0:00

Folks, this is Tom Opre, your host to the podcast where we ask the tough questions regarding man's impact

0:05

on the world's wildlife, raw and unfiltered.

0:08

We strive to help you fully understand the real issues at hand.

0:12

Our goal ensuring the world's wildlife and wildlife habitat exists forever.

0:17

Stay tuned for another edition of Shepherds of the Wild.

0:24

Okay, so I'm Peter Cairns, C-A-I-R-N-S.

0:29

My official pretentious title is executive director of a rewording charity

0:34

called Scotland, the Big Picture. So what is.

0:38

So what is Rewilding? Well, I've been wrestling with that question as of many others for many, many years,

0:44

and it's fair to say that definitions do vary.

0:47

I'll give you our sort of corporate version of it if you like.

0:50

That is Rewilding is an evolving process of nature recovery

0:55

leading to ecosystem, health function and completeness.

0:59

But in essence for me, rewilding is anything that counteracts more widing,

1:04

anything that joins up and enriches habitats rather than further fragment

1:09

and degrade them. Anything that results in more nature and not less nature.

1:14

How do you rewild? You mean Rewild?

1:18

What is the process of rewilding as far as physically,

1:21

what do you do to actually rewild the land?

1:25

I think in terms of what we as humans have to do,

1:29

actually very little in Scotland,

1:32

we live in a situation where many of our ecosystems are severely degraded.

1:37

So there isn't a certain amount of intervention in the short term,

1:41

but quintessentially rewilding is about letting nature run as it needs to

1:45

letting nature plot its own course. Nature is governed by natural processes,

1:50

and I think in many parts of the world we've either arrested or suppressed those

1:55

processes and it's about relinquishing control back to nature.

1:59

And so that's as much a philosophical shift in mindset as it is a

2:03

physical change to the land and the sea. So it's really about letting nature and shape and govern the landscape

2:10

as it needs to, as it wants to. But it involves planting trees to some extent. Right?

2:17

So trees is quite interesting. The word trees is quite interesting at the moment.

2:20

We have a bit of an obsession with trees.

2:23

There's a big difference between trees and a woodland ecosystem,

2:27

and I think we need to understand that difference.

2:30

Planting trees per se is not the answer.

2:33

So it is true to say that Scotland is one of the least wooded countries in

2:38

Europe. Our tree cover is something like 18%.

2:42

The average across Europe is about 37%. So trees plays a part in it,

2:46

but as does Heather blab wood, ants, badgers, otters,

2:50

all of these species are components in a system. And it's the system,

2:55

it's the functionality of the system that we as rewers want to

3:00

improve. If you draw an analogy with, I dunno,

3:03

a plane engine or an airplane, if a few rivets drop out,

3:07

the plane will still fly. A few more rivets drop out and it starts to wobble a little bit. Ultimately,

3:14

if you keep removing components, it's going to come out of the sky.

3:17

And really our ecosystems are no different.

3:20

We've taken away some key components,

3:24

and I won't say we're falling out of the sky, but we're faltering a wee bit here in Scotland and we need to make those repairs

3:30

to get the plane flying functionally again.

3:33

So I've been to some of the JMT properties and some of these

3:38

properties that they've purchased that are what were sporting estates at one

3:42

time, and I just see these hills covered in trees that have been planted

3:48

and then of course fenced off from the deer and stuff like that. Planting,

3:52

I mean, there is an effort, but with the rewilding effort there is an actual effort to plant trees.

3:58

But is that kind of forcing nature to go in a certain direction? And if it is,

4:03

explain to me or if it isn't, kind of why is that? I think there's an effort to plant trees because we are bereft of woodland

4:10

ecosystems generally. It is fair to say that the conservation stroke rewilding community is only

4:17

planting trees when there's no prospect of

4:21

natural regeneration. And in some cases the ground is so far away from the nearest

4:28

tree source or seed source, should I say that planting is the only option,

4:33

but where regeneration is an option in the Kang goms, for example,

4:36

where there's lots of seed saucers, but you have fragmented woodland,

4:40

then natural regeneration, allowing nature to do it for you is the best option for sure.

4:45

Yeah, we've saw quite a bit of that over in sky in that area where they've actually,

4:49

there's a seed bed already in the ground. You're getting these regenerative natural native forests,

4:55

mostly deciduous trees, but they're coming back and it's nice to see that you have such a complex

5:00

biodiverse habitat, whereas because of the logging schemes here,

5:05

since the wars and the seventies and eighties,

5:07

I see all these monocultures and it doesn't seem to me like that's very natural.

5:12

No, not at all. And that's definitely not what rewilding will look like a hundred,

5:17

200 years from now. It is this mosaic,

5:19

this complex mosaic of open glades, boggy,

5:22

woodland scrub and mature trees,

5:25

and of course dead and dying wood within those systems. So again,

5:28

it's that difference between trees and inverted commas and a healthy woodland

5:32

system. And there's a big difference between those two things.

5:37

I guess the question I want to ask you about is about deer

5:42

are deer evil? Yeah.

5:44

So the concept of deer being evil or any animal being

5:49

evil is a completely human construct. Of course, deer are not evil.

5:55

Deer are a necessary and integral part of this landscape.

6:01

The problem if indeed you perceive it to be a problem is the

6:06

number of deer. So the way that the Scottish landscape has been managed for the last 150,

6:11

200 years, generally speaking to paraphrase,

6:14

is to maximize the number of deer. And there's all sorts of reasons for that.

6:19

So we have a situation where the grazing pressure primarily through red

6:24

deer and sheep, is preventing the regeneration of the woodland habitats,

6:31

and not only woodland, but habitats in general.

6:34

And it's keeping them in a suppressed, degraded situation.

6:38

So certainly nobody I know wants to get rid of deer. I certainly don't.

6:44

But we need to control the grazing pressure, at least in the short term.

6:48

And by the short term I'm talking 30, 40 years.

6:52

So we can create this mosaic of habitats that is better not only for deer,

6:57

but also for a range of other species. So the ultimate aim here is to create a greater abundance and diversity of

7:03

life, including deer. Okay, great. With the change of,

7:10

one of the things that Bahari talked to me about was that he sees Scotland being

7:14

purchased up these sporting estates by very

7:20

wealthy international landowners,

7:22

kind of like what Anders Paulson's done here and that they have the money to

7:27

build the tourism infrastructure, that there's going to be an all new economy here that's going to change.

7:33

So going away from the sporting estates into a more

7:37

tourism based economy, how does that really work?

7:42

I know Nigel says the model hasn't, it hasn't been proven out,

7:47

but how will that model work and what will happen to the people that are already

7:52

here living on the land, the folks that are the keepers and the stalkers and all that stuff? Yeah.

7:58

I see the change of land use in Scotland

8:03

very much as a social and a cultural process as well as a physical

8:07

process. And I think the fear of change,

8:11

the fear of people's sense of identity,

8:14

sense of belonging to the land that is inherent with many people,

8:20

that is very, very real. For many people.

