many areas like this exist, and mink are very territorial, so damage our native populations.

More damage to the environment comes from fishing: or rather, overfishing. Despite being inefficient (only 0.15kg of fish is harvested in the seas per hectare of ocean per year, and 40% of this is fed to farm animals and factory farmed fish), the world's annual catch is over 80 million tonnes. There are many problems with this. Pollution in the North Sea means half the catch suffers from lesions and tumours. Young fish are caught - fishing being indiscriminate - which severely affects future stocks. Large scale fishing has led to the decimation of many species. Also, fishing takes the food that would otherwise feed other animals such as seabirds. Drift nets can be up to 40km long and cause large scale, indiscriminate slaughter (e.g. 250,000 porpoises and dolphins a year are caught - then thrown back dead as non-target fish). Nearly a million seabirds die in nets. Every year thousands of miles of nets are simply abandoned, and continue to trap and kill. The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates 90% of the world's commercial fisheries are overfished to an unsustainable degree. In the North Sea it has been claimed that a quarter of the entire fish population is removed every year.

Finally, meat production damages the environment as well. Rainforests are being destroyed for this (not just for their wood), which is also destroying the habitats for species, and stops trees from producing oxygen and absorbing carbon dioxide. Millions of trees a year are destroyed to provide cropland for meat production. For example, in Central America 90% of the forest has been cleared primarily for cattle ranching. For every burger eaten, half a tonne of vegetation is lost. 60% of Brazil's forest has been destroyed for cattle ranching. Burning rainforests produce a major greenhouse gas, CO2, and forest burning in Brazil was responsible for 20% of the greenhouse gases released in 1988. This seems even more ridiculous when you consider that livestock are fed while people in the developing world starve in their millions, leading their Governments to adopt environmentally unsound practices (such as growing cash-crops) to try and feed the population. US livestock consume almost twice as such grain as is eaten by the entire American population. In the UK 80% of all agricultural land is now used to feed animals: in fact, half the world's cereal harvest is used to feed livestock. Meat production is extremely inefficient too. It takes 10 pounds of grain to produce 1 pound of intensively reared beef, a mere 6% conversion rate from plant to meat protein. Since WWII there have been 38 major famines, and in 33 of these the West continued to import grain from the starving to feed their cattle. Also a greenhouse gas is produced by cattle - 200 litres of methane per day per cow. Finally, meat production is a major cause of river pollution in Britain - slurry (which is 100 times stronger than human sewage) simply runs into rivers. It contains heavy metals, nitrates and drug residues.

Many Third World countries are in the process of developing, and will cause all the above problems too if they adopt western models of development. What is needed is a new form of development, but is sustainable development possible? That is not for this essay to discuss.

What does the green movement suggest is needed to avoid the pattern of environmental degradation outlined above?

Most environmental groups have learnt to use legislation to get their views turned into action. They lobby governments, official aid agencies and international bodies such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. It is not always easy though. WWF is having a lot of trouble making the Government keep its Rio Summit promises, which are now being 'forgotten'. So by using legislation, we see that the Government is expected to be doing something about environmental degradation.

Many believe laws should be passed to ban environmentally damaging practices, e.g. making hunting and shooting illegal, banning fur farms, making pollution illegal (Greenpeace in particular recently ran a 'No Legal Pollution' tour of the UK), all of which again comes down to the Government's responsibility.

Similarly, using lobbying, pressure groups have learnt to encourage banks to reduce Third World debt; this reduces short-term pressures which lead to deforestation, intensive agriculture etc. There is limited success. In WWF News (Winter 1992 issue), it was announced that National Westminster Bank was funding over 100 projects for them and has also agreed to 'Debt for Nature' swaps - part of a country's debt is cancelled in return for local currency which is spent on conservation.

In this age of mass media, many environmental groups find it a lot easier to get publicity, which drums up support for them and gives them more lobbying power. Many believe very strongly in educating the young, who will be the Government/consumers of the future. WWF and The Vegetarian Society both believe in this.

Moving on, the green movement obviously believes that there should not be so much waste produced. In many cases waste gases can be purified before emission, though this is expensive. And if ozone-destroying gases are not released the ozone layer will eventually heal itself. Unfortunately, many 'substitutes' for CFC's often lead to ozone depletion too e.g. HCFC's (Hydrochlorofluorocarbons), so a total ban is needed. Greenpeace have produced a non-CFC fridge, the 'Greenfreeze' which is 100% ozone safe and can be made on a commercial basis. This shows that the use of chemicals need not be so damaging, though there may not be alternatives for all processes.

Much waste can be recycled, which the green movement believes should be more widespread. What is needed for this is new techniques, suitable markets and collection points. In a similar vein human and animal waste could be used as fertilizers.

Many groups in the green movement, especially Greenpeace, believe that there should be more investment in non-nuclear, non-fossil fuel burning power - again, the Government's responsibility. 90% of all UK Government funding in non-fossil fuel energy goes towards nuclear energy. They claim that up to 10% of our energy requirements could realistically be supplied from renewable sources, much more than the current 2%. If this figure became 10%, we would get: 23,000,000 tonnes less CO2 per year, 160,000 tonnes less sulphur dioxide per year, and 100,000 tonnes less nitrogen oxide per year, which would mean less global warming and acid rain.

Many environmentalists believe we shouldn't use agrochemicals on crops - resources would go further (as the chemicals are based on minerals) and it would prevent a lot of intensive agriculture which exhausts the land, turning it into desert in extreme cases, and promotes deforestation.

Some in the green movement say green consumerism can help solve many problems, i.e. where people only buy things that are less polluting or recycled. So economic growth need not be polluting. Many claim this is proved because most recent growth is in the service sector. However that claim is undermined because this sector includes tourism, which utilises transport that causes pollution (and planes release pollution at the most damaging place, high up in the atmosphere); promotes the building of holiday destinations (that destroy the landscape); and allows tourists to ruin the beaches with their numbers etc.

Others say we need to consume fewer resources and less energy. They say economic growth is not compatible with environmental protection. This is because the capitalist system is inherently competitive, people compete by raising productivity, so growth is necessary. There are too many things being made that we don't need. They would call for radical social change, changing society to small-scale models of production, but for this everyone would need to take part. It would be hard to achieve, as some people don't believe the warnings; some don't care; some are less affected (e.g. because they are rich and can move); and some people profit from pollution (e.g. people who make catalytic converters).

A lot of people concerned for the environment are also vegetarians or vegans, as they believe this avoids supporting environmentally damaging practices. There is enough food to feed everyone on a vegetarian diet. 10 acres of land could feed 2 people on a diet of cattle meat or 61 people on a diet of soya beans. The UK alone could feed 130 million people on a vegetarian diet, or 250 million people on a vegan diet, which is almost five times the current population. So there would not be the intense pressures on the Earth that meat production and overfishing causes, discussed above.

To conclude, most 'greens' believe that the Government should be doing more to protect the environment, and we should aim for reform by lobbying them. They also believe reform can be achieved by green consumerism. Other 'greens' believe this is wrong, radical social change is needed. This seems unlikely to take place though. So, with reform seeming more likely (and hoping that it will be enough), the former kind of environmentalists believe a lot can be achieved by educating the young, reducing Third World debt, promoting recycling, and becoming vegetarian.

REFERENCES
HALL, S. S & HELD, D. & MCGREW, A. eds Modernity and its Futures (1992)
PORRITT, J. & WINNER, D. The Coming of the Greens (1988)
Also lots of information from:
GREENPEACE, Canonbury Villas, London N1 2PN.
LYNX (anti-fur charity), P.O. Box 300, Nottingham NG1 5HN.
THE VEGAN SOCIETY, 7 Battle Road, St. Leonards-on-Sea, East Sussex TN37 7AA.
THE VEGETARIAN SOCIETY, Parkdale, Dunham Altrincham, Cheshire WA14 4QG.
WWF, Panda House, Weyside Park, Godalming, Surrey GU7 1XR.

There goes the neighbourhood

2011-03-01T19:23:00.007Z

Heol y Bont roundabout (Llanbadarn Fawr) being dug up

The large green space within the red triangle has been dug up by Ceredigion County Council so they can build more roads

The roundabout in the map and image above is a mess now that Ceredigion County Council have dug up a huge tract of green land so that they can extend the roads there. Yet more green areas gone, just to make it easier for drivers, thereby encouraging more cars. That is the short-sighted future that Ceredigion County Council and the Welsh Assembly Government envision. They are irresponsibly encouraging car use and destroying greenfield sites just to shave a few seconds off the journeys of impatient drivers, rather than encouraging responsible travel. Ceredigion County Council and WAG are so far from being green that they could hardly be doing a worse job. Again and again we see them giving planning permission for developments on greenfield sites. For a year now CIN has been campaigning to get Tree Preservation Orders on some of the trees in Aberystwyth. However after dragging their heels for all this time Ceredigion County Council has now refused on the basis that they may want to mark those areas for development in their Local Development Plan (LDP). In the current LDP huge areas of Ceredigion are being marked for development by Ceredigion County Council despite objections, and they refuse to offer protection to the very green spaces that need it in case it causes problems for their 'development' plans, or the building developers they work with.

[History lesson: the LDP is a plan which has been in development for over ten years, starting off as a Unitary Development Plan (UDP). It has been in development for so long that areas which weren't even earmarked for 'development' in the original plan have now been built on.]

The Welsh Assembly Government and Ceredigion County Council certainly aren't responsible organisations. In the referendum on Thursday anyone caring about the environment should vote 'No' to giving any more power to those irresponsible people who are mis-governing Wales. Otherwise their increased powers are likely to see the best things about Wales destroyed forever.

The horrible first site of Aberystwyth thanks to Welsh Assembly Government and Ceredigion County Council

An ex-greenfield site - plenty more expected in the near future if you somehow missed this one

Is more evidence needed?

2011-02-27T14:39:00.003Z

The Department of Health in the UK recommends people to cut down their meat intake to reduce their risk of bowel cancer. Good news! There has been a long record of evidence for this but rarely has this turned into advice or recommendations - because the Government is scared of the powerful farming lobby. But people's health is important and it's good that they are being told the truth about their diet, even if the recommendations are still too weak. The advice comes from the Scientific Advisory Commission on Nutrition for the government. More here.

UK forests saved!

2011-02-21T21:03:00.002Z

That was the fastest victory yet! The proposed sell-off in our last post has been 'axed'. The House of Commons speech can be found here. Lots of organisations are celebrating.

Save the UKs forests

2011-02-08T17:53:00.005Z

Image from the Woodland Trust

The UK coalition government wants to privatise and sell off the public forest, currently managed by the Forestry Commission. There's no knowing what private companies could do - unsustainable logging, blocking public access (many public rights of way have been lost under private ownership of former Forestry Commission land), destroying wildlife habitats etc. It could also result in 30 million trees being cut down.

Public woods are beneficial not just for the income and products that come from sustainable logging, but also the huge benefits in people getting out in the open, walking, cycling, riding, enjoying nature, getting fit, and valuing wildlife. Private ownership could mean the loss of all these benefits and seems counter to many agendas such as encouraging the nation to be healthier and fitter, and a better appreciation of nature. Forests should be maintained for the nation as a whole (including the wildlife that makes its home there), not for the short-term profit of a minority of companies. Although it may only relate to English woodlands, if it goes ahead then it doesn't rule out it happening in Wales too.

Forests are a priceless carbon storage resource and essential to the Government's efforts to achieve climate change mitigation targets. At 9% the level of forestation in England is one of the lowest in Europe and 69% of forest is already privately-owned.

Read more in The Guardian, or on The Woodland Trust's media pages.

What can I do?
First of all, sign the online petition. It has almost reached the target of half a million names!

You could also write to your MP about this and ask them to vote against it in the Public Bodies bill (find your MP here).

Finally respond to the official UK consultation.

Construction continues

2011-01-16T13:16:00.012Z

It has rained a lot recently, and many people in Aberystwyth have been heard grumbling about flooding. However in most cases it is not the rain that is the problem - it is the continuous human development of green spaces, roads and buildings covering hills that would have absorbed huge amounts of water, leading to the combined problems of run-off and compression from the weight of developments squeezing water out. Both lead to flooding lower down and loss of topsoil. Problems that get worse as we cover more and more green spaces in concrete.

