Bristol's Garden Rewilding Project [DOCUMENTARY]
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 май 2023
- 🌳Gardening for nature is perhaps the most effective way to encourage a return of native biodiversity, in cities and across the country.
🌳 This project was made possible with Ben Barker & the BS3 wildlife group, a fantastic group of wildlife enthusiasts & activists here in Bristol. Find out more about the group here:
bristolwildlifegroups.wordpre...
🌳 Thank you for watching :)
With you guys every day and every way without nature we have nothing
#1 thing to do: add plants that are native to your local area. Many caterpillars and pollinators can only use specific native plants as hosts.
The UK almost doesn’t have native species. A lot has disappeared after the ice ages…
Slugs is lunch :) was the cutest thing
The 3 piles to add to your garden for nature:-
1. Log pile - over a thousand UK insects need decaying wood to survive.
2. Rock or Stone pile - provides shelter for all kinds of insects, reptiles (frogs, toads….) and small mammals (shrews, voles, field mice,……..
3. Vegetation pile or compost heap is home to all kinds of insects, reptiles and mammals.
Oh, make sure there is water. Everything needs water!
Our cities need to be greener,fantastic idea.
Very uplifting watch.
That’s the way to go. I am doing the same here in Vancouver, Washington USA. Wish me luck.
Good luck! :)
Woohoo! More areas definitely need to pick up this concept, rewilding is so important for protecting biodiversity! As someone else here said, planting local natives is super duper important for insects and birds especially
Local radios need to do more. Get the word out there. Nature is forgiving..
Bravo! 😀
No wildlife friendly garden is complete without a hedgehog highway, our gardens are becoming so vital in keeping the uk's most loved wild mammal from becoming extinct in this country.
Cool idea. It's amazing to see a tightly packed community trying to help the wildlife. I'll share out your video on my community page.
Nature doesn't care about garden boundaries.
There is a difference between rewilding and gardening for wildlife. This project requires conscious human input (gardening). The more people who do garden for wildlife the better. Putting food and water out, hedgehog highways/holes in boundaries, sensitive planting etc is great for individual gardens but put it together and the neighbourhood becomes a larger and larger area that can support our flora and fauna.
I agree with you on everything, except that I would not want to exclude gardening (or certain other human ecological inputs) from the concept of Rewilding. I would rarther say gardening can be an aspect of rewilding.
Sure, rewilding in the classical sense of stepping away completely as humans, from large areas of land to let it have its way, is important of course. But to see this as the only legit rewilding, to me is to further cement the artificail gap between Man and Nature, that got us here in the first place. We´d still be stuck in Culture, with Nature being something other than us.
So I think equally important to deep actual rewilding of the planet, is to stop excluding ourselves from the concept of wilderness. We are wild. We need to un-domesticate and let ourselves into nature, by opening our gardens, for instance. It´s not them coming in, it´s us getting out.
What I´m saying is, we will always have an impact on our surroundings. Because every animal and other lifeforms do. And if these impact is not detrimental to the land, if wildlife thrives alongside humans...why is that area not a sort of wilderness?
Ooops, sorry, a long one this...I got a little carried away because this is something that is dear to my heart. I admit it´s a little much to throw at you for one little sentence above! So please see this as something only started by my reflecting, ignited by your comment but in the end not really replying to it any more... Cheers!
The key is native plants. People always talk about "diversity" but that's the wrong way because it leads you to believe simply that more is better. A better way to think about it is "complexity" because the local ecosystem is an amazingly complex "system" that was built over thousands of years, each piece working with countless others in a dance that we don't have the faintest understanding of. You can have a yard full of green plants, and it still be a black hole in the ecosystem because all those plants are non-native. That means the insects, birds, and other animals don't use the non-native plants for food or housing. Thus, the fragmentation of the ecosystem caused by urban sprawl isn't actually ameliorated. Make sense? In the US, it's estimated that the average house has a landscape that's 80% non-native plants. That's more acreage than all the National Parks combined. However, people see "green" and think everything's okay, not realizing that what they did was no different than pouring used motor oil out on the whole ground. The result is that the Monarch butterfly finally got listed as endangered, and we've lost 30,000,000 songbirds since the 1970's. In the UK, I would guess that the damage is just as bad, and possibly even worse since the nation has a long history of importing non-native species because they've been so heavily marketed.
Brilliant comment!! I converted my yard (garden in UK) in Massachusetts 20+ years ago from lawn that I never treated with any kind of chemicals anyway, to almost entirely native perennials, shrubs, trees -- drought tolerant and amazingly beautiful as well. I leave my outdoors to naturalize, and all kinds of gorgeous native plants self-seed and pop up in unexpected places. A rustic, naturalistic look is what my outside is about, where dragonflies, toads, birds, pollinators of all kinds, snakes, insects, etc abound -- nursery logs (large tree trunks) dotted around are fabulous backdrops; as are my wood piles partially hidden by my native shrubs; leaves left in place until May, when I crumble them into the soil or scoop them up for my compost pile; flagstones and arborist wood chips for the paths; and boulders and rock piles from all my digging in New England soil have pride of place all over my yard. To my dismay and horror, horrendous invasives and ornamentals still get priority at garden centers -- such as "butterfly bush" -- to my dismay. Meanwhile, not one of neighbors have any interest in re-wilding or native plants -- they love their sterile toxic lawns, and preened apartment-complex landscaping with artificially-dyed bark mulch encircling non-native shrubs sheared into bizarre shapes -- it's all so horrendous to the sight and senses!