8:23

Change is something that human beings don't necessarily welcome easily.

8:27

We're not comfortable with it, but change is inevitable.

8:30

And I think in some cases it is desirable too.

8:33

So it is true to say that what you might term traditional land

8:37

uses, and by that I mean sheep farming grouse, shooting upland deer,

8:42

stalking, et cetera, they are under pressure,

8:45

they are under scrutiny and in some cases they are being phased out.

8:50

Is that an economic necessity? Is it a reflection of modern,

8:54

the challenges that we face as a society, climate breakdown,

8:58

global nature loss being two very obvious ones or is it a combination of all of

9:03

those things? I don't believe,

9:06

and I see absolutely no evidence for this notion that

9:10

rewilding automatically leads to depe.

9:14

There's no evidence of that whatsoever. And you mentioned Glen Fey just a few miles from me, if you've got that, Glen.

9:19

Now there are more people working there than there were 10 years ago.

9:23

So they're the same stalkers, the same Gil is, but there's also fencing,

9:26

contractors, tree planters, peatland, restoration experts, scientists,

9:31

researchers, mountain bike operators, all of these businesses,

9:35

some of them are tourism related, some of them not are in some way or other connected with.

9:43

So if you go for example, up to Glen Fey, which is just a few miles from here,

9:48

there are more people living and working in that landscape than there have been

9:52

for the last 20, 30 years. Still the same deer stalkers, land managers,

9:57

but you've also got fencing contractors, you've got peatland restoration experts, you've got scientists,

10:03

researchers, tourism operators, hospitality providers.

10:06

All of these businesses in one way or another are reflected or a

10:11

reflection of the landscape that is in recovery or rewilding if you like.

10:15

So this notion that Rewilding will lead to depopulation,

10:20

I don't accept that it will involve change.

10:23

And at an individual level that can be challenging. But equally,

10:27

some of the skill sets that you described within the stalking community for

10:30

example, they're really, really, really valuable. And again,

10:33

if you take Glen Fish in as example, they're still dear stalking,

10:36

but they're doing other things as well. They're being retrained to diversify their role.

10:41

So I don't see, I understand the fear,

10:44

but I don't think there's any serious foundation in it.

10:48

So across the valley, Glen, over here we have ra,

10:52

where brew dog has purchased it under the auspicious of becoming the very first

10:56

beer company to be carbon neutral. And I've been there,

11:01

I've seen the excavators that Trackhoes digging up the Heather land,

11:04

which I kind of look at. And I know according to UN that you guys have like 60% of the Heather Mooreland

11:10

in the world and it's considered the ecosystem of importance.

11:18

How do you square with them planting Douglas f sickest, Bruce,

11:21

after digging up the ground and breaking through the iron pan on the

11:26

soils and changing the soil

11:30

for thousands of years and putting non-native trees up there.

11:34

How does that kind of move into your big scope of thing? Is that good or bad?

11:41

I dunno that I'd necessarily want to refer to brew dogs specifically,

11:44

but it is true to say that there are organizations

11:49

moving in on the Scottish landscape with an agenda to arguably offset their

11:54

carbon. Some might say greenwash their public profile.

11:59

I think as with anything, there are good examples and there are bad examples.

12:04

The example you've mentioned not too far from here,

12:07

I would argue is not a particularly good example.

12:10

I think their motivations are questionable, but equally,

12:13

we work with corporate bodies who have no agenda. They don't want greenwash,

12:17

they just want to give back to nature and in many cases give back to local

12:21

communities as well. So this term green led,

12:25

I think is a typical sort of term adopted by the popular media to

12:29

generalize a whole range of different organizations

12:34

coming to this place for different reasons and for different outputs.

12:37

So I think there are good examples of corporate rewers

12:43

and there are some questionable examples as well.

12:46

And I think organizations like Scotland, the big picture,

12:48

we have quite a long list of criteria,

12:51

quite stringent criteria of companies that we will deal with and those that we

12:56

won't. So we need to make sure that the motivation of these investors is well

13:01

placed. And it is true to say that in some cases that's not the case.

13:06

Great answer. So what I've noticed over the last year of being here and going back and forth,

13:11

talking to Beth, there's a lot of animosity towards different groups here.

13:16

It's literally chucking hand grenades at each other. It seems to me though,

13:22

I mean one of the things that when I first sat down with David Behar to

13:25

interview, he pulls out his iPhone and starts scrolling through and showing me all these

13:28

big stags, he's hunted. And I'm like, okay,

13:31

so why don't you get along with the keepers and the

13:36

stalkers? And it seems like there's a lot of people want the same things.

13:43

How do we cross bridge those gaps between these different

13:48

user groups and their traditions? Face it. I mean,

13:52

we are a product of our traditions and our experiences.

13:55

How do we bridge those gaps so that we can leave this place better than we found

13:59

it? It's a really interesting question about how we bridge the gaps, so to speak,

14:04

or the divides between different interest groups.

14:07

And I often remark people say to me,

14:09

it must be great working in a wild landscape with these sexy wildlife

14:14

species. And I say, yeah, that must be great.

14:16

It's not what I do most of my time. It's trying to bridge those gaps.

14:20

I think my job or our job really is 20% ecology and

14:25

80% psychology. It's all about people.

14:29

I do believe that we share more common ground

14:34

than A, we believe ourselves. And B,

14:36

perhaps as is portrayed in the popular media,

14:39

the popular media like division and conflict, they like tribalism,

14:42

they like segregating and compartmentalizing these interest groups.

14:46

That's not helpful in my opinion.

14:48

So I deal with a lot of dear stalkers and land managers and farmers, et cetera.

14:54

I've never come across a situation where you can't find some common ground.

14:58

And I think the secret is building out from that common ground.

15:01

Let's not spend days, weeks,

15:03

months and endless energy trying to reconcile our extreme differences over

15:08

wolves. For example. Let's agree that we all need and want a healthy environment.

15:14

And then the only question is what does that look like and how do we get there?

15:17

So for me, this is as much a social process,

15:20

a philosophical or a cultural process as it is a physical one.

15:25

And I think the answer to your question really is finding that common ground and

15:28

building out from that. Because what you do then you build trust and you build a common objectivity.

15:34

You find shared solutions to the shared challenges that we all face.

15:38

Yeah, that's a great, I mean I look at it and it's like, well,

15:41

if you need to remove a certain number of deer, why aren't the people from the Scottish Gamekeepers Association providing you

15:47

that service for benefit to themselves, which benefits you?

15:51

And everybody wins at the end of the game,

15:54

but I know that there's these wars about this per square kilometer capacity of

15:58

deer and that stuff, and it's just, to me, I'm like, guys, I mean,

16:02

you really don't have a lot of deer here for the most part.

16:04

There are some places that do. Yeah, exactly. But for the most part,

16:08

it's pretty well under control from what I can.

16:10

Tell. Yeah, and I think ironically, we've been talking about,

16:13

we're doing a film about deer at Scotland, the big picture.