We often get sent bits of news about Aberystwyth University, since it is such a large employer and land-owner in the area, and therefore has such a large opportunity to improve or degrade the natural environment. Unfortunately most of the news is not good: building extensions, tree cutting and developments on woodland. What has been the recent news? Are we seeing any slowdown in the university's publicly-funded building projects?

New IBERS building on Penglais campus
Work on this Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences building started at the end of August and is apparently expected to take sixty weeks to complete. The development is between the Cledwyn and Edward Llwyd buildings. See the image below, from the Aberystwyth University Estates website.

Before construction of the IBERS building (1)

Before construction of the IBERS building (2)

Construction site now

Unfortunately, as part of the construction a greenfield site has been built on for a contractor compound near the Cledwyn Bridge.

The 'contractor compound' before - open green spaces

The same view now - built on

Just in case you thought it was still grass inside the contractor compound - no, the grass is now gone. Presumably the university will later use this as a car park or space for another building.

A talent for destruction?

It doesn't look so considerate

Back in February 2010 the Director of IBERS announced proposals to press ahead with this multi-million pound building programme. At the same time it was announced that IBERS was facing a funding deficit of £2.4m and the Institute identified the need to lose up to 70 existing full time equivalent posts. In a later announcement the university said "We now expect no more than 61 posts to be deleted with no more than 34 members of staff to be made redundant as a result of this process." Mad isn't it? Millions are spent on a new building yet a huge number of staff are lost due to lack of money.

More tinfoil shacks at the Arts Centre
Yes, the university is building yet more of the bacofoil sheds where there used to be a wood.

"Yes, they really blend well into the natural environment..."

That used to just be a view of thick woodland

Other green spaces
Construction (and the inseparable destruction) has a wider impact than just the site itself. On Penglais Campus the university has a large area of land which has been cleared for storing piles of rubble and soil from construction projects, and trees which it has cut down. It is no surprise that the water run off from Penglais onto the nearby footpath is heavy enough to regularly flood and damage it.

Entrance to the storage area

All this construction is a good example of one of the ways in which we are ruining the global environment. Trees cut here, buildings on greenfield sites there, road extensions connecting them. Surely a civilised society would be cutting back on this kind of activity, not increasing it? There is a distinct lack of intelligence in humanity's endless growth. Then again, when universities can't even get basic grammar right (see above - missing apostrophe on Aberystwyth University signs, as confirmed by the APS) then perhaps it is not surprising.

Tree cutting on Penglais Campus last week...

...including a healthy tree that was over 47 years old according to the rings. No wonder there is water runoff when the plants which best prevent it are cut down.

Good news to finish
We may be losing green spaces at a fast rate but at least (for now) a meadow has been saved in Gwynedd, North Wales after a fourteen year battle. It is obviously harder work to save green spaces than to lose them, but generally in life that is the case for things of value. Lots to think about the next time it rains...

Update 29th January 2011: An interesting suggestion in the comments below, any mileage in this? Keep sending us emails or post a comment.

Badger snippets

2011-01-04T14:13:00.004Z

Some recent news from Pembrokeshire Against The Cull.

Bovine TB rate dropping - without a cull!
DEFRA have published statistics for incidence of bovine TB in Wales up to the end of September 2010. These continue to show the incidence is declining overall in Wales. An estimated projection shows a drop of approximately 29% on 2009. But most importantly, the drop is even more pronounced in Dyfed - the area that contains the Intensive Action Area where there was a 34.8% reduction in 2010! This shows that a cull is unnecessary, as well as cruel and unscientific.

BBC blog comments
The BBC's Nature UK blog asked for views on culling. Have a look at some of the comments!

Travel by public transport

2010-12-29T13:36:00.006Z

Transport Direct's CO2 Emissions Calculator

Private car transport is the least environmentally-friendly way to travel. For short distances walking, running or cycling are best; and for longer distances public transport offers a lower environmental impact (as well as the option of reading and relaxing in a way that you can't when you are driving!).

If you are planning on using public transport in Wales then Traveline Cymru is one option. It lets you find out about the various journey options available to you, though doesn't let you compare ticket prices.

A better option may well be Transport Direct since that site lets you compare the CO2 emissions of different journeys. Of course that is only one measure of impact, but it is a start, and can be a powerful education tool for use with children. This site also has a cycle route search.

Welsh Assembly Government lies

2010-12-18T13:15:00.004Z

The Welsh Assembly Government made a false claim in favour of culling badgers an official leaflet sent to 26,000 homes in a proposed badger cull area during their consultation - something only admitted and covered in the press after the consultation was over. As a result of this (whether dishonest tactic or inept mistake) there will be more pro-cull responses based on the false information spread by the Welsh Assembly Government. Can we really trust these people? It seems that, on top of their bad science and bloodthirsty primitive prejudice we can add either ineptitude or dishonesty. Their pro-cull arguments are shown up for what they are politically-motivated rubbish. More information here.

New site - Badger Protection League

2010-12-11T13:27:00.003Z

The Badger Protection League is an independent website supported by many societies, groups, VIP’s and Celebrities, set up to fight against the proposed killing of thousands of badgers in England and Wales from May 2011 onwards. The badgers will be killed despite the protection legislation afforded to them.

To help out go to their site for more information; follow our coverage of the badger situation; and respond to the WAG consultation by 17th December. Our Delicious account also has many useful badger links.

Badgers update

2010-11-18T20:56:00.005Z

Don't forget to respond to the badger consultations (the WAG Public Consultation on badger culling in West Wales and the Defra Consultation on culling in England).

Aberystwyth Against the Cull organised a stall in Aberystwyth town centre recently and achieved 114 completed responses in just a few hours! Their newsletter said:

"The reaction from the general public was overwhelmingly supportive and it is quite clear that most people are against the cull. It's also clear that most people are well informed about the issues and are able to see the increasingly unsubstantiated and irrational nature of the arguments in favour of a cull."

They are organising another session in the town centre this Saturday (20th Nov) from 11am-2pm outside Siop y Pethe, and also another one up at the University on Thursday week (25th November).

Anyone who can join them and lend a hand will be very welcome. The more helpers they have, the more responses they can help people to make. Even half an hour can make a big difference and can also allow someone else to take a quick break. Contact Aberystwyth Against the Cull for more details or simply turn up on the day.

Bad school science

2010-11-13T14:55:00.008Z

From a recent Secondary School Update by
the PETA Foundation - click the image to read it

Some schools still favour old-fashioned dissection in teaching science, despite the fact that it is not mandatory and there are far superior - and cruelty-free - alternatives.

In Penglais School (Aberystwyth) we were recently told that in years 12 and 13 there is some dissection of sheep hearts and kidneys and fish gills which is the default option - if science students do not want to do this then they have to opt-out. As the Penglais School Head of Science said in an email to us: "This does not disadvantage them [the students] as they can obtain the same information from books, models and computer simulations". This begs the question: why not switch the default to the cruelty-free option then? If the school moved to alternative methods for everyone then all students would be treated equally without involving the taking of life or slaughterhouse by-products, and there are other benefits.

PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) have a Foundation for education. The site has materials for pupils as well as teachers, for example see the links to resources if you scroll down to 'science' here. The site also covers other education topics such as implementing Meat-Free Mondays in schools (as a cross-curricular global citizenship project) and resources on other topics that teachers can order for free, so is well worth a look.

Traws Cambria consultation

2010-11-06T18:29:00.009Z

The Welsh Assembly Government are taking a week out from persecuting wildlife to seek views about the TrawsCambria network. The consultation is open until the 12th December and you can respond by email or post (they have not provided an online option).

We recommend that you respond to the consultation if you want to see improved public transport options. Possible things to mention include the following.

The need for external cycle racks at the front of buses. Arriva has some buses with racks - but passengers are not allowed to use them. Arriva put them on the backs of the buses, then decided they weren't usable because the driver had to get out to check them, and if the bus lane was on the main road they said it was a risk that a car could hit the cyclist as he put his bike on. So that project was a huge waste of money. Both problems are avoided with front-mounted bike racks. Many buses going to the middle of nowhere have hardly any passengers and have to be subsidised or cut. Yet if they had cycle racks and cyclists could then get to those places it would increase the number of passengers. Cyclists wouldn't mind paying an extra pound or two per bike.

The need for a guarantee that passengers with folding bikes would be allowed on the bus. CIN spoke to Arriva buses customer support on 24th August 2010. They pointed out that even folding bicycles are only allowed on the bus at the bus driver's discretion. Therefore those people trying to be environmentally-friendly and socially-conscious by planning days out or holidays that combine public transport with cycling could face these situations:

They could plan a cycling holiday, book leave, book accomodation, pack etc - then at the bus stop get refused access with the folding bike. Holiday cancelled.
They could go somewhere on the bus with a folding bike, but then not be allowed back on with their bike for the return journey at the end of the day, leaving them stuck in the middle of nowhere with night coming on.

Improved fare information is needed: both inside the buses and on websites. At present it seems to vary from day to day and driver to driver.

Clear and simple ticket options. Why is the return ticket from Aberystwyth to Carmarthen the same price as the single? (£4.70). If the prices of returns and singles are so similar, why not just make every ticket a return ticket and give people more options?

Improved facilities for long journeys. In 2005 Arrive switched from the 701 service to the X40. The 701 service included proper coaches with toilets. A four hour journey from Aberystwyth to Cardiff was at least comfortable. However the replacement X40 service is just a normal bus with inadequate space and uncomfortable seating – not good on a long journey. No toilets and no timetabled toilet breaks - so if you travel from Cardiff to Aberystwyth (or vice versa) you can't risk drinking for many hours before you set off, leaving you dehydrated by the end of the journey.

More direct services between Aberystwyth and Swansea/Cardiff. Many people just want to get on a bus at one end of a journey and get off at the other, without having to change seats or means of transportation. However the number of direct services keeps getting cut. This process began in 2005 when Arriva dropped the Sunday morning return from Cardiff to Aberystwyth, leaving only the Sunday evening return, which was also made an hour later! So anyone wanting to travel north now would get home around ten hours after they could have done on the old 701 service. The Friday 5pm direct service from Aberystwyth to Swansea was cut completely back then too, yet it was a useful time for those wishing to go to south Wales for the weekend, and avoided having an early start on the Saturday.

93% against a badger cull

2010-10-31T12:31:00.001Z

Good results from the BBC Countryfile magazine, viewed today:

WAG response to report on land use and climate change in Wales

2010-10-29T15:15:00.006+01:00

The Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) land use and climate change group have responded to a recent report on land use and climate change in Wales. The report was:

"an assessment of the science relating to emissions from the agriculture, land use and food sectors in Wales and outlines a way forward for these sectors to achieve significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions by 2040. ... Existing evidence suggests that agricultural operations and land use changes contribute around 11% to Wales' total GHG [GreenHouse Gas] emissions - or a ~net 5,200 kt CO2e. Of this, about 45% is in the form of CH4 from ruminant animals" (pxxix)

The report lists five scenarios, one of which - Scenario 3 - is very interesting. It is based on major imposed cuts of around 60-70% in ruminant animal numbers, as has been proposed by the Tyndall Centre as part of a package of measures to achieve emission reduction rates of 6-9%/year for Wales. The scenario calls for drastic reductions in ruminant animal numbers, as they are the major contributors to greenhouse gas emissions in the land use sector, as well as sources of dairy and red meat products which are seen as being damaging to public health (pxxxii). Scenario 4 is a less extreme version of this. Predictably, the WAG group decided that Scenario 3 was "not considered to be practical" and ignored it.

The report makes over 40+ recommendations (some of which WAG only partially accepts or rejects), but, from a first reading of the report, it seems that no recommendations mention the HUMAN diet - reducing our animal intake in our diets would have a far greater, and easier effect, than tinkering around the edges, and subjecting animals to zero-grazing. It is evident that the farming lobby is very powerful in WAG. WAG summarised the report as emphasising "maintaining intensive dairy, sheep and beef sectors" - which shows how blinkered the whole of WAG is.