@@lanialost1320 I'm right there with you. I've had many a 'discussion' with folks over the matter because I'm constantly fighting against invasive non-native plants ruining my own landscape. Someone planted Bamboo next door some 40-odd years ago, and it's a very constant and very expensive task to keep it from simply taking everything over. Same for the privet and nandina. Now I've found a patch of English Ivy as well as Creeping Jenny! It just never ends!
Try as you might, you're hard pressed to find native plants around any more. Folks wonder where all the birds have gone, so I point out that birds need bugs to eat, and we've all but wiped out the bugs by removing their food sources. Undercut the food chain at the bottom, and you wipe out everything at the top. You'd think that simple logic like that would be understandable, but...
When I was working in the trade, there was never any mention of the industry having any responsibility to steward the ecosystem. We were supposed to grow what sold and sell what we grew. Non-natives didn't get holes in their leaves from insects nibbling on them, so that's what customers got. To a point, I understand it because we always had "leftover" plants that didn't sell because they did have insect damage. Try as we might, getting customers to buy those plants was always a struggle.
Kudos for a job well done! You're an inspiration to others, and never think you're not. You might not realize it. They might never say anything. But you can be sure that your small corner of the world has left a lasting impression on passersby.
the natural environment is supposed to be untidy
While on a natural stretch of beach in Dorset, a woman commented that it was lovely, but it was just a shame that the seaweed and debri marking the tide-line was so untidy, and wouldn't it be nice if someone cleaned it up.
While in the woods I asked a passing dog walker if they knew why the trees had been cut down, and she said, in a well-meaning attempt to bond over the issue "I know, it's messy isn't it!" So I replied that I hoped they were harvesting the non-native pine crop, so that the native shrubs and trees could recolonise themselves.
An old colleague looked at a lawn carpeted in daisies, bright as a smattering of spring snow, and said it was "unkempt" and needed a good mow. It was breathtakingly beautiful, but she missed this because she saw it through eyes trained to see nature as something ever-encroaching that should be cut into squares and bound tight at the borders.
Something can be a little loose in looks, a little "untidy" in traditional terms, and still be beautiful. See beneath the surface and you realise that beauty lies not in how something appears, but what that appearance means.
Sometimes ugliness is beautiful because it is honest. And sometimes ugliness isn't ugliness at all, but blindness.
Greetings from further down the list! (Sweden)
Edit: Buuut, I don´t really agree with this list now that I look at it. They are ranking countries based solely on absolute numbers of species currently present. Not relative to historical presense. So it says nothing about biodiversity loss.
As the text on the top of it says "All data based on raw numbers comparing countries without adjusting for size or geographic location." Also, I´d add, without taking into account what losses have been made in that country.
With a ranking system like this, Brazil could erradicate chunks of their species and still be ranking top country, because they have so much to take from. And a country like Kuwait or Luxembourg would stand little chance to rank good ever.
It would make more sense to have a ranking based on biodiversity relative to, for instance, 1950. Or realtive to what could be expected. Though of course that would be much harder to do and leave a greater margin for error.
If you only want to measure for what biodiversity there is to protect, this list is good. But if you want to get a grip of a countries ecological history and sort of measure it´s bad-guyness, it does not communicate well..
Wild urban sounds like an oxymoron, yet it is what will happen as urban areas blight and are overrun. Parts of suburban Detroit, MI is falling down is really falling back to the predevelopment days.
The urban creep is going in reverse as populations age and die out. No where is more noticeable than "Rust Belt" Midwest US states, Eastern Europe, southern Italy.
I welcome the return to pre-European North America, it will become a carbon sink.
What a great future awaits us! I marvel at the thoughts of a wilder future.
None of the people featured were Bristolians. It's the story of modern Bristol really.
The only way to re-wild earth is, one-child families.
Its great so many people are taking action, however I see soooo many how to say well towny or chavvy families that just have desolate fake grass no wildlife spaces and plastic all over their garden.
The middle classes who care let gardenss grow longer and wildlife but sadly 75% of the people dont want this and this is where this idea crashes and burns.
We have to have a green government who leads on all of climate change and biodiversity otherwise were stuffed.
Don't pave over your garden .
Some individuals taking matters into their own hands - well, you couldn't rely on any of the British governments for any action. The way they carry on, you'd think they were the only living things in existence, everything is something they watch on TV.
It's been down to us ordinary folk and a few charities to ring in the changes for a very long time. A pity that clever advertising and increasing poverty has driven people to thinking about themselves before nature.
Utterly disgusting to learn we are in the bottom 10% of countries in the world for biodiversity. That's a shameful figure.
And I live in the part of Britain that lately announced that it can't meet it's net zero targets - before the net zero date is even here. There's time to at least try and work towards it, but no. Let's not bother is pretty much what the SNP said. God knows, it pumped enough money into other ridiculous projects. You mention environment, everyone goes quiet.