16:16

And the idea is that ultimately if we get this mosaic of

16:20

vibrant, dynamic, healthy habitats in place,

16:24

and this is not going to happen quickly or easily, but let's project 50,

16:28

a hundred years from now, there's no reason we can't have more deer. Actually,

16:32

it is just the fact we've got an impoverished landscape supporting an

16:35

impoverished deer herd and they're all scratching around trying to find

16:40

food in an environment that doesn't provide a great deal.

16:43

So there's a welfare issue as well here for me. Others would contradict this,

16:48

but I think if we can give deer a better home to live in,

16:51

there's no reason why we can't have more healthy deer and greater numbers.

16:56

And that's the irony. And speaking of that, especially in this glen here, it seems, I mean me,

17:01

I am used to seeing in Montana deer being moving unrestricted.

17:06

These environments have evolved with deer and the impact of them and of course

17:09

elk or woody browsers, and we have lots of those where I live,

17:12

but I see this insane amount of deer fence.

17:17

How does that, your idea of having deer have a healthier environment and be able to be a

17:23

healthier animal, healthier species here if they're constantly running into fences

17:29

everywhere here in the highlands? I mean, if a deer, I mean deer for 2000 years,

17:34

there has only been what, 5% cover of forest on this island in the highlands and now

17:39

we're at 20, 25% somewhere in there yet I would almost argue. And those deer did fine.

17:45

I mean they survived up there and they've adapted to living over the thousands

17:50

of years in the highlands here and up in the Mooreland and the Heather

17:54

Mooreland. But how do we cotton with this fact that deer really don't have access to the

17:59

habitats they need when they need it? It's a crazy system.

18:04

And I think some of the perspectives that you've alluded

18:08

to, some of the quite narrow perspectives are born of that system.

18:13

And we live in a landscape that is very compartmentalized.

18:17

You've got blocks of forestry here, blocks of farmland here,

18:21

the odd pocket of wildness or rewilding dotted in and around the

18:26

system. And by the system, I don't only mean the financial support system,

18:30

but also the philosophical cultural system perpetuates that.

18:35

And deer fencing is a tool that

18:39

delineates between one bit of the system and another, but as you rightly say,

18:44

it's onsight, it's intrusive, and it prevents the free movement of not only deer but other animals.

18:50

I hate fencing, I've got to tell you, I really,

18:52

really detest it both physically and ideologically.

18:57

But again, it is the system and I think not only are we seeing a change

19:03

in people's perspectives of what the land should do,

19:07

which species should accommodate and who those

19:12

species should serve, but we're also starting to see a shift in the policy system that

19:18

finances land management in Scotland.

19:22

And that's the uk, rightly or wrongly has left Europe.

19:25

We've now got to come up with a new land management subsidy system.

19:29

And I believe that will be very, very different to that.

19:32

That has persisted since the second World War really.

19:35

And so ultimately it might be economics that forces the

19:40

change as well as social trends.

19:44

We have this effort to plant trees, plant trees, plant trees, plant trees

19:50

and plant trees in places that maybe like the Heather Molins,

19:55

that soils in those ecosystems have evolved pretty much

20:00

without trees. Is there a human romantic

20:08

emotional reason for doing that? I mean, your trees for life,

20:13

why is this about trees or at least that's the perception it comes across to

20:18

the outside public. Sure. Why is this? Here comes the dog, by the way. Oh,

20:22

right. Great. Why are trees romanticized here in Scotland?

20:28

I don't dunno that trees are romanticized necessarily.

20:31

There's a recognition that Scotland once had a much greater

20:35

tree cover or woodland cover. I don't like the word trees for reasons I mentioned.

20:41

And so part of rewilding is to try and restore that

20:45

woodland cover or some of it anyway, but that is not to say that that's at the expense of valuable peatland

20:52

habitats, for example. And we saw a disastrous situation in the sixties and seventies where deep

20:58

peat, which we now understand stores more carbon than tropical rainforest was over

21:03

planted with exotic conifers. And again, there was a financial incentive to do so.

21:07

Hopefully we've learned a lesson from that. So forestry policy in Scotland,

21:11

for example, now won't allow tree planting on deep peat for that very reason.

21:16

So I think our ecological knowledge, our ecological awareness is improving.

21:20

And again, it's not about trees per se,

21:23

it's about creating this healthy functional ecosystem,

21:27

part of which on open moorland or some open moorland would benefit from more

21:32

vegetation cover, let's call it that, rather than trees per se.

21:35

And that includes upon the high hills,

21:38

the Mont woodland that is very, very rare in Scotland, the dwarf birches,

21:43

the miniature willows that should grow at altitude but don't because of historic

21:48

grazing pressure. So trees are often picked out as a sort of silver bullet.

21:54

It's not about trees, it's about fully functioning ecosystems and trees are just one part of that,

21:59

as are millions of other species.

22:02

Staying in that ecosystem.

22:05

Bahari says that the management of grouse Moores is done to the detriment

22:10

of the land and the animals that are in it. How would you respond to that?

22:15

I think my problem with, well,

22:17

I suppose my problem with grouse Moores is that it serves the need.

22:22

The management of a driven grass mall serves the needs of just a few

22:27

species and just a few people. So my question is,

22:31

could that area of land be utilized in a way that

22:36

benefits a greater range of species and a greater range of people?

22:39

That's the first question. The second question,

22:42

I think more philosophically I guess,

22:45

is that if grass shooting had never existed and in 2023 in a

22:50

climate emergency and a biodiversity emergency,

22:52

somebody suggested it as a sustainable land use for the future,

22:57

it would be laughed at, it would be completely dismissed.

23:00

And yet here we have roughly 12 15% of Scotland's entire land

23:05

area devoted to driven ground shooting.

23:08

So it's not anti grouse shooting as such.

23:11

It's a question of does this land use benefit

23:16

society at large in the 21st century? That's the question.

23:20

Should it be benefiting society? I mean, is that the whole purpose of, I mean,

23:25

people don't live up on these highlands, I guess could you explain why it should benefit society and how it does?

23:32

Well, I. Mean want everything to be natural, right?

23:36

I don't think it's necessarily, again, depends how you define natural,

23:40

of course. Basically what you've got with gro mores is huge areas of land intensively

23:47

managed to produce effectively one species red grouse. Now,

23:51

there are other beneficiaries. Wading birds would be one.

23:54

There are other specialist species associated with Heather Moland,

23:59

but it's a fairly narrow group of species. At a social level,

24:04

I would argue that grass malls don't support as many

24:09

people as an alternative. Land use could.

24:12

So at a social and a cultural level or social and economic level,

24:16

that land could be more productive. Okay.

24:20

I've seen some research and I've talked to some scientists that have managed,

24:24

not managed, they've researched grouse Moores that have gone,

24:28

that are no longer managed as grouse Moores. And the science says that within 10 years they lose 50% of their biodiversity.