The report can be accessed here and WAG's response to the recommendations here.

Respond to badger consultations

2010-10-17T18:33:00.007+01:00

Badger and cub killed on a farm by using a snare

We recently covered the UK and Welsh Assembly Government's attempts to spend huge sums of money to kill protected wildlife (badgers).

UK Defra Consultation
The UK Defra Consultation is open until 8th December.

[Update: 21 October 2010] The Badger Trust will be printing guidance leaflets for the Defra UK consultation - it is important that this is distributed as widely as possible and they would be grateful if people who would like supplies of the leaflet would advise the Badger Trust office of their requirements. E-mail staff@badgertrust.org.uk to say how many leaflets you would like, the name and address where they are to be sent. The leaflets can be handed out at meetings or events, put through letter boxes, included with newsletters or any correspondence to members, left with friendly shopkeepers etc.

The Badger Trust have now taken scientific and legal advice on the Defra consultation, and considered what it will mean for the badger population in the UK if the proposed cull takes place. Slaughtering protected wildlife is not the answer to dealing with bovine TB. [CIN note: giving up dairy products is a great answer though!]

The advice notes on the Defra Bovine TB Consultation are available here. Note that they are just guidance, so use your own words and arguments - this reduces the chance that Defra will choose to disallow your submission.

WAG Consultation
The WAG Consultation is open until 17th December.

Elin Jones, Minister for Rural Affairs, is consulting on a new Badger Control Order 2010. Like the 2009 Order, which was ruled unlawful earlier this year, if passed this will allow the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) to kill badgers in north Pembrokeshire and adjacent parts of Ceredigion and Carmarthenshire - known as the IAA (Intensive Action Area). Their proposed action is, to enforce access to all land within the area, and to cull around 1400 badgers, just in the first year, by cage trapping and shooting, or free-shooting. The cull would take place annually in spring, summer and autumn for at least 5 years. WAG have ruled out the use of vaccination as part of the current TB Eradication Programme, although an injectable badger vaccine is available now and is an option in England. (Oral badger vaccine is also being trialled and cattle vaccination is on the horizon.) They have not addressed the issue that culling will make the future use of vaccination more difficult because it increases the prevalence of TB in the badger population. Nor have they considered the many other detrimental impacts of culling, such as the negative effects on communities, tourism and other industries, and the reputations of farming and Wales itself. It is absolutely critical that as many people as possible respond to this WAG consultation.

The consultation questions are tricky (many, many responses to the last consultation were discounted, so please take a little time to get yours right). The new PAC Website Consultation page has guidance and also a blank pro forma response form with answers for those people who may not have much time.

In short, here's how to make sure your response will be counted.

Head your response clearly - 'Response to Consultation on Badger Control in the Intensive Action Area' - so there can be no doubt that it is a response to this consultation. Put this in the email subject lines and at the top of the email itself, as the first line of a paper response etc.
Answer each of the 7 specific consultation questions asked. Set your answers out clearly against the relevant question number. Be direct about your opinion re: the proposed statement / actions.
State yes or no as appropriate - and then explain why. (Last time about 1600 emails and other correspondence sent to WAG opposing plans to kill badgers were not counted as consultation responses. If you don't address the questions your response might be classed as ordinary correspondence.)
Point out any flaws and skews in the consultation in your response.
Make your response individual, whenever possible.
Put your name and address on - sign and date it. You can ask WAG not to publish your name, address and email.
Keep a copy for yourself (and please send a copy to PAC - PAC, PO Box 65, Cardigan SA43 9AD or info@pembrokeshireagainstthecull.org.uk).
Send it to reach WAG by 17 December latest - to TB Team, Office of the Chief Veterinary Officer, Department of Rural Affairs, Welsh Assembly Government, Cathays Park, CF10 3NQ or by email to bovinetbconsultations@wales.gsi.gov.uk

National Trust support killing
The National Trust have done a 'U turn' and are now going to allow badger killing on their land. In a truly dispiriting interview, a senior figure from the National Trust said on BBC Radio 4's Farming Today that they agree with killing badgers. Let them know what you think of their cruel policy.

Why licensing farmers to kill badgers will not work

Government spent £50m on a 10 year badger culling trial supervised by the Independent Scientific Group (ISG) which stated that: “licensing farmers to cull badgers will risk increasing and spreading bTB in cattle”.
The Government’s own badger culling trial showed that there are profound negative impacts from culling. Although a sustained and co-ordinated 4-5 year cull led to modest falls in cattle TB in the core of the cull area, there was an increase in cattle TB on the periphery and culling led to an increase in the prevalence of TB in the local badger population. This is known as the perturbation effect.
The ISG finally concluded that: “badger culling can make no meaningful contribution to the control of bTB”.

What about elsewhere?

No badgers have been killed in Scotland yet it is officially bTB free.
Badgers have been culled in the Republic of Ireland but bTB remains a big problem. The intention is to replace culling with badger vaccination and cattle controls.

What should be done?

The 2007 ISG report recommended that improved cattle controls would greatly reduce incidents of bTB. The TB advisory group and the TB eradication group also recommended increased cattle controls and improved testing.

There are still thousands of overdue tests and no improvement in the testing regime. The Government may even be considering relaxing some of the regulations.
Cattle husbandry and biosecurity (disease prevention measures) could still improve.
Cattle herds are getting larger and many farmers keep cattle in close contact in large sheds for long periods increasing the risk of passing TB from cow to cow.
All cattle controls still need to be rigorously enforced.
EU Regulations should be altered so that cattle can be vaccinated against bTB.
Badgers should be vaccinated, not killed. This is the only sustainable long term solution to address the occurrence of TB in badgers.
The Government proposal seeks to placate those farmers who support a cull; yet it makes them bear the cost. It does not deal with the principal factors that perpetuate bTB in cattle: inaccurate testing for bTB, leaving infected cattle in the herd; moving cattle with undiagnosed bTB.

Cardiff eating places to try

2010-10-06T19:59:00.005+01:00

The cool people at Eat Out Vegan Wales have come up with a vegan guide to Cardiff and given permission for us to make the information available. Their site is excellent, and has always been included in the CIN Delicious links, Eating Out category. Make it your first port of call when travelling! Guide text reproduced below - although aimed at vegans it is automatically useful to vegetarians too.

A QUICK GUIDE TO CARDIFF FOR VEGETARIANS AND VEGANS

Cardiff is a pretty good place for vegans. Here is a quick guide to the best places to get food in and near the town centre. The opening times stated are for Saturdays. Further details on the places listed and many others can be found on our site.

VEGAN CAFES

Hungry Planet 142 Clifton Street, Roath, Cardiff, CF24 1LY Tel: 029 20440504 Open 9am-5.30pm
Vegan café and health food shop run by a co-operative. Meals, soups, salads, sandwiches, toasties, cakes and drinks served. Sell homemade bread too. Brilliant and totally vegan. Situated on Clifton Street about 10/15 minutes walk from town centre.
Pulse Wholefoods 171 Kings Road, Pontcanna, Cardiff, CF11 9DE Tel: 029 20225873 Open 10am-5.30pm
Another vegan café. They serve pies, pasties, sandwiches, cakes etc. They also sell wholefoods and again are great. About 20/30 minutes from town.

VEGGIE CAFES

Crumbs Salad Restaurant 33 Morgan Arcade, Cardiff, CF10 1AF Tel: 029 20395007 Open 10am-4pm
Old school veggie café with vegan dishes in the town centre.
Café Atma 40 Crwys Road, Cathays, Cardiff, CF24 4NN Tel: 029 20390391/07967 636485 Open 9am-7pm
Hare Krishna vegetarian café. Vegan options are labelled and include veggie burger with homemade potato wedges and a variety of Indian style dishes. Also vegan cheesecakes. Cathays is the area of Cardiff by the University, close to the town centre.
Embassy Café @Cathays Community Centre, 36 Cathays Terrace, Cathays, Cardiff, CF24 4HX Open 10am-4pm
Another good veggie café in Cathays with vegan options and usually cake.
Milgi 213 City Road, Roath, Cardiff CF24 3JD Tel: 029 20473150 Open 11am-9.30pm
Café bar in Roath. It’s customers voted for it to go exclusively veggie and they serve some vegan options.

FALAFEL

The Falafel Bar 38 Woodville Road, Cathays, Cardiff, CF24 4EB Tel: 029 20233181 Open noon-6pm
Veggie falafel bar in Cathays serving very nice homemade falafel, hummus and pitta bread.

INDIAN RESTAURANTS

Vegetarian Food Studio 109 Penarth Road, Grangetown, Cardiff, CF11 6JT Tel: 029 20238222 Open 11am-10pm
VFS is a vegetarian Indian that does not use eggs with masses of labelled vegan dishes including some which use tofu instead of paneer and vegan lassis. You will need to book if you want a table in the evening, as it is deservedly very popular. About 5/10 minutes from the Central Station. [Editors' Note: This is popular with CIN members!]
Madhav 53-59 Lower Cathedral Road, Riverside, Cardiff, CF11 6LW Tel: 029 20372947 Open 10am-7pm
Another vegetarian Indian restaurant & takeaway serving vegan food. It is about 5/10 minutes from the Millennium Stadium.
Mango House Grand Hotel, Westgate Street, Cardiff CF10 1DD Tel: 029 20232266 Open 6pm-midnight
Central upmarket Indian restaurant that understands veganism and has a number of nice vegan options.

CHINESE TAKEAWAYS

Golden House 4 Upper Clifton Street, Roath, Cardiff, CF24 1LR Tel: 029 20498733 Open 5.30pm-midnight
Chinese takeaway with a wide range of vegan dishes including many made with good meat substitutes (not the cheap tinned stuff). Near to Hungry Planet.

NOODLE BARS

Wagamama St Davids 2, Mill Lane, Cardiff CF10 1EX Tel: 029 20641564 Open noon-10pm
One of the nationwide chain. They will give you a vegan menu when you order but personally we prefer the other two listed noodle places. There is another one down the Bay. Under Cardiff library.
Wok to Walk 90 St Mary Street, Cardiff, CF10 1DW Tel: 029 20388405 Open noon-4am
Central noodle bar. Many vegan sauces. Ask for your food to be cooked without egg, which they do in front of you.
Noodle Box 62 Salisbury Road, Cathays, Cardiff, CF24 4AD Tel: 029 20251007 Open noon-10.30pm
Noodle bar in Cathays. Most of the veggie options are suitable for vegans.

ITALIAN PIZZERIA

La Vita 25 Castle Street, Cardiff, CF10 1BT Tel: 029 20373433 Open 9am-10.30pm
Pizzeria opposite the Castle. They serve pizzas topped with vegan cheese. Sometimes they have none in however.
Café Citta 4 Church Street, Cardiff, CF10 1BG Tel: 029 20224040 Open 10am-9pm
Pizzeria in the city centre. Pizza bases are vegan and one comes without cheese anyway. Explain you are vegan. There are also pasta dishes that can be prepared vegan.
Frankies 6 Mackintosh Place, Roath, Cardiff, CF24 4RQ Tel: 029 20454234
Pizza takeaway in Roath. Vegan bases and they will cook them with vegan cheese if you take it in. Only £5 for a nice pizza before 6pm.

BURGERS

The New York Deli 19 High Street Arcade, Cardiff, CF10 1QR Tel: 029 20388388 Open 9.15am-5pm
A labelled vegan burger is served here. It comes in a bagel. Sophisticated or what?
AJ’s Coffee House 20 City Road, Roath, Cardiff, CF24 3DL Tel: 029 20451588 Open 8am-8pm
Reasonably priced veggie burger and curly fries served. They also have soya milk. Found at the bottom end of City Road, which is only 5/10 minutes from town.

BAGUETTE SHOPS

Flavour 34 High Street, Cardiff, CF10 1PU Tel: 029 20388551 Open 9am-6pm
Baguette shop in the centre serving a labelled vegan baguette and with other suitable fillings such as Redwood Cheatin’ chicken & ham and Linda McCartney sausages. Also stock soya milk. The owner is very clued up on veganism but sometimes the other staff are not.