24:37

Then it's peer reviewed science. I mean, it's real. So how,

24:43

and David says, well, I don't believe it. And I'm like, well, I don't know.

24:46

I mean, every time I see a peer review paper, I guess you could make up the information. But usually if you're a scientist,

24:53

I mean it's like being a doctor. You have a ethical objective

24:59

here to be objective, to be scientific,

25:02

to let science figure out what's going on,

25:05

what happens if we all know that in the United States we have wild quail there

25:10

and in southeast United States they do low intensity burning and they do

25:14

suppression of ground predators, and we give those landowners awards in the United States here,

25:20

you guys want to hang 'em from the highest hill. If you do,

25:24

if science says you do lose biodiversity by not managing it makes sense too,

25:28

right? You're creating a lot of different levels of habitat.

25:33

And as we know in the United States, especially for deer and Turkey and things like that,

25:37

the more variety of edge cover you're having,

25:39

those are edge cover animals there in North America.

25:41

But how do you kind of cotton into that science?

25:45

And do you believe it? Do you not believe it? I mean,

25:50

what's your thoughts on it? I think as a society and within society,

25:56

there are tribes, if you like. Everybody belongs to a tribe.

25:59

And I think we have a tendency to cherry pick science,

26:03

cherry pick evidence that supports our particular agenda,

26:06

that frames our objectives in a favorable light. And I see that all the time.

26:11

And don't get me wrong, rewers do it every bit as much as other sectors do it.

26:16

So I'm not disputing the veracity of the science.

26:20

I would say that it's probably come from

26:24

sort of an internal commission in some cases.

26:26

So there's a predisposition to come out with a certain result. And again,

26:31

I would emphasize that applies across all sectors,

26:34

not just the supporters of Heather. I suppose at the end of the day, the tension between

26:44

at pro rewild as an anti rewild,

26:46

as possibly lies with the belief system that on the one hand

26:51

says humans have an obligation,

26:54

a moral duty even to manage the landscape.

26:58

And those that take an ecentric view,

27:00

which is that nature should have free reign.

27:05

And it's that word control that sits in the middle of that.

27:08

How much to what extent,

27:11

and whether humans should control the landscape to their own ends

27:15

and over what sort of area and what are those ends?

27:20

So I think there are two words at the heart of this tension,

27:24

this debate, call it what you will. One is change and the fear of change,

27:28

and who is advocating that change? And the second one is this business of control.

27:33

And we live in a country where for hundreds if not thousands of years,

27:37

we've had control over every square inch of it and every species within it.

27:40

And we've made it work for just one species, us.

27:44

So coming along and suggesting that we should seed

27:49

control to another species or another set of species that's really unsettling

27:54

for a lot of people. So this business,

27:58

this interface between how much,

28:01

whether and to what extent humans should manage the landscape,

28:06

I think is at the core of the rewilding debate.

28:10

Some people would say it has to serve humans,

28:14

and some people would say, we are just one species among many and we need to understand our place in the

28:20

natural order. And I think that's where the rub comes.

28:24

And it is a difficult and often fractious rub.

28:28

One of the things that we push is the fact, I said earlier,

28:30

there's 8 billion humans as of last year now on the planet.

28:33

The push and the stress on our ecosystems and

28:38

resources is never earth,

28:40

has never seen anything like this in human time.

28:45

But to say, let's let nature figure it out,

28:48

yet we know that there's going to be forces that are going to put their,

28:52

we're going to want, they're going to to control things. And obviously,

28:55

as we've said for thousands, well as long as humans have existed the earth for our survival,

29:02

Is nature really going to take care of this on its own?

29:06

That's also going to benefit the 8 billion humans,

29:09

or are humans going to have to be involved in that management?

29:13

Because you guys are planting trees, so you are making conscious decisions about physically what's going to happen on

29:19

the ground. And of course you got two different user groups. One,

29:22

it's trying to traditional sporting people that they want to have certain things

29:27

with the wildlife, and you want to let nature just do its own thing.

29:32

How do we cotton with the fact that with 8 billion humans,

29:36

can we really allow nature to run the show here?

29:41

It does run the show. I mean, I get it of, but the reality is,

29:44

is we are going to fuck it up if we're not careful. Yeah.

29:48

Yeah, yeah. No, it's a completely valid question.

29:50

And all of these factors,

29:53

not least of which the burgeoning human population play a massive role in all of

29:58

this, of course. And that's not unique to Scotland, by the way.

30:01

That's a global challenge. How do we feed and service a growing population against the backdrop

30:08

of a climate and biodiversity crisis? That's not an easy answer,

30:12

an easy question to answer. What I would say is that for the likes of Scotland, the big picture,

30:18

we are not suggesting that Rewilding should take over that it should be

30:22

everywhere. We are pragmatic people.

30:25

We understand that people live and work in this landscape,

30:28

and those people need to be fed. It's a question of could we do more?

30:33

Could we do better? And that applies not only to big areas in the Scottish islands,

30:37

it applies to green infrastructure in our cities,

30:41

it applies to the margins around farms.

30:44

Could we have more nature in our landscape,

30:47

whether that's a big estate like Glen Fey or a garden in the middle of

30:51

Edinburgh? And I think the answer to that is yes. Now,

30:54

whether you call that rewilding, whether you call it ecological restoration,

30:57

nature recovery, call it what you like, the net result is more nature and a more functioning nature or nature

31:05

machine, so to speak. So it's not a question of wiping the slate clean and starting

31:11

again and trying to create some sort of disneyfied version of the past.

31:14

That's not what it's about. It's a recognition of the challenges we face and how we're going to best address

31:21

those challenges against the backdrop of those really huge

31:25

challenges. And human population is really the elephant in the room with all of this.

31:31

And again, that that's a global challenge of course.

31:34

So no silver bullet, no easy answer, but from my point of view,

31:40

so lemme just come at it. Another one just give you a little,

31:45

one way of looking at Rewilding is that it's a journey. It's a scale.

31:50

Let's just say for the sake of argument, that scale is one to 10.

31:53

Let's say Montana is at seven, let's say Scotland is at four,

31:58

just arbitrarily my job, our job as Rewild is,

32:02

is to get us from four to five.

32:04

We probably will never get to 10 because we live in a tiny,

32:08

relatively crowded island. Can we get to seven? Can we get to eight?

32:12

Possibly in the future. But my immediate job,

32:15

my immediate priority is to get us from where we are and just inches along that

32:19

scale of wildness, just that little bit.

32:22

And that needs the likes of the farmers and the keepers and the land managers to

32:25

come with us on that journey. So our job is a challenge because on the one hand,

32:30

we're constantly trying to push the envelope to move us along that scale,

32:35

but of course we can't alienate neither would we want to alienate the people

32:40

that we need to bring with us. And that's a wafer thin line given all the social and cultural sensitivities

32:45

that you've referred to. Yeah, that's a great answer.