RESTAURANTS

Canteen on Clifton Street 40 Clifton Street, Roath, Cardiff, CF24 1LR Tel: 029 20454499 Open 7pm-10pm
Not a veggie restaurant but only one non-vegetarian option per course. Always have a labelled vegan option for each course. Very nice food and not that expensive. Excellent vegan desserts including meringues sometimes. Pre-booking totally essential. On the same street as Hungry Planet.

CAFES

the plan café bar 28-29 Morgan Arcade, Cardiff, CF10 1AF Tel: 029 20398764 Open 8.30am-5pm
Café in the centre with labelled vegan dishes.
Thé Pot 138 Crwys Road, Cathays, Cardiff, CF24 4NR Tel:029 20251246 Open 10am-5pm
Café in Cathays with vegan food, drinks and sometimes cake.
Waterloo Gardens Teahouse 5 Waterloo Gardens, Penylan, Cardiff CF23 5AA Tel: 029 20456073 Open 8am-6pm
A bit further out of the centre in Penylan they can provide vegan food including a choice of cakes and soya drinks.
Chapter Bar and Café Chapter Arts Centre, Market Road, Canton, Cardiff CF5 1QE Tel: 029 20311050 Open 8.30am-9pm
Again a bit further out in Canton this café and bar at an arts centre has labelled vegan food options.

General Note: As regards soya milk drinks if you are unlucky enough to find a coffee shop in Central Cardiff that does not serve them, I would leave and you should find one that does within a minute’s walk normally.

MILKSHAKES

Simply Shakes Level 1, Queens Arcade, Queen Street, Cardiff, CF10 2BY Open 9am-5pm
This place can provide a number of flavours of milkshakes made with soya milk and Swedish Glace ice cream.

PUBS

Rummer Tavern 14 Duke Street, Cardiff, CF10 1AY Tel: 029 20649871 Open 11.30am-9pm
Central pub. The vegetarian chilli and curry can both be served vegan.
Zero Degrees 27 Westgate Street, Cardiff, CF10 1DD Tel: 029 20229494 Open noon-11.30pm
Bar & Micro-brewery in the town centre. There are items on the Italian style menu that can be prepared vegan if you ask. In addition all the beers they brew are vegan as they are fined with fossilised kelp.
JD Wetherspoon pubs & Lloyds No. 1 Bars
The menu at these pubs has a labelled vegan curry and they serve other vegan food. There are 8 in Cardiff including 5 in the centre and 1 very close on City Road (Yes, it does seem a lot for a city this size).

HEALTH FOOD SHOPS

Beanfreaks 3 St Mary Street, Cardiff, CF10 1AT Tel: 029 20251678 Open 8.30am-6pm
Independent health food shop in the centre. They stock labelled vegan takeaway options such as pasties, sausage rolls etc in the fridge.
Holland & Barrett 6-8 St Davids Way, St Davids Centre, Cardiff, CF10 2DP Tel: 029 20342172
This Central Cardiff branch of the nationwide chain stocks plenty of their labelled vegan pasty and sausage roll range. They have another branch on Albany Road in Roath.

CHIP SHOPS

We would not recommend any chip shops in Cardiff due to cross contamination issues. This is not particular to Cardiff; hardly any traditional chip shops can provide vegan food.

Ignore Science, Kill the Badgers: the idiots are at it again

2010-09-26T15:30:00.007+01:00

Plaid Cymru, the Conservatives, and the Liberal Democrats are all renewing their vows to use taxpayers' money to slaughter protected wildlife. Yes, despite all the evidence proving that their plans are a waste of money, and despite all the public opposition, they have stated again that they are determined to start killing badgers.

Some information from Pembrokeshire Against the Cull (PAC):

"What are the facts for and against a cull of badgers to reduce TB in cattle? There has been no cull in Scotland but they are free from TB. There was a cull in Ireland but TB remains a major problem and they are trying vaccination. There are no badgers on the island of Anglesey but they have TB. In the area planned for a cull in Wales TB levels have dropped 7% in the first three months of this year- without a cull. The ten years cull trial by Krebs found that culling made the problem worse. Now the Tories are genuflecting before the farmers and planning to let them kill a protected species. It’s politics, not science. The court appeals against culling have been successful. The source of the problem is the very profitable farm-to-farm cattle trade. Badgers stay in one territory. Cattle to cattle infection is the problem that farmers refuse to see. Why should they? Trading cattle makes money. The taxpayers pay the bill for compensation for disease and the legal appeals. In any other industry problems are dealt with through insurance. If farmers became responsible for their own losses they would seek practical solutions. Culling is not one of them.

The Welsh Assembly Government have launched a consultation on new plans to kill badgers in the same area of west Wales as before - now called the Intensive Action Area. Their proposals rule out any option to use vaccination instead of killing badgers in the Intensive Action Area. The plan will apply to all land in the area and use powers to force land owners opposed to killing badgers to allow it to happen on their land."

Some information from Aberystwyth Against the Cull:

"In spite of the court judgement two months ago Elin Jones is trying again to cull badgers with a new order aimed at Pembrokeshire and parts of Ceredigion. Once again the order contains draconian provisions for forcing landowners to allow culling on their land.

At the same time the Coalition Government in England has declared its intention to grant licenses allowing farmers to kill badgers themselves over huge areas. Horrifyingly, they are suggesting allowing farmers or 'contractors' to shoot free-running badgers.

So, a renewed assault on all sides. Both governments have started the Public Consultation procedure (yet again). The last public consultation by the UK government in 2006 received an overwhelming response against culling - over 47,500 individual written or emailed responses from those who opposed the cull ie over 96% of all responses. This expression of strong public opinion, along with the unequivocal results and conclusions from the ten year RCBT (ISG) trials against culling, clearly influenced ongoing UK Government policy until the advent of the current Coalition government.

Both the new UK government and the Welsh Assembly Government appear determined to ignore the scientific evidence (and the recent court judgement) and force through a discredited culling policy regardless of its effect on wildlife, tourism and other rural sources of income, and the opinion and convictions of most sections of our society apart from a narrow but powerful farming and veterinary lobby (primarily driven by the farming unions). Of course we sympathise with farmers hit by disease outbreaks but don't feel it would help to condone a policy which will actually make matters worse and which flies in the face of science and common sense.

[Of the consultation documents]: the Defra one especially is presented in a very biased way, with many half-truths, misleading and inaccurate statements. This represents a serious and sustained attack on one of our oldest native mammals and is an important precedent. If we let this happen we could be seeing the end of any effective protection for any native species."

Some information from the RSPCA:

"The RSPCA remains firmly opposed to any plans for a widespread cull based on current science, welfare concerns and practicality. The society believes the government should listen to public opinion. The new consultation follows a decision by the previous government in 2008 not to embark on a badger cull after the publication of independent scientific advice and a previous consultation which showed overwhelming public opposition.

David Bowles, Director of Communications for the RSPCA, said: “Now is the time to act. The results of the previous consultation show very clearly that a badger cull is not what people want. It is vital that this new government listens to the same message as the last one. Scientific evidence has proved culling would have a limited benefit on the disease and in surrounding areas outside the cull it may increase the disease in cattle.”

The RSPCA is also concerned that in these austere times the government may devolve killing badgers to farmers, which would be a recipe for disaster. The society agrees there is a problem with bovine TB but believes a recently-approved TB vaccine for badgers combined with increasing the level of cattle testing, improving biosecurity and imposing stricter controls on the movement of cattle are the ways most likely to be sustainable and effective in reducing the incidence of bovine TB amongst cattle

Senior RSPCA scientist Colin Booty said: “Our opposition to a badger cull is based on solid science not sentiment. There is compelling evidence which shows a policy of badger culling is unsustainable, and could even worsen the spread of bovine TB due to a process known as perturbation."

CIN will post guidance for responding to these consultations (UK Defra Consultation open until 8th December / WAG Consultation open until 17th December) once it has been made available by the excellent people in the wildlife protection groups. It is important to be very careful in filling in consultations, as Defra and WAG will look for any opportunity to ignore any responses which are anti-cull. As PAC have pointed out:

"Last time the vast majority of anti-cull responses to the WAG consultation were disallowed. WAG received 2,346 replies in some form or other. Of these 1,978 (84%) were opposed to the cull. However, WAG discounted approximately 1600 anti-cull responses. Even then there was still a slight majority against culling - 51% against - with 49% for culling (WAG Summary of Responses para 3.4.1). Despite this WAG claimed public support for its cull strategy.)"

It is worth remembering that all political parties in Wales will want your vote in the Assembly elections in May. Plaid Cymru, the Lib Dems (with the exceptions of Peter Black who is very opposed to the cull), and the Conservatives are all pro-cull. Labour, in the UK, are technically against a cull, but in Wales they are in joint power with Plaid Cymru in the Assembly so are technically voting for the cull in Wales. The Green Party remain the only political party consistently opposed to a cull.

For now, have a look at the Back Off Badgers site.

WAG consultations - food strategy and TB

2010-09-22T20:41:00.011+01:00

There are two new Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) consultations, see details below.

1. On TB in non-bovines
Respond to the consultation here by 11th November.

There is a simple method for dealing with this issue - the only one that a civilised society should follow. That is, if TB occurs in an animal then they should be treated to the best quality veterinary care available until they are better. Along with restrictions on the moving of animals to markets the TB issue will disappear.

WAG should stop wasting public money on subsidising and compensating animal farmers too. We don't compensate other industries when they produce faulty goods (e-coli, BSI, salmonella, foot and mouth, TB).

2. On a food strategy for Wales
Respond to the consultation here by 28th September.

Unfortunately the proposed strategy pretty much ignores the wider issues of health, nutrition, climate change, rising energy prices, land use, water scarcity, and the negative health impacts of meat and dairy foods. In its current form it will lead to flawed decision making based on missing out on the all-important links between these topics. It seems to be ‘more of the same’ with lip service to sustainability and climate change and little or nothing on animal welfare. This is no change here, no radical thinking or planning for a different direction. It proposes nothing to deal with common problems such as: why are greenfield sites always built on for housing, but never used for allotments?

There’s no reference to choice of diet (e.g. vegetarian), no reference to the health benefits or reducing meat and dairy intake, there’s no reference to livestock’s massive contribution to methane production and the damage to the climate from this, and little reference to the benefits of organic production in terms of reducing dependencies on oil based fertilisers and pesticides. There’s also little or no mention of the benefits of the organic approach in terms of biodiversity. There is also no reference to the connection between imported food stuffs for animal feed and the destruction of the precious rainforests, see recent Royal Agricultural Report Pastures New.

So as it stands it manages to ignore just about all the important issues. Quite outstanding.

How could it be improved?

The report refers to sustainability, but even that reference is lacking in any substance.

Environmental sustainability
There is no reference to the UN’s research which showed that livestock are the biggest contributor to greenhouse gases and thus their role in global warming (Livestock’s Long Shadow). A another UN report (Assessing the environmental impact of consumption and production, 2010) found that Agriculture, especially meat and dairy products, accounts for 70% of global freshwater consumption, 38% of the total land use and 19% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions. In the sustainable section (para 59 onwards) there’s no actual reference to the methane produced by livestock, and this damaging impact on the climate. Para 67 does not clearly state a reduction in meat intake in diet is the main way to reduce carbon footprint – the wording as it stands is vague and indirect – it needs to be clearly spelt out that it is a reduction in meat and dairy foods in the diet that is the way to reduce carbon footprint.

There is reference to the carbon footprint of food production, but it is not explicit in the strategy that livestock farming has a huge role to play in this regard and if people wish to reduce their carbon footprint then paying attention to their diet is crucial. All carbon footprint calculators ask a question about meat/fish/dairy intake – vegetarians and vegans score much better in this category because of the high carbon requirements of meat and dairy. The current reference to One Wales and carbon footprint does not go far enough for this strategy to have any meaning

For a food strategy for Wales to be really sustainable there needs to be a reduction in meat and dairy production and intake and increase in plant based food production. This is possible, even in Wales. The strategy notes that land use has changed in the last 50+ years and arable crops are only 1/3 of what was produced in 1950s (p16). This must be reversed to improve food security and reduce food miles, and to reduce the contribution to climate change. As well as increased arable and vegetable production upland areas could, over time, be re-forested with timber and other tree production plants e.g. nut trees. This is possible once sheep are fenced off areas as the ground cover returns to a more diverse state other than just grass and is able to support other vegetation including trees. Upland areas could also be diversified into recreation use e.g. more forest trails for walking and cycling, thus contributing to the health of the population and acting as tourist areas. Other areas still could be returned to a wilder state – we do not need to ‘use’ every bit of land.

Meat production is one of the most inefficient methods of obtaining food. For every 10kg of plant feed fed to cattle, only 1kg of meat is produced. This is exceedingly inefficient. Instead, 10kg of plant matter makes 10kg of food that can be eaten by humans.

Economic sustainability
Certain sections of the food industry are a drain on the economy e.g. livestock farming with massive subsidies and compensation culture. Is it sustainable to compensate these industries when they create disease (e-coli, BSI, salmonella, foot and mouth, TB)? After all, do car or steel industries get compensated for producing faulty goods? Action plans for meat and dairy industries should be changed to reduce subsidies, move to organic farming, and move to extensification (i.e. no massive units, no zero-grazing). The economy could be made more sustainable if more people were employed in the food industries – if we moved away from intensified agriculture and back to extensification, where more people were needed to do the jobs. This would relieve the unemployment and welfare benefits and get people back into work.There should be a reduction in fishing quotas (many species are at dangerously low levels of population), and there should be a much greater emphasis on plant/horticultural food production in Wales.

Social sustainability
There needs to be greater awareness of the damage done to people’s health by high meat and dairy diets. We need to increase the proportion of plant based foods grown in Wales, help people achieve 5+ a day and reduce meat and dairy consumption. A vast amount of research shows that meat and dairy diets are linked to higher rates of heart disease, high blood pressure, cholesterol, diabetes and some cancers. In terms of the social agenda, food and diet is central: a reduction in animal products (meat and dairy) will improve people’s health, but this is not stated anywhere in the report.

Animal welfare
The ‘vision’ mentions: “Consumers are increasingly demanding more socially and environmentally responsible food” – that translates as less animal farming, better animal welfare, yet there is no mention of the word vegetarian in the entire strategy. And, it is acknowledged by the most senior climate change scientists that is vital that we reduce meat and dairy consumption in our diets. See previous comments. Animal welfare should have a much higher priority, including greater monitoring since the ‘freedom foods’ and similar schemes are not a guarantee of higher standards. Random investigations on farms selling ‘freedom foods’ have shown appalling conditions for the animals.

In summary:

The sustainable element needs to be more explicit and much stronger. It needs to be the focal point of the strategy. There needs to be more innovative change, for example, why not propose a policy that public institutions in Wales and the WAG will adopt ‘meat free Mondays’ and ‘Welsh Wednesdays’? These two steps could both have hugely positive benefits. Several European cities have adopted meat free days e.g. Ghent, Hasselt and Mechlelen in Belgium, Washington DC, San Francisco, Bremen, Sao Paulo, Cape Town and several universities e.g. Oxford and Harvard and Helsinki educational institutions (see here for a longer list).

Aberystwyth is the 19th clone town

2010-09-16T19:23:00.002+01:00

A report released today by the New Economics Foundation reveals the high streets of Aberystwyth, Bridgend, Carmarthen and Llanelli have all lost their individuality and have become part of an “identikit” commercial culture. Traditional market towns across Wales are being turned into 'clone towns' as chains continue to drive independent retailers off the high street. Once-distinctive towns have now lost so much of their character as a result of the suffocating effect of large retailers such as Marks & Spencer, Topshop and HMV, and their residents no longer engage in the community. Read more here.

Massive factory farm planned for Powys

2010-09-14T20:40:00.004+01:00

Zero-grazing is a form of factory farming where animals that naturally graze are instead locked into huge warehouses. An application to set up Wales’ first proposed mega-dairy has been submitted to Powys, where 1,000 cows would be cooped up indoors for more than half of the year. The environmental impact of these huge dairy farms has been well documented in America – and there is real concern that we may just be importing those problems to our shores.

Visit this site for details on how to make your voice heard. Every voice counts, and it only takes a minute. However the closing date is 16 September, so please act today.

Possible reasons for objection (adapted from the Viva site):

a) Environmental Issues
A large farm such as this will have negative and detrimental impacts on the environment in various ways. This includes

Waste Water
Research has found that for every 100 cows, 100 to 1000 gallons of waste water is produced, and, this is contaminated water which then pollutes the ground water. With over 1000 cows inside for much of the year, the amount of water needed to rinse the floors, palour, pens etc will be considerable. Not only would this greatly increase the pollution of ground water, but also could lead to eutrophication and anoxia (i.e., low levels of dissolved oxygen). Based on these figures, it could mean 1,000 to 10,000 gallons a day, or over 3 million litres of waste water being used each year on the farm. We note that some provision for this has been made, in the form of a water storage tower, there is a large surplus that the tower won’t able to provide, and will therefore need to put an enormous strain on the surrounding countryside.

Slurry
Looking at the farm capacity and the figures, the slurry storage system is inadequate. On the planning application it states that the slurry stores would create a 8,520 m3 capacity in a four month period. However, a herd of 1,000 cows create approx. 83 cubic metres of slurry a day – this equates to (using 120 days as a four month period) 9,960 cubic metres – much more than the capacity allows for. And this is just for a herd of 1,000 cows – at full capacity the farm aims to have 1,200 on the farm. A further problem with the slurry storage is that it will also store waste water. In times of unsuitable weather, even for a short period of time, the capacity of the slurry stores would not be able to deal with both the slurry and waste water produced.

Methane
According to the United Nations, methane is the most damaging greenhouse gas there is, and the world’s livestock contribute the biggest amount. It is larger than the global transport CO2 emissions. On this basis alone, industrial sized factory farming units such as this one should be disallowed on the basis of the hugely damaging contribution to global warming and climate change. Based on figures of how much methane an average dairy cow can produce (up to 500 litres of methane a day), and allowing a reduction for feed changes, it works out as over 150 million litres of methane a year form this one development. As methane is 21 times more damaging than CO2 to the environment it means that this development alone will produce as much detrimental global warming gases as a village of 400 houses. This doesn’t even include the C02 emissions from the farm machinery, lighting, refrigeration, transport, production of fodder, transport of animals and milk etc.

Other pollution
Smells will be prevalent at all times for all the villagers. Noise levels from 1200 cows would also be considerable for Leighton residents.

b) Traffic Problems
The size of the farm (up to 1200 cows) will significantly disrupt traffic in the area given the large increase in daily movements, both on and across the highways. This will cause inconvenience to Leighton residents and in Welshpool itself, given the additional transporting slurry for spreading through such areas.

c) Animal welfare
Housing 1000-1200 cows inside for much of the year is not a natural environment. The proposed increase in farm size puts it on par with industrial factory farms, which evidence shows have significantly higher incidences of diseases, and related problems. Keeping animals indoors can also lead to overcrowded, unsanitary conditions and high humidity which has been shown to lead to high levels of lameness and mastitis in cows. It is also timely to note that with the risk of bovine TB high, is now the most appropriate time to be undertaking such large scale animal farming?

Community green report

2010-09-12T15:23:00.002+01:00

Community green: using local spaces to tackle inequality and improve health examines the impact of the quality of local green spaces on the health and wellbeing of people in six deprived and ethnically diverse areas. It shows that providing good quality local green space is an effective way to tackle inequality. Read the report and summary here.

Cardiff University involved in cruel experiments

2010-08-27T15:33:00.006+01:00

(image from here)

We have been asked to promote this petition about the vivisection experiments being done at Cardiff University (covered in the news here), behind closed doors and funded by the public who are kept in the dark about the unscientific cruelty they are funding. Sign it here. Note that other Welsh universities are involved in this primitive practice too. Complain to your MP and AM!

Further information from the BUAV:

"The BUAV has uncovered the use of kittens in experiments at Cardiff University. The experiment is reported in the Wales on Sunday newspaper as part of an investigation by the paper on the rise in the number of animal experiments in universities in Wales, especially at Cardiff University. The paper has revealed that almost 200,000 animals, including cats, mice, rats, guinea pigs, rabbits, birds, frogs and fish have been used in experiments in the past four years. Cardiff University alone used 191,549 animals (96% of all animal tests at Welsh universities). The number of experiments carried out at the institution has risen 13% since 2006.

In the experiment, nineteen kittens, just two-six months old, were subjected to invasive surgery under anaesthesia in which their windpipes were sliced, catheters were inserted into blood vessels and parts of their brains exposed in order to implant electrodes. The fate of these kittens was not stated. In 2009, Cardiff University was responsible for using 46 cats, which accounted for 26% (over a quarter) of all those cats used in research facilities in the whole of the UK during that time period.

In four years Cardiff University experimented on 157,839 mice, 17,324 rats, 11,096 fish, 1,941 birds, 1,253 guinea pigs, 933 pigeons, 884 frogs, 207 cats, 54 rabbits and 18 tree shrews from the tropics of south east Asia. By comparison, Bangor University used 1,464 mice and 664 fish, Aberystwyth used 289 cattle, 153 mice and 102 sheep and Swansea used 1,208 fish.

Much of the animal research carried out at universities is funded by taxpayers. The Medical Research Council supported the kitten experiment."

Woodlands Strategy

2010-08-21T16:51:00.002+01:00

The Welsh Assembly Government has published the Woodlands for Wales action plan which sets out what needs to happen over the next five years to make progress towards achieving the outcomes of Woodlands for Wales, the Welsh Assembly Government’s 50 year strategy for trees and woodlands.

Promoting cycling to every door

2010-08-06T14:47:00.007+01:00

One of our supporters told us they had received a copy of the 'Cycling to Work' booklet pictured above some time ago, and it made cycling seem so attractive and easy that it inspired them to get back into it again. They felt that the booklet - or something similar - should be more widely available as a way of promoting cycling, giving practical advice on all aspects of choosing and maintaining a bike.

There is no doubt about the many benefits of cycling. They therefore requested that Ceredigion County Council's 'Highways, Property and Works' department (responsible for cycling schemes) should distribute something about the benefits of cycling to all homes in Ceredigion. It would get many more people interested in this healthy and fun means of transport, benefiting Ceredigion residents, the environment, and relieving traffic congestion and pollution, as well as being cheaper than unenvironmental road expansion schemes. The booklet was even printed locally (Cambrian Printers) so they could be used again for this project.

There would also be potential to work in partnership with large local employers such as Aberystwyth University, the National Library of Wales; and with other Council departments responsible for Tourism and Leisure, Environment and Planning, Health and Well Being (since cycling crosses over with all of them).

There is a very good 'Get Cycling Ceredigion' magazine - but is only seen by people who are already into cycling, and even then it is not widely available. Distributing that to every home could be an alternative. Whatever was used could have a huge impact on getting people off roads, thereby improving health and the environment, but the key is getting the material to people - hence the requirement for a copy for every household as a one-off project.

We will see whether Ceredigion County Council rise to the challenge.

Update 19th November 2010: No reply from the Council yet.

Update 16th January 2011: Between October 2010 and January 2011 we contacted the Council five times before we finally got a reply. Unfortunately it does not commit to any actions at all:

"Your comments / suggestions in relation to this publication are noted, however the department has no plans at the current time to supply each household in Ceredigion with a copy of this book due to the cost implications of such an exercise. However, the content of your letter will be revisited should funding for an initiative of this nature be forthcoming in future.

The publication “Cycling to Work” has been used / supplied by the department previously in a targeted manner, when it undertook refresher cycle training for staff who were considering cycling as a means to commute to work.