32:48

And one of the things that's kind of bugged me here,

32:51

a couple of things as we've gone and done the research here,

32:54

my associate producer on this is a photographer named Tony Vinu,

32:58

and Tony's got a master's in land management in the United States,

33:01

worked for department interior. He's a card carrying Native American.

33:04

And so he has a very unique perspective, and we've really just pounded our heads like, well, why is this and why is that?

33:12

We see this effort to take grouse Moores.

33:17

It's not just even grouse mors, it's just that Heather ecosystem and plant trees on it.

33:23

And then we look at this agricultural lands that we have down lower that in some

33:28

cases are fairly marginal agricultural lands that actually is,

33:32

we know agricultural lands is the demise of biodiversity, right? I mean,

33:37

these are, monocultures for the most part, are very limited,

33:40

is when it comes to biodiversity. Why aren't efforts by groups like yours and the rewilding effort

33:46

targeting these marginal farmlands and grasslands to be able

33:51

to make them more biodiverse and more healthy?

33:57

Again, I don't think rewilding is targeting, as you put it,

34:02

a given habitat or a given land use. I think there are some extremes.

34:06

You might argue that driven grow malls are one such extreme where

34:11

the intensity of the management in some cases is undoubtedly detrimental.

34:16

Maybe not to red grouse, but to a whole range of other species.

34:19

And there's routine calling of stokes weasels, foxes,

34:23

corvids on those estates. But it's not about targeting grouse smores as such.

34:28

It's about how can we identify across the whole country?

34:33

Gra Moores might be one example, Upland deer estates might be another,

34:36

a garden in Edinburgh might be another, marginal farmland might be another.

34:40

How can we identify those opportunities to create more nature

34:44

without displacing the people that live there and work there,

34:51

and not only not displacing them, but also creating additional benefits for them.

34:55

One of the challenges in Scotland or in rural places really across Europe

35:00

is depopulation, especially young people leaving rural areas to go and work in the city.

35:06

It's completely understandable. Those communities will ultimately die like a forest would if there's no young

35:11

trees growing up in it. So that's a social challenge that we have to address.

35:18

We believe that rewilding, it's not a silver bullet.

35:20

We've never made any claims about it being a silver bullet,

35:23

but it does bring benefit if we get it right. It brings benefits for nature,

35:27

it brings benefits for climate, but crucially,

35:29

it also brings benefits for people. So yeah,

35:33

I think that it's not a question of targeting something and

35:38

banning it and stopping it. The question is,

35:40

could it be done differently to benefit to create a wider

35:45

range of beneficial outcomes? Now, you used the word detrimental, the management of grouse Moores. I mean,

35:51

how is it exactly detrimental in what animals are actually being negatively

35:55

harmed by that form of management? You would ask any grouse, more manager

36:02

is grouse shooting in its historical context

36:07

possible without severe persecution of the

36:12

species that impact on grouse, and that's predators and scavengers generally.

36:17

And I think if they were honest, most of them would answer no.

36:21

So the detriment, as you call it,

36:24

is to those species that are literally eliminated to allow red

36:29

grouse to produce a harvest for the shooters.

36:32

But detriment was your word, not mine. Okay.

36:36

That's why I asked. You said David said the same thing, and I said, okay,

36:38

so just explain it to me. If you're. A crow or a fox or a sto or a weasel, it's detrimental.

36:43

You have your head blown off. So I talked to and Whiteman too,

36:49

and about Raptor persecution and whatnot,

36:52

and we know there's been a long history of Raptor persecution for the grouse

36:55

Moores. Obviously their idea there is to limit just like the ground predators we're

37:00

talking about here. But of course, the laws have changed, society's changed,

37:04

and killing avian predators literally can land you in jail,

37:09

including the landowner, which I'm sure that these guys,

37:11

especially if they're wealthy people don't really want to go to jail.

37:18

I understand that the management of those grouse, Moores, I mean,

37:23

I've been on Glen Ogle, I've been on some of the Danica estates,

37:27

and I mean I have seen a variety,

37:29

large variety of avian predators and both species and

37:34

numbers. And when I talked to Andy about it, he says, well, yeah, Tom,

37:38

these are all animals that are coming in to an area that's devoid of predators

37:42

because the guys killed them all. Well, that's not really how nature works.

37:47

I mean, yeah, they do come in and fill these vacuums where there is,

37:50

but they're coming there because the habitat, it is easy to hunt on.

37:55

And there's a whole bunch of walking McDonald's around. I mean, let's face it,

37:58

if I put a hundred big Macs out on the table and school got out and I just said,

38:01

Hey kids, there's Big Max out there. Guess what?

38:03

500 kids would be standing there by the table pulling big Macs out.

38:07

So is there really Raptor persecution going on a regular basis

38:12

in all these estates or is this kind of a fallacy that's more of cherry

38:17

picking something to be able to throw rocks at a different user group?

38:20

Yes. I think the issue of Raptor persecution,

38:23

as with all of these issues is complex and it is contested.

38:27

You asked me the question, is rap to persecution going on? Yes, unequivocally,

38:32

there's evidence on a regular basis that is it going on?

38:36

Is it going on on all estates? No, absolutely not.

38:40

And there is a tendency, we all have a tendency to generalize and to use a broad brush.

38:45

Grouse mores are good grouse, mores are bad, rewers are good, rew is are bad.

38:50

There's a huge amount of nuance and layering across all of this.

38:55

So Raptor persecution, in my opinion, is a huge and embarrassing stain on Scotland as a country and as a

39:02

society in a progressive modern country. It shouldn't be happening.

39:07

And it does happen. Is it as widespread as it once was? I believe not.

39:14

I believe the ability for us to monitor that is better

39:19

because of things like satellite tracking. Equally,

39:22

those perpetrators that are doing it know that, and it's a bit like drugs.

39:27

Every time the police come up with a way of curtailing the trade,

39:30

the dealers come up with a way of bypassing it is a problem.

39:35

There's no doubt about that. And I think if you just turn the tables a little bit,

39:40

if you are in the shooting community or the grouse shooting community,

39:43

it's a problem for you. It's a problem for the reputation of the shooting community.

39:48

My frustration is that that shooting community

39:52

is not as willing if you like to come out

39:57

and expose those bad apples, if you like,

40:00

in the bunch as they should do. And I believe if they did,

40:06

we talked earlier about building bridges and building trust,

40:09

that would be a bridge that could be built. So there is a problem at the moment,

40:14

both physically in terms of the persecution itself,

40:17

but also the cover of the cover that some

40:22

parts of the shooting community provide for the perpetrators. But again,

40:26

I would just stress that's a broad brush, and there's a huge range of nuance

40:33

in all of that. So there are some landowners that are willing to let their keepers take some big

40:37

chances here. It's kind of a little game of Russian roulette to be exact.

40:41

Well, I think there are some landowners that tell their keepers not to do it,

40:45

and they do it. There are landowners that turn a blind eye.

40:48

There are landowners that actively instruct their keepers to do it.

40:51

So the keeper becomes a victim of the system, as it were.