As stated in your letter the department produced the bilingual Get Cycling Ceredigion guide. This guide was distributed to every school pupil in Ceredigion, reaching a significant proportion of households within Ceredigion, and it is available at all of the Authority’s Tourist Information Centres. The magazine is also soon to be available online on the Ceredigion County Council website."

Catalonia bans bullfighting in landmark Spain vote

2010-07-29T19:35:00.002+01:00

Yes, that is the bull's blood

The parliament of Catalonia has voted to ban bullfighting - the first region of mainland Spain to do so. See the BBC site for more.

UK-imported feed for livestock farming is depleting rainforests

2010-07-23T13:50:00.000+01:00

"Rainforests and grasslands are being ripped up to make way for soy plantations or for beef ranching which has been displaced by soy plantations" - see new report here.

North Ceredigion Bat Group

2010-07-20T19:51:00.003+01:00

Are you interested in bat conservation? North Ceredigion Bat Group is centred in Aberystwyth, Mid Wales. The group consists of volunteers and conservationists and their activities include roost counts, bat walks and bat talks. See their blog for details of upcoming events.

Victory for badgers!

2010-07-14T19:55:00.004+01:00

Covered by the BBC.

Comment from the Badger Trust:

"Victory for badgers on all counts as Court of Appeal declares proposed Welsh badger cull unlawful.

Campaigners were celebrating today as the Court of Appeal handed down judgment finding the proposed Welsh badger cull to be unlawful on all three grounds they raised on appeal.

The Court of Appeal ruled that the Welsh Ministers had unlawfully failed to carry out a balancing exercise to weigh up the harm involved (i.e. killing over 2,000 badgers) against the potential benefit (which the Minister’s own model predicted to be a reduction in the rate of cattle herd breakdowns of just 0.3% of farms annually).

The court emphasised the fact that Parliament deliberately drafted the Act so that wildlife could not be killed without robust scientific evidence. As Lady Justice Smith said: ‘Hunch and anecdote would obviously not be sufficient; nor would impermissible extrapolation [from the scientific evidence].’”

The massive body of rigorously peer-reviewed literature shows that killing badgers can play no meaningful part in the eradication of bovine TB and that robust cattle measures are sufficient, as demonstrated by the fact that the rate of increase in new TB outbreaks is already starting to slow. We also hope that the Minister will now adopt a strategy of vaccination as a cost-effective, viable alternative."

Seagulls chicks orphaned at Aberystwyth University?

2010-07-06T19:25:00.011+01:00

Seagull chick orphaned at Penglais?

CIN has received emails about orphaned seagull chicks on Aberystwyth University's Penglais Campus outside the Arts Centre this week. On further investigation in nearby buildings we were informed that Aberystwyth University had installed acoustic bird scarers at Penglais campus. We investigated yesterday and did find seagull chicks wandering around in obvious distress while adult seagulls seemed unable or unwilling to land near them to help. One person told us that Pestokill (a company that profits from exterminating animals) were being used by the university to do this.

If all this is true it means that although the university has chosen a non-lethal way of scaring birds from their nests they have cruelly chosen to do so at a time of year when the chicks are unable to fend for themselves. Cue the distressed and hungry chicks abandoned to starve while the adult seagulls are unable to do anything.

We have been in touch with the university to check the facts, and also with PICAS and the RSPB to ask about the legality of moving adult birds away at times of year when they have chicks which will be left to starve - at the very least it seems to be a form of cruelty.

Update: PICAS have a lot of useful information. E.g. on this page it points out that the seagull is a protected species, and "these [acoustic] systems ... cannot be used within the breeding period. In most cases so-called problem birds such as gulls cause the most significant problems during the breeding period and therefore a system of this nature would be worthless." So it currently appears as if the university is sneakily breaking the law by using the systems at this time, as well as wasting public money in doing so. No wonder they have been keeping this quiet from the public. The pages also point out that: "in order to control gulls effectively an understanding of the species is vitally important and therefore advice must always be sought from a bird control expert rather than a pest control company. Pest control contractors know little or nothing about the habits of gulls and how the species will react and respond to the controls provided. This, combined with the fact that contractors have a vested interest in selling products and installation services, renders any advice provided by a pest control contractor extremely questionable at best." Yet if the university are using Pestokill then they have obviously gone against this advice and wasted their money.

Seagulls at Aberystwyth University from Caredig I Natur on Vimeo.

Another chick - apparently a large number have been seen crying and looking for their parents

Update 11 July 2010: Aberystwyth University's Estates Department did not bother to reply. This confirms that everything we wrote above is true (as well as giving them a chance to respond we had specifically stated that if they did not reply then we would take it as a confirmation that the facts were all correct).

On 8th July a Wildlife Advisor at RSPB UK said that "Gulls are legally protected"and without a General Licence harming them would be illegal. Does the university have a licence? Even if they do (and there is no evidence that they have one) the RSPB added that "However, the method they are using could be illegal under cruelty laws. Preventing the adults returning so the chicks starve seems unnecessarily cruel."

On the 9th July we had a further information from PICAS UK's expert technical consultants. They said that "The photographs provided show juvenile gulls, Herring Gulls [...] What we would suggest as a matter of urgency is that somebody grabs the youngsters and puts them back onto a flat roof, as close to where they are now as possible. [...] Additionally, we would recommend that someone keep a very close watch over the birds to find out exactly what the current situation is. It could be that as a pest control company is involved, that they have harmed or killed the adult birds illegally - we feel it would be unlikely particularly when Herring Gulls are now so much more protected than most other gull species, but it is possible so you need to spend some time observing."

So is Aberystwyth University breaking the law, or wasting money, or just cruel? Or a combination of these?

Meat-free Mondays

2010-07-03T13:24:00.004+01:00

Meat-free Mondays are a great way to cut carbon emissions, reduce fuel and water use, and have a positive impact on climate change. Several European cities have already done this e.g. Ghent, Hasselt and Mechlelen in Belgium, Washington DC, San Francisco, Bremen, Sao Paulo, Cape Town and several universities e.g. Oxford and Harvard and Helsinki educational institutions (see here for a longer list).

Obviously institutions can do this too if they want to help the environment, provide a healthy diet for staff, and save money too in the catering department since vegetarian sources of protein such as grains, tofu, nuts etc are cheaper than meat and fish.

The negative environmental impact of livestock farming is internationally recognised e.g. the UN's recent report found that agriculture, especially meat and dairy production, accounts for 70% of global freshwater consumption, 38% of the total land use and 19% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions. This is in addition to the UN's Livestock's Long Shadow report which also found that livestock agriculture contributed more to greenhouse gases than all the world's transport emissions put together.

For newspaper coverage of the Meat Free Monday campaign see The Telegraph and Times.

See the Meat-free Monday website for more information.

Wreath-laying at the Welsh Assembly Building, Aberystwyth

2010-06-25T20:53:00.005+01:00

Around thirty people gathered on Thursday June 17th in a peaceful and good-natured procession to lay a wreath and flowers at the front door of the new Assembly building in Aberystwyth. Banners and placards left no doubt as to what people were unhappy about - the killing of our wildlife by the Welsh Assembly Government. A two minutes' silence was held at the front door. Black and white ribbons, wristbands, flowers and hand written messages on postcards and posters were left attached to the security fence (the only thing it has ever been useful for).

Rural affairs minister Elin Jones gets confused

2010-06-20T16:46:00.004+01:00

In a FarmersWeekly article we read the following:

"Wales' rural affairs minster Elin Jones said she is willing to sacrifice her seat at the next election rather than back down on her plan to implement a pilot badger cull in west Wales. Ms Jones, who is the Assembly Member for Ceredigion, told the Farmers Union of Wales' agm that her determination to order the cull resulted in a "politically motivated'' campaign to unseat her at next year's Assembly elections. "I know I can only lose votes for having taken this decision," said the Plaid Cymru AM, who claimed another political party was capitalising on her position to snatch votes from her."

Elin complains that the attacks are 'politically motivated'. Is it so difficult for her to believe that civilised people really do object to the plans she has pushed through to kill protected and beloved wildlife?

People know that the slaughter is not about science - all the studies and evidence (that weren't WAG-funded) said killing badgers is pointless. As the post here shows, the WAG approach is anti-science.

People know that the slaughter is not about the rise in TB - since we have already seen that rates were falling, and approaches that don't involve slaughtering badgers would make them fall even more.

So what is the slaughter about? Well, Elin was speaking to her perceived main voting group for Plaid Cymru - the Farmers' Union of Wales - a group dominated by animal farmers who wanted a cull. She gave them what they wanted. So that is the real 'politically motivated' action. Hypocrisy, anyone?

‘Substantial Fall’ in Cattle TB in Wales

2010-06-12T10:56:00.017+01:00

Victim of the Welsh Assembly Government

We have received the following excellent guest article which shows how useless and unscientific WAG's badger cull is, and how WAG has been misleading the public while wasting money on the useless cull.

"I have been looking into the stats for bTB in Wales and have noticed a substantial fall in the bTB figures starting around April2009. For example look at herds under TB restriction.

My sources are all DEFRA statistics and I have attached copies.

April 30th 2009 (Wales) Herds under TB restriction: 1,983
February 28th 2010 (Wales) Herds under TB restriction: 1,117.
These figures are actual and ‘on the day.’ They do include herds late with their tests.

Dyfed works out at about 36% reduction in herds under restriction in the last 10 months (April 30 2009-Feb28 2010) but if you subtract the ‘overdue test factor' you get about a 40% reduction.
In Wales, with the overdue tests factored out, you get a reduction of 58% over the same period.

I have attached Defra's own assessment for GB of CNI's. This the rate of Confirmed New Incidents (bTB) per 1000 tests on clean herds given as a percentage and although they are provisional, they show a 14% reduction Feb 2009 to Feb 2010. Again this is ‘substantial.’ If you take the actual GB figure for 2008 however, which stood at 5% ,and the figure for this February 2010, which is provisionally given as 3.8% the downward trend is indicated.

The yearly figures given below are ‘actual’, but somehow are marked as ‘provisional’. Can they still be working on figures for 2008/2009? After all, it is June 2010.

CNI's in Dyfed 2008 were 301
CNI's in Dyfed 2009 were 234

This represents a ‘substantial’ actual drop of over 22%, better than in the rest of Wales. They are finding a lot less bTB out there, how is this possible without any badgers having been removed? We are told that it is badgers who are infecting cattle yet incidence of the disease is in ‘substantial’ decline.

In 2009 there were 1,610 less cattle culled in Wales as a result of bTB in herds than there were in 2008. (As reactors, inconclusive reactors and direct contacts.)

The disease is in decline because of the increase in cattle testing over the last two years along with the removal of infected cattle: the real vectors of this disease. If all the many recommendations for improvements regarding cattle control measures, given by the ISG in their Final Report, were implemented, the disease would rapidly disappear as it did in the 1960's without badger culling. (Note that W.D. Macrae the Chief Veterinary Officer at the time, in his final report to the government, does not mention badgers once).

However if we fail to get these figures out now as the cull starts, the decline in cattle TB will be acknowledged and attributed to the badger cull. It will be the excuse for extending the programme over the whole of the country!

WAG has been very quiet about the decline of bTB in Wales as it demonstrates convincingly that even their limited cattle measures are having some effect. There was never a reason to consider culling badgers. WAG's whole premise for culling badgers was that the disease was 'un-sustainable and out of control.' The estimated compensation bill given in 2008 by Elin Jones for 2014 was £80 million. That figure now looks absolutely ludicrous!! The only factor out of control was the industry itself, already we note that overdue TB cattle tests so proudly claimed by WAG to be down to near zero last year have risen dramatically to 702 this year.

Other countries' experiences (especially New Zealand and Australia) show that unless show that unless you take cattle movements seriously you will never eliminate/control this disease in cattle.

WAG tries to use these countries approach to eliminating bTB to try and justify badger culling in Wales. This is very misleading. Below is the evidence from the men in charge at the time which shows that wildlife control bore little relationship to the situation in Wales.