40:54

And there's everything in between, and there's landowners and keepers that will have none of it and everything

41:00

in between. So it's wrong to say that all grouse mos are shooting raptors or

41:05

killing whatever it happens to be. That is not the case.

41:10

It is the case to say though, that in order to run a sustainable mo,

41:15

there has to be some predator control.

41:18

Now the question is to what degree is that control? And I don't,

41:24

if you just put aside the legislation a moment,

41:27

is it any more appropriate or moral to shoot a stout

41:32

or to shoot a golden eagle? Golden eagle is illegal to shoot,

41:35

and society rightly recoils in horror,

41:39

but STOs are somehow dispensable. So yeah,

41:44

at the end of the day, a more is run according to certain management principles,

41:48

and some people find those palatable and acceptable and others less so. Yeah.

41:53

In talking just FYI to Peter Frazier, we did a couple interviews with him,

41:57

and you mentioned something, there's about three to 400 grouse Morris in Scotland here,

42:03

and his estimate is it's three or four

42:09

outfits that are doing the wrong thing. And matter of fact,

42:13

that's what he's telling me, and he has no reason to lie to me. I mean,

42:16

because considered to be friendly too, right? So it's like, okay,

42:21

so again, it's kind of like I said at the beginning of the question,

42:24

it feels like there's a big, and you used the term broad brush that's painted on here and the United States.

42:29

I mean, it's absolutely, you can't go kill bald eagles, you can't kill hawks and stuff. Does one happen every once in a while?

42:34

Usually it's some kids out sticking around with a shotgun and shoot something.

42:38

It's very rare that people that are maintaining, like I said earlier,

42:43

are quail plantations and wild quail. I mean,

42:46

only when you take wild quail and you manage 'em,

42:48

just like you do the grouse Moores in the southeast United States,

42:51

you have really good populations. Well, it makes sense, right?

42:53

Because inhibiting the ground predators and you're enhancing the land for them,

42:57

their food and cover. But when you get off those lands,

43:02

the wild quail populations are almost gone.

43:05

Yeah. Yeah, sure. Because humans, that's one thing.

43:09

Our ecosystems have evolved over fire. Now,

43:12

that's not the case here because it's so wet,

43:15

but that's one of the things that we look at it and say like, wait a minute,

43:18

without humans burning the land, which is long before Indo-European,

43:22

northern white settlers showed up. And so these ecosystems,

43:27

you evolve a fire. And without that, then those species that we hold near and dear aren't going to do very well.

43:32

It's kind of like the whole, that stopped fire fires with the bear there.

43:38

It's like all of a sudden we realized that we had all this loading of fuels in

43:43

the forest because they weren't ever burning for 80 or a hundred years.

43:45

And when they did burn, it literally scarified the ground three or four feet down and killed the seabeds

43:50

and everything else. And that's not a good thing. And if you were with Yellowstone,

43:54

you saw that in 88 and after they had another big fire after that. And so yeah,

43:59

we kind of need to have fire because that's what that ecosystem here. But here,

44:02

do you guys have, I've heard about some catastrophic fires up in the Glen. I'm not Glen's per se,

44:08

but up in the Heather Mooreland, when you've got some really rank Heather and you've got a fairly amount of,

44:15

it dries out and it creates a fuel load. And so there's been some big fires.

44:19

How do you guys manage fires? I'm just curious on a side note.

44:22

Yeah, I mean, I think the subject of wildfires is in there with the debate

44:28

around rewilding and land use generally. And again,

44:32

I think it's a good example of how people, different people cherry pick the evidence to support their particular objective.

44:38

I hear a lot of rhetoric about mule burn,

44:41

which is the deliberate burning of Heather predominantly to sustained grouse

44:48

being damaged into the climate. It emits carbon, and that makes sense. Equally,

44:52

I hear the argument that you've just alluded to whereby rank Heather is a fuel

44:57

load and therefore the heather has to be burned regularly to prevent that fuel

45:01

load burning a building. So yeah,

45:03

I think it's another chess piece if you like,

45:06

on the bigger board that is moved around according to your particular agenda.

45:10

Okay, that's great. You guys have started your organization 2018, the Scotland big picture.

45:20

You guys are obviously doing things that you feel are important to affect

45:25

change on the landscape. Where do you see the highlands of Scotland and the islands in

45:31

5, 10, 50 years from now? Really based on what you're seeing,

45:36

I know what you want to see, but based on all these different conflicting forces and different user groups

45:42

and land use issues, where do you really think it's going to be?

45:46

And then maybe just add where you hope it.

45:49

Yeah, I think the direction of travel for the future is really interesting,

45:54

actually. And the direction of travel over the last four or five years has been very

46:00

much towards, within the conservation community,

46:04

it's been very much towards ecosystem restoration rather than the species.

46:08

Individual species management. That's been a fundamental change,

46:11

and that's really accelerating in the farming community.

46:14

There is a recognition that farmers have to play a role in climate

46:19

mitigation and biodiversity loss in the uplands, again,

46:24

depends on who you speak to, but if you take deer management, for example,

46:28

which plays a big role in upland management,

46:31

there is a recognition more recently about deer numbers and the need to

46:36

regulate them. That has been a relatively recent development.

46:40

And it goes back to what I said earlier about finding common ground.

46:43

We're starting to get better at finding common ground.

46:47

So building from that common ground, it is likely that over the next five,

46:52

10 years, there will be more ecosystem restoration. Call it that.

46:56

You don't have to call it rewilding At what speed and at what scale and to what end point

47:05

that develops, I don't know.

47:09

But I see the direction of travel as a positive one.

47:12

The caveat to that is that we must ensure as that journey

47:17

rolls out, that people are part of that journey. And so again,

47:22

this has never been about people or replacing people with nature.

47:27

This is about, we all face challenges, they're existential challenges.

47:31

Some of these things, how are we going to address them as a society,

47:36

as a country, as a species, even. So these are big, big challenges.

47:40

But I see change, I see positive change. And ultimately,

47:44

I would hope that we end up in a place,

47:48

going back to my definition of rewilding, really,

47:50

where we have ecosystems that are healthy, they are functional,

47:54

and wherever possible they are complete with a range of species that help shape

47:59

and can help shape in the future those ecosystems.

48:02

So that's where I hope we'll get to. I'll be dead by the time all of that happens,

48:06

but that's the journey that we're on. Great. Down Edinburgh, that's where your government is,

48:13

dictates a lot of the policies on land use issues. And of course,

48:17

you alluded to rules and regulations and licensing and all that stuff.

48:22

Do you really feel that the Scottish National Party and the government,

48:26

Edinburgh today and over the last 10, 12,

48:30

whatever years that they've been in power, do they really care about the land and the people that live on the land

48:37

or is more of their emphasis on the people between Glasgow and Edinburgh?

48:41

Yeah, I think the political wins blow

48:46

in a quite fickle way. I think we've all seen across the world how quickly those wins

48:53

change. In the last 10 years or so, we've had Brexit, you've had Trump, we,

48:59

we've all had our challenges to deal with,

49:02

and Scotland is no different. So

49:08

was ecological recovery high on the government's list of priorities

49:13

10 years ago, no, five years ago starting to creep in on the edges as Scotland declared a

49:20

climate emergency is one of the first countries to do so now. And again,

49:26

this is as much about the personnel in the government at the moment right

49:31

now, there's a huge momentum behind it,

49:34

but it is fickle and all of that could change on Monday morning.

49:38

So from a rewers point of view,

49:42

we're trying to take advantage of the window of opportunity that exists right

49:46

now, but that window could close in an instant.

49:50

So it's difficult to predict the political climate moving

49:54

forward because I think it's just so volatile. So I'm hearing talk,

50:00

and obviously there's efforts afoot within the government to license grouse,

50:03

Moore's licensing, these deer policies,

50:08

things like that. In creating licensing and overview by the government,

50:13

is there a comparable opportunity to license

50:18

rewilding and people because affecting

50:22

change similar? I mean, I'm trying to figure out is the universal,

50:27

is the government trying to manage these ecosystems for the benefit of all,

50:32

or is this just being kind of cherrypicked of this licensing schemes?

50:37

Is that more along the lines of, we're doing these things because we don't like what these people are doing,

50:41

but we like what you're doing so you're not getting licensed? Yeah.

50:44

Again, I think it's what I'm seeing. Yeah. Yeah. I think it's a very astute question.

50:49

I think that Grouse Smalls and Melbourne and

50:54

arguably predator persecution is licensed or is

50:59

becoming licensed to reflect wider societal attitudes.

51:05

Nobody likes regulation, and there's a pushback against that licensing because of that reason.

51:10

It's that perception that the establishment is imposing its will on rural

51:15

communities. I would contest that Rewilding isn't licensed.

51:19

It absolutely is. You can't just go and plant trees wherever you like.

51:23

You can't just go and wiggle or meander a river wherever you like.

51:28

There are regulatory consents that you do need.

51:32

And also the subsidy system has to be worked if indeed that's the route

51:37

that you go down. So Rewilding is not a free for all, absolutely not.

51:42

Land use change in Scotland is regulated to varying degrees.

51:46

And I would say that some elements of sports shooting, for example,

51:50

and I'm referring maybe to the release of non-native pheasants and red leg

51:54

partridges. That's a really good example of an unregulated land use.

52:00

So again, the perception is that at the moment,

52:05

grouse shooting is under the cosh and it's being overly regulated,

52:09

and there's pushback from that. But it's no different really in many ways to other land uses in Scotland that

52:15

are equally regulated. So I wouldn't say it's a level playing field,

52:20

but it's probably more level than the popular media would have us believe.

52:25

Okay. Well that was great. Is there anything you'd like to add?

52:30

No, I think they're really, really in searching questions.

52:34

They're all valid and clearly there is no black and white answer to any of it.

52:38

It's a journey, and we're all on it to varying degrees.

52:42

This is kind of a filmmaking maybe 50% investigative journey.

52:46

Yeah, yeah. No, it's interesting. It's good. Why are people doing what they're doing?

52:50

Why is the decisions that are being made the way they are,

52:54

and at the end, what is the end result? What are we going to achieve here?

52:59

Because like I said, with all the people on the land, it's got to have a benefit to somebody. Yeah, absolutely.

53:03

And it has to be a measurable benefit. I do have one question too about just economics.

53:11

From what I can tell grouse, Moores don't make any money. No

53:16

deer stalking estates don't make any money. No.

53:20

Rewild at estates don't make any money at this point in time.

53:25

They don't make any money. What they all have in common is they have passionate landowners that are willing

53:32

to subsidize the cost to reach the goals that they want to

53:36

attain. How can these estate, I mean,

53:40

it's all government subsidized for the most part. I mean, even the farms. Yeah,

53:45

absolutely. So you literally have a artificial economic

53:50

environment over the entire Highlands. How does that,

53:55

that's not sustainable. Like you said on Monday,

53:57

the government could change and they could say, well, guess what?

54:00

We're not paying for this. We're not paying for that.

54:02

Or you get somebody environment ministers, well,

54:04

I don't like planting whatever trees. It can change.

54:08

How do we cotton with this fact that none of these estates make money?

54:14

So the question of how Rewilding pays is something

54:19

that's, that's put to me quite regularly. But equally more broadly,

54:24

how does land management in Scotland pay?

54:27

How does it become economically viable without support from either

54:31

public support or other forms? In the case of Rewilding,

54:36

it tends to be either public support or philanthropic support.

54:41

And this is where, again, we talked about earlier. At the moment,

54:45

we have a situation where nature recovery, I can only speak about nature recovery in this instance,

54:50

but nature recovery has a deficit of something like 15 to 20 billion over the

54:54

next 20 years. That's the difference between the money that's available and the money that's

54:58

needed. Somebody has to fill that gap. And this is where you've got public private sector interest coming in. Now,

55:05

not withstanding the conversation we had about the motivations of the private

55:08

sector at a pragmatic level,

55:10

without that money ecosystem restoration is not going to take place.

55:15

But beyond that, who pays for a healthy environment,

55:21

who pays to stop or prevent or disincentivize the farmer from

55:25

ripping up a forest or filling in an a peatbog or whatever.

55:31

And I would argue that those habitats,

55:33

those systems are benefiting the whole of

55:37

society, and therefore the whole of society has to contribute to the maintenance of those

55:42

systems or the preservation of those systems, and that includes the business sector.

55:47

So we face a dilemma at Scotland, big picture,

55:50

because there's a school of thought that says,

55:52

don't prostitute your values and jump into bed with the private sector.

55:55

They're just red blooded capitalists, and I get that. But equally,

56:01

if they're not going to pay, who is going to pay?

56:03

So going back to your question about who pays and how does it become

56:06

economically viable, we need to develop a sustainable economy that isn't reliant on public subsidy.

56:13

Number one, that's not easy or quick, but that involves also external investment from the private sector.

56:22

And if we get to a situation where we have the private sector

56:27

fueling nature recovery, but what gets spat out at the other end is community benefit.

56:33

And that might be money, it might be jobs, it might be recreational opportunities, it might be ecosystem services.

56:38

If we can get that conveyor belt flowing more freely,

56:41

then I think we've got maybe not a perfect situation,

56:44

but a situation that's moving towards rewilding and nature recovery becoming an

56:49

economically viable land use. We're not there yet,

56:52

but that is the direction of travel. That's great. We talked about trying to bridge the gaps and stuff,

56:57

but kind of trying to wrap this thing up, do you see an opportunity or a time where the sporting estates and the people

57:04

that work within them and those folks and the folks that do what you guys do,

57:09

can figure out, I mean, do you see them living, I mean,

57:13

living together and assisting each other for the same goals?

57:18

I already see that collaboration happening.