NewZealand , Bryce Buddle stated in London 3rd March 2006: "Even in the wake of an expansion of wildlife vector risks (40 million possums to 60 million) the number of cattle herds with TB had reduced by 80% over the past 12 years"

Australia. Paul Wood stated in London 3rd March2006: "Testing alone even with strict interpretation, was not the answer and not until strict movement controls were in place from 1970 on a national scale with roadside monitoring and enormous power invested in the inspectors was any real progress made."

Links:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/diseases/atoz/tb/stats/documents/10/feb10wales.pdf
http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/landuselivestock/cattletb/documents/tbpn.pdf
http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/landuselivestock/cattletb/documents/tbweb.xls
http://www.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/farmanimal/diseases/atoz/tb/stats/latest.htm"

Pembrokeshire Against the Cull added: "Please spread the word that bovine TB rates are already coming down - people need to know the facts now. We don't want anyone to claim that this substantial reduction in bovine TB is as a result of culling - if it goes ahead. CLICK HERE to have a look at the DEFRA website for the source data. Write to your local papers, Assembly Members and MPs - find a way to publicise these figures."

CIN has contacted Elin Jones and the Pembrokeshire Assembly Members listed here and here asking for their comments on this. Our experience in the past has either been no response, or a standard form letter, but if any genuinely reply we will add details here.

Update 18 June 2010: Alun Davies took the time to reply, which is appreciated. He did question one of our points by saying:

"Most of the statistics that have been published on this matter are actually collected by the Welsh Govt. It seems somewhat curious to then accuse them of 'keeping this quiet'."

We explained that by 'keeping it quiet' we are referring to the fact that Elin Jones and her department have made announcements about the increase in BtB cases as a justification for killing badgers, even though they knew from their own statistics that cases were actually falling. They did not refer to those statistics because it would completely undermine the case for the unpopular slaughter.

He responded by saying: "I cannot think of any instance whether the minister has sought to mislead either through omission or through misuse of the statistical evidence base."

To which we refer to Elin Jones' Written Statement on the TB Eradication Programme (and every other speech and announcement she has made): "Bovine TB is out of control and unsustainable." That is pretty misleading when she knew figures were actually dropping.

Angela Burns' office refused to reply, first saying she was "unable to respond to residences outside her constituency due to Assembly protocol" even though it was an issue about Pembrokeshire for which she is an AM, and therefore the correct person to contact. Would she ignore an email from the Queen or the Prime Minister in that way? Both of those have residences outside her constituency too. It is ridiculous that AMs can choose whether to reply or not, or insist on postal addresses even though the postal system is not being used for correspondance. Her office also started their emails with 'Dear Cofion' - not realising that the 'Cofion' at the end of our emails is the Welsh word for 'Regards'...

None of the others contacted have bothered to reply: Nicholas Bourne, Nerys Evans, Joyce Watson, Paul Davies.

Cofion, CIN...

Update 11 July 2010: Elin Jones' office finally replied after a month. She said of the fall in TB rates that "Statistics need to be treated with caution". It is interesting that when the statistics seem to favour WAG ministers they announce them everywhere as 'evidence', but when they contradict WAG policy they 'should be treated with caution'... Hypocrisy again.

Update 8 August 2010: From a Badger Trust press release:
"Only half as many cattle were slaughtered in Dyfed because of bovine TB in the first four months of this year than in the same period last year with no badgers killed. This is the county where up to 1,500 badgers were under threat of extermination until the Appeal Court quashed the plan in June. The number of herds infected in Dyfed also fell by a healthy 14 percent between the same periods.

[...] the reductions were far from marginal. They were in line with longer-term statistics showing a consistent downward trend of about seven percent over the last two and a half years both in Wales and Great Britain as a whole.

The stringent controls in Wales on the movement and sale of live cattle are designed to achieve results such as those above. The Trust says they should also be implemented across England and without the wasteful distraction of killing badgers. Elsewhere, Scotland has now been given TB-free status by the EU, and Northern Ireland has announced it has no plans to kill badgers.

Despite bovine tuberculosis figures continuing to fall without any badgers being killed, not just in Wales but in Great Britain overall, the Farmers’ Union of Wales (FUW) makes new claims that culling could be effective. The Badger Trust says the FUW should be wholeheartedly encouraging its members to back cattle-based measures in the light of the improving figures. The FUW has now asserted (in a statement it did not see fit to have independently validated) an assumed drop in bTB of 30 percent if badgers were killed for over five years in North Pembrokeshire and 32 percent for a further two and a half years. But even the Welsh Assembly Government has calculated only a supposed nine percent reduction in bTB.

The Court of Appeal recently found that a nine percent reduction would not be sufficiently “substantial” under the Animal Health Act to justify killing wildlife [...]. the diminishing level of bTB over the last two and a half years with no badgers killed confirms the pointlessness of culling."

Meat and dairy free diet urged by UN

2010-06-04T20:09:00.003+01:00

Another UN report concludes that the Western diet must shift to being meat and dairy free in order to save the world from hunger, fuel poverty and the worst impacts of climate change.
Livestock agriculture and growing crops to feed animals is on par with fossil fuel because of the environmental impacts. Agriculture, especially meat and dairy products, accounts for 70% of global freshwater consumption, 38% of the total land use and 19% of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, says the report, which has been launched to coincide with UN World Environment day on Saturday. See an article in the Guardian, or read the full report.

Some badger updates

2010-05-31T19:04:00.005+01:00

As well as the updates below, have a look at some of our Delicious links about badgers.

Updates from Pembrokeshire Against the Cull [Thu, 27 May 2010]
[This relates to what CIN covered here]

"The events of last week, when masked contractors arrived with large numbers of police to carry out sett surveys, exposed the ongoing unreasonable treatment of landowners by the Welsh Assembly Government. The story was run in the Daily Mail, as well as by Welsh media. This week's Western Telegraph and Tivyside Advertiser have front page features, and many letters from shocked and concerned local people. In the days following these extraordinary events many landowners received letters from the TB Team informing them that imminent sett surveys on their land had been cancelled. But no information was provided about future arrangements so they are now in limbo, unsure what might happen next and when. At least questions have now been raised in the Assembly about the treatment of landowners and the lack of advance notice provided to them. For several months landowners have been reporting to PAC that contractors have just appeared with no prior warning given to them, or arrived at times when the landowners have specifically requested them not to, and of contractors found wandering around on their land who, when challenged, claimed to be lost (sometimes more than once on the very same land and the very same contractors). CLICK HERE for a report on Peter Black's blogspot on recent Assembly questions and answers. WAG's claims of intimidation of contractors by landowners does not bear scrutiny. On that Tuesday morning they chose to arrive without warning, already equipped with police and masks, at a farm where they had been asked in advance not to come at that particular time when an elderly disabled man would be there entirely on his own. He was apparently visibly shaking when his son arrived. We also heard that two elderly women, one in her 70s and the other in her late 90s, received a similar visit from police and masked men and were absolutely terrified.
It has not been easy to make sure people are aware of what is going on here in North Pembrokeshire. CLICK HERE for a link to footage taken at Brithdir Mawr - watch it quickly as previous film was taken off YouTube within hours. CLICK HERE for a link to the recent S4C programme about the cull 'Y Byd ar Bedwar'. Click the small owl to see the English subtitles. PAC has received many messages of support from local residents and people from further afield who are horrified by what they have read and seen and have asked us what they can do. The most immediate thing everyone here in Wales can do is to contact your Assembly Member and MP and let them know what you think of this behaviour by public servants and at taxpayers' expense. Ask them NOW to question again the basis on which this cull was proposed and the way in which it is being implemented. And if you are a landowner in the cull area, sign up to the Open Letter to the Welsh Assembly Government - email us to request a copy. PAC is continuing to raise questions and issues with WAG and other organisations.

In another blunder by a WAG official, the serial numbers of all the identity cards used by Thomsons, the WAG surveyors, to gain access to private land have been made public. This means anyone could make an identity card that would be verified as genuine by the WAG helpline. PAC has advised Elin Jones. Until she replies and takes action to protect landowners we suggest calling the police if anyone claiming to be a WAG contractor comes to your land."

Updates from Aberystwyth against the Badger Cull [Mon, 31 May 2010]

"Firstly many thanks to all who came to our Public Meeting in April and helped to make it such a success. I attach a recent report from the Cambrian News - also reported by several online groups. It also proved valuable for making contacts and linking up individuals/groups/organisations fighting the cull.

Meanwhile Aberystwyth Against the Badger Cull will be going ahead with a ceremony in front of the WAG building in Aberystwyth on Thursday June 17th (details to be finalised). We will be laying a wreath and flowers and unfurling a banner - hopefully for good media coverage. It is important that we demonstrate that - far from giving up - outrage against the cull is spreading and growing. One of the main ways we can fight the threat of culls in England as well is by showing the level of public opposition involved.

We will be having our next meeting on 7th June at 6:30pm in the Arts Centre Cafe at Aberystwyth University to finalise plans, review recent events and discuss further action. Everyone welcome. If you can't make the meeting but have any ideas/suggestions/offers of help, please email.
We have now discovered that the firm doing the survey work on setts in the cull area, prior to trapping and shooting the badgers, is
Thomson Ecology
enquiries@thomsonecology.com
Head Office
Compass House
60 Priestley Road
Guildford
Surrey GU2 7YU
Please send them a (polite) email/letter expressing your feelings about their willingness to help with the slaughter of badgers.
Further links and information about this firm from here.
We are also asking people to email and/or write to;
Tourism Dept.,
Pembrokeshire County Council,
County Hall,
Haverfordwest,
Pembrokeshire
SA61 1TP
tourism@pembrokeshire.gov.uk
(and ask for an answer to your specific points)
and to Carwyn Jones (as WAG First Minister)
Carwyn Jones AM,
36 Caroline St,
Bridgend,
CF31 1DQ
carwyn.jones@wales.gsi.gov.uk
(Again, ask for a specific answer and not a form letter)"

No Freedom of Information in Wales

2010-05-29T16:22:00.010+01:00

WAG keeps information from us - but aren't they meant to be serving the people? [Image by Tim Sanders]

The Welsh Assembly Government has been refusing to answer Freedom of Information requests related to the badger killings in Wales (note - even their press release about it has now been made secret and the public are no longer 'authorised to view this page'!). We had been informed of this from other sources, and had decided to try our own FOI requests on 3rd May 2010. Below are the requests made and the responses given by the WAG team that organises wildlife slaughters (they only replied on 28th May). It should be noted that WAG altered the wording and removed detail from our original requests when they acknowledged our requests on 7th May. We corrected their 'error', but in their final response they only responded to the edited questions they had created, not our original requests or corrections to their errors (sent to them on 8th May).

1. Request: We asked for a list of the people who will be licenced to kill badgers, along their relevant training and qualifications. Unless this is made available anyone could trespass on land with a gun and claim that they are killing badgers on WAG business - a landowner or person questioning the gun-carrier won't have any way of confirming whether or not the person is licenced and trained, or whether it is an illegal poacher or criminal, since the WAG staff wear balaclavas so can't be identified by their ID card; and their ID cards have no names on so it is impossible to check if they are official. Anyone can fake a letter saying they are licenced when no-one knows what an official letter looks like. This is a matter of citizen safety, and refusing to make an authorised list of people available puts the public at risk. We have covered this Catch 22 situation already.

Their response: they decided that they would make this information exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.

Their specific reasons were:

"Section 38 (1)(a) and (b) state that the disclosure of this information would endanger the physical or mental health of any individual, or endanger the safety of any individual."

"All contractors working in the pilot area will have authorisation on them. This will not contain their name but landowners will be able to contact a helpline to verify that the contractors are genuine."

However there is no way of identifying a nameless man in a balaclava! What do you say? "Well, he looks like a man in a balaclava, please can you confirm whether that is your WAG killer or just a rapist." Bear in mind that if you take the cards away to your phone you will be arrested. What about the safety of people who can now have unidentified, unidentifiable masked men - and later armed men too - turning up on their land at any time, pretending to be doing WAG's work? Don't landowners deserve protection too?

They even hide the names of anyone writing to you - all correspondance was signed 'TB Team,
Office of the Chief Veterinary Officer'. When did it become okay for civil servants to sidestep accountability in this way?

Section 40 (1) states that this information is exempt from disclosure as it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the data subject. This is an absolute exemption that is not subject to the test of Substantial harm or public interest.

Mmm. We were the applicant. But we were NOT the data subject. So this is absolute meaningless tosh.

2. Request: We asked for a list of the personal interests of the various WAG staff and ministers who have been involved in this badger cull. The public has a right to see where there are vested interests. For example, the Rural Affairs Minister Elin Jones has links to animal farming and therefore stands to benefit herself and her family from these proposals she is putting in place as Minister. We wanted the name and role of each person, along with details of their farming vested interests (and any other vested interests relevant to the badger cull).

Their response: The decided not to answer this, even though many of the staff involved in these decisions have links to animal farming that benefit themselves. They mentioned just four staff (including Elin Jones) and said none had vested interests "in the pilot area". Note that was not what we asked - we asked who had vested interests linked to farming, the area was irrelevant. WAG did not want to answer that so made up their own question to answer.

3. Request: We asked for the full evidence base for the decision to kill badgers in Wales. All the reports and research that were considered, including links to where the reports/research can be checked. WAG had a Public Consultation on their website in July 09 on this subject, so the results of that consultation are also part of the evidence base that need to be included, along with where it is possible to read the results of the consultation. The internationally validated ISG study, based on 10 years of scientific research and costing over 12,000 badger lives, concluded unequivocally that 'badger culling has no meaningful part to play in TB control in Britain'. Therefore it is important that the public knows what vital evidence the Welsh Assembly Government found which invalidated the conclusions of the largest-ever study in this area, leading to a decision to undertake a badger killing at massive cost to the tax payer.

Their response: They refused to list their evidence base. They just said it was 'on their web pages' and included a link that did not go to any such information.

They also used the same response with regards to the consultation. However nowhere is there a summary of how many people were for the cull, and how many were against. So in what way did WAG use this information? As far as can be seen from their web pages they did a consultation, then did absolutely nothing with that data apart from upload it. What is the point of doing a consultation if you aren't going to act based on what those consulted say? It is a perfect example of a wasteful and cynical exercise followed by the WAG bureaucrats just to tick the box saying 'yes, we consulted people'.

Secondly, as you browse through the responses it is clear that most 'pro-cull' letters were identical - they had been distributed by some third party, rather than being individually-written consultations. And the pro-cull responses from the Farmer's Union of Wales (policy@fuw.org.uk) are listed MORE THAN TEN TIMES! These again were just standard letters.

4. Request: We asked for a breakdown of the full cost so far (and any other foreseen costs) for undertaking the badger cull in Wales, broken down into as much detail as possible. Examples of things to include (not exhaustive):

Costs of dealing with all correspondence and administration on this issue
Court cases
Costs for reports and research
Licensing and training for the badger killers
Travel and subsistence costs for staff and ministers working on these issues.

This would need to include the number of hours spent on things by different staff and the costs of their salary per hour, so if Elin Jones has spent 12 hours reading reports, 4 hours giving speeches, 12 hours attending meetings and so on then the costs of her 28 hours of salary would need to be included to get a correct figure of the cost to the tax payer. Obviously WAG would not be going ahead with such a plan if there had not been a full costing, so this information should already be available.

Their response: Generally "We do not hold this specific information." Then a very selective inclusion of a few costs, with massive gaps, in an attempt to hide how much this is really costing the taxpayer.

So WAG either refuses to answer the FOIs or says it can't. They are absolutely useless, and are hiding information. Elsewhere it had been quoted that the cost per badger killed will be £6,000 it is no wonder WAG want to conceal all this from us at a time when public services are being cut and people are losing their jobs. At least faceless WAG bureaucrats and badger killers don't have to worry - they always look after their own.

Attempts at justification

2010-05-23T16:29:00.007+01:00

We have been forwarded a letter send to a CIN supporter by Nerys Evans, Plaid Cymru AM, about Plaid's and WAG's plans to kill Welsh wildlife. It had taken Nerys 20 days to respond to a letter sent on 1st May.

The twist was that the recipient had sent their letter as an email but Nerys insisted on not replying in the sender's obviously preferred medium, but instead wanted to reply by post (despite the cost and waste of paper). The recipient had to state twice more that they wanted a reply by email - their preferred format because of accessibility reasons and wanting to use a screen reader. So what did Nerys's office do when they eventually agreed to an email? Instead of text they send it in the one format that can't be read by a screenreader: embedded uncompressed scanned images in separate word documents totalling over 1.5 MB! Obviously they either don't care about accessibility issues, or are just unable to operate a word processor and email client properly. Further, the letter had basic punctuation errors such as missed apostrophes, which doesn't create faith in the cognitive abilities of the sender. How can AMs understand complex issues when thye can't even understand basic punctutation?

The letter included blatant lies such as "The Welsh Governments TB Eradication Programme is supported by all political parties in Wales" [NB missing apostrophe again]. Wrong.

The letter also said:

"Last year £24 million was spent by the Welsh Assembly Government in compensating farmers for the slaughter of cattle with TB. The current situation is unsustainable."

Yes, it is unsustainable. They should stop subsidising animal farmers immediately. Do car manufacturers get money for every defective car they scrap on the production line? No. Do fruit farmers get subsidised for every apple that is not good enough to sell on? No. So why does WAG and Plaid Cymru support animal farmers in that way? Stop subsidising them and instead subsidise local organic small-scale fruit and vegetable producers, thereby benefitting people's health and avoiding an economy based on exploitation and cruelty.

In a major and insulting form of spin Nerys claims that they are doing this because they care about animals. Mmm, so kill a load of badgers because you care about them? Kill them whether or not they carry TB? Support an industry based around exploiting animals by rewarding farmers with subsidies when it turns out their 'product' is poor quality? Allow transport of animals on long journeys for cattle markets, slaughter, and live exports? Kill cows with TB even though it is treatable? And kill those that don't have TB because they can make money from it? Another example of an AM making Wales look like a backwards and ignorant, uncivilised country. Please keep comments and letters coming in, we will make use of the best ones.

The whole issue of TB in Wales is an indictment of the current farming and trading systems. Badgers are just a scapegoat to save having to face the real issues of the whole animal exploitation industry. TB in most cases isn't fatal if there is proper care and treatment, and early vaccination prevents even that low risk. However the Welsh Assembly Government won't consider that because WAG and dairy farmers don't see cattle as beings but as profit, and it is more profitable for them just to kill the cattle than to cure them

"governments have come under pressure from some quarters, primarily dairy farmers, to mount an active campaign of eradication of badgers" Wikipedia

The answer: give up dairy products. It's easy!

Welsh Assembly Government security lunacy

2010-05-21T16:24:00.012+01:00

The Welsh Assembly Government has started sending staff onto private land without the landowner's permission in order to identify badger setts so that they can come back and kill the badgers. The irony is that the surveyors wear balaclavas and have id badges with no names on, and refuse to remove the balaclavas so that the landowner can check that they are who they say they are! One man took the ID cards so that he could phone WAG to clarify if these were really who they claimed to be - and even though it was his only option under these barmy circumstances, he was arrested for theft! (Thanks to Peter Black, AM, for covering the issue - the last two links go to his blog.)

Later these people will return armed with guns, again without permission, and probably at night, wearing balaclavas and with no means of identifying who they are and what they are doing. The lunacy of this resembles something from the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. The Welsh Assembly Government has granted itself laws which enable it to over-rule human rights, and which mean any armed men can wander round with balaclavas and fake id. The Welsh Assembly Government is acting like a right-wing dictator, removing our rights and using Blair-like spin in an attempt to make anyone who disagrees with their unjust laws a criminal, whilst instilling a culture of fear. This all adds up to a violation of landowners' rights to privacy, security, peace of mind, property, and freedom from trespass.

Do these look like terrorists to you? WAG has been portraying these peaceful and legal-minded citizens as 'terrorists' - but it is WAG's own staff who are going round the countryside in balaclavas and carrying guns with death on their minds

Who supports the cull?
The Welsh Assembly Government loves to call objectors a 'minority', when in reality the supporters - a small proportion of farmers (and only those involved with dairy cow exploitation) - are the minority. The vast majority of people object, either because of compassion, or concern over social justice, or because of the massive costs of the cull (£6,000 per badger), or because science shows the cull to be only a costly political gesture. Even comments on an article on the Farmer's Guardian website are all against the cull! Many points are excellent, see below. So what is the answer? Object to the The Welsh Assembly misGovernment, and stop eating dairy products! Some of the comments we refer to:

"The UK is ALREADY spending millions of pounds (now approaching £100 million annually) on bovine TB (bTB) and trying to eradicate a disease where the risks are hypothetical. [...] It has been refreshing to see that scientists are beginning to question the current policy. ‘Public Health and bovine tuberculosis – what’s all the fuss about’ is a recently published report by Dr Paul R Torgerson and Professor David J Torgenson. They conclude that bTB control in cattle is irrelevant as a public health policy and there is little evidence either for a positive cost benefit in terms of animal health of bTB control. It suggests that such evidence is required; otherwise there is little justification for the large sums of money spent on bTB control in the UK. [...] The cull in Wales is to cost a staggering £10 million (equating to over £6500 per badger culled, based on the estimated 1500 target quoted in the local press!) (and this excludes policing and legal costs regarding challenges) to achieve just 6-9% reduction in bovine TB for only 2 years following the five years of the cull. The Welsh Assembly has not even undertaken any proper cost benefit analysis. Will a cost benefit analysis be undertaken to justify the costs, which include any indirect costs to businesses if an angry public opt for boycotts? Will farmers ultimately bear the brunt of such an unpopular and expensive cull that is not properly backed up by scientific evidence?"

"Culling badgers is just a way of being seen to be doing something. Personally I have responded by giving up dairy produce."

"Funnily enough with (on current estimates) 20%+ of our UK adult badger population dying as the result of traffic accidents, we already have a pretty efficient cull going on, year on year for free. Still we are not talking about a cull here in Pembrokeshire, It is extermination they are aiming at. Either way someone is getting rich out of wasting our taxes."

"This disgusting plan will not secure the eradication of bTB in cattle but merely satisfies a desire for vengeance within the dairy farming community. [...] To add some piquancy to this scenario, the scientific justification behind the proposal is to say the least unbalanced and one senses the weight of vested interests behind the promotion of badger culling as a realistic option for eradicating bTB. As an additional bonus for the rural community, this medieval and barbaric project will also sanction the behaviour of those people who get gratification from slaughtering wild animals. Look out fur and feather, Boggis, Bunce, Bean and co will be dealing with you later, once the final solution has been achieved with the badgers."

"I emailed the Libs and Cons prior to the election to tell them that due to their stance on culling (go ahead), and the Cons stance on hunting with dogs (go ahead) they lost my vote and the votes of my families and friends. We are not alone in such action - the general public is becoming sickened with such matter-of-fact attitudes toward wildlife by such politicians."

Aberystwyth Walking Festival

2010-05-16T14:42:00.002+01:00

Friday May 21st - Sunday May 23rd.

Explore the beautiful coast, valleys and hills around Aberystwyth on walks for all ages and abilities.

More information here.

Justice is served!

2010-05-07T13:10:00.005+01:00

Well, Plaid Cymru got smashed in the elections, their results far down on those they got last time. In Ceredigion Plaid Cymru lost by 8,324 votes - a 10.5% swing away from the party. Is it a coincidence that they have been pushing through unpopular legislation to kill our wildlife? CIN doesn't think so. Our post about parties' stances on the badger slaughter got more hits than any other we had ever done - last week the number of unique CIN blog visitors tripled! This is obviously a huge issue, and has made Plaid Cymru deeply unpopular with many people in Wales, who love the country because of its natural environments.

Further good news was that the UK got its first ever Green Party MP. Other parties pay lip service to green issues but in action are useless (e.g. Plaid Cymru supporting road schemes that would destroy Sites of Special Scientific Interest, or supporting nuclear power stations in Wales, or wanting to slaughter badgers). Well done Green Party!

Update: 14th May 2010, Farmer's Weekly, p30.