57:21

I do see a dismantling of the tribal barriers that

57:25

perhaps have, well undoubtedly have hindered progress.

57:31

You said earlier on, we can all sit in our ivory tower hurling grenades at each other. And if I,

57:37

sorry, do you want me to do that again? No, we're good. We can all sit in our ivory towers, hurling grenades at each other.

57:43

And if I thought that worked, I'd be on the front row doing it.

57:46

If I thought shouting at people change their behavior, then I'd be doing it.

57:49

But it doesn't work. We all know it doesn't work. So we have to find a way of collaborating.

57:54

And that has to take into account a recognition of different people's

57:57

motivations, objectives, agendas, peer group pressures.

58:01

All of those factors play into this. I do believe the conversation around rewilding or land use change

58:08

is evolving quite quickly. It's maturing. It's more respectful,

58:12

it's more progressive, it's more future oriented.

58:16

It's more solutions focused than ever it has been. Is it perfect? No,

58:20

it's not perfect, but we are moving in that direction. So yeah,

58:24

I'm really optimistic about finding that common ground and building from it

58:29

and people being at least more respectful

58:33

of what might've been previously opposing tribes than was the

58:38

case initially. So I think the answer is yes,

58:42

and arguably the answer is it has to be because if it isn't,

58:47

we're all screwed. And we've got to get past these petty political and

58:53

cultural barriers that are standing in the way of restoring the

58:58

living systems that we all depend upon. That's not a wilder saying that that's a human being,

59:05

a citizen of the planet saying that. So yeah, we've got to get beyond.

59:10

We've got to get beyond self-interest and look at this from a global

59:14

perspective, if not a, yeah. Yeah. Anyway, fuck that last thing.

59:18

You know what I mean? Yeah, no, I got it. Unless you want to try. I mean,

59:21

I think you got it, and I think you've said it a couple different ways.

59:24

So I think you're good. This has been great. Great interview.

59:28

You've never done this before. I can tell. Well, yeah. But those questions are really searching,

59:33

and it's difficult because of course somebody like me, it doesn't have to be me,

59:37

but you would expect me to have the answers.

59:40

But there are no answers to any of these. There's my view,

59:43

there's my perspective, there's my insight. But there's no definitive blueprint that you say, I'll tell you what,

59:48

this is what we need to do. I ask the same hard questions to the other side.

59:53

It's the other different groups and stuff. And sometimes he's a little hard on the other side.

59:59

Actually used the word surf with me, and I'm like, David,

1:00:02

that's not the way to go. And John Mu trust, you'll have picked up. If there is at the moment, if

1:00:10

there is a sort of a microcosm of all of this tribal warfare that we've been

1:00:14

alluding to, it's between the John Muir Trust and the ascent crofters with the deer

1:00:18

situation. I get it. I get on both sides. I understand.

1:00:23

I know Mike Daniels quite well. There comes a point, I think,

1:00:29

with some people where the winning of the war becomes more important than the

1:00:34

subject matter that the war started on. I've seen that in shooting

1:00:39

the one-Upmanship becomes the goal rather than saving hen Harrys or

1:00:44

deer or whatever it happens to be. And

1:00:48

when a battle becomes that consuming, you need to get out of it.

1:00:53

You need to take a step back because all you're doing is just digging the hole

1:00:56

deeper and deeper and deeper and disappearing down it. It's hard. I get it.

1:01:00

When you've got passionate people that believe in a set of principles,

1:01:03

it's hard, but you've got to see the bigger picture.

1:01:07

And I've sat down with David and I was just like, David, I mean, I get it,

1:01:11

but I've flown my drone all around coag. I said, where all the trees? He said,

1:01:15

well, the deer rate 'em all. I'm like, David, just don't play me stupid here.

1:01:20

All right? And I'm like, how many deer did you kill?

1:01:25

And he's like, well, his name's on the permit. And he's like, well,

1:01:28

it was less than 150. I said, do you know how many you shot? Just tell, I mean,

1:01:33

what's going on here? I mean, I was there when it was happening.

1:01:36

I got the Crofters Trust invited me to come up.

1:01:39

So Tony and I went up and we were out there with a couple of the Crofters.

1:01:44

Then I ran into Craig Ross, who the Vestia estate as a keeper there.

1:01:48

And he tells me this story about being on a zoom call with Mr.

1:01:51

Besty and him and David, and David's like,

1:01:54

you better feed all the damn deer you can to get 'em off coag,

1:01:57

because if we see one on there, I'm going to kill the fucking things.

1:02:01

I asked David, I said, why did you say that? And David,

1:02:05

I shook him. I was like, everybody's talking to me, David. I mean, at the end,

1:02:10

how is this? And you can be the greatest force to work with these people and vice versa,

1:02:15

because you all want the same thing. And of course,

1:02:17

when I talk to some of these keeper types, they absolutely hate him.

1:02:20

And I'm like, guys. And that's when I tell him, this guy, he's a hunter.

1:02:24

You guys are hunters. Why can't we find the common ground here?

1:02:28

Because this can be a win-win. Yeah, I agree. I agree altogether. And again,

1:02:35

these things are often fickle. And if you'd have, I've got nothing else,

1:02:39

David Bahar, but if you go back, his predecessor,

1:02:44

he would never ever have said anything like that. Much more of a politician,

1:02:49

much more of a pragmatist, which in itself has its frustrations.

1:02:51

Some would argue pace change is only glacial under that.

1:02:56

Somehow in the middle there, you've got to, I think there's a line,

1:02:58

and the line is you need to know what you stand for.

1:03:01

You need to know what your principles are, and you need to have the evidence to back them up.

1:03:06

But you've got to frame that in a way that recognizes that other people

1:03:11

equally have their principles and their red lines. You might not like them,

1:03:15

you might not agree with them, but they're not invalid and through their eyes,

1:03:18

they're equally as valid as yours. If you don't accept that,

1:03:23

then it becomes a war. And of course, we have social media now.

1:03:27

It's just like pouring petrol on the fire.

1:03:30

And it drives me nuts seeing some of this stuff on social media. It's so lazy,

1:03:34

it's so generalized, so well-informed. You lose all that nuance,

1:03:38

all that layering, and it just creates this binary right and wrong, us against them.

1:03:44

Are you one of our tribe or are you against us?

1:03:47

We've got to get caner than that. We really have. Because if we don't,

1:03:51

it'll just carry on. It'll just carry on.

1:03:54

And there's this notion that shouting louder

1:03:58

is going to make the change. If only we could all shout it,

1:04:03

doesn't it? So yeah, I'm a bit disappointed in my can, David. I understand why.

1:04:10

I understand where they're coming from, but I just want to grab them both.

1:04:14

Just say, whoa, whoa, whoa. Just come out here a minute.

1:04:17

Look at these other people in this space. Look what they're saying.

1:04:21

Look what the damage you're doing to the reputation the John Muir Trust. Okay,

1:04:25

your followers are, but why do societies probably thinking, oh,

1:04:29

hang on guys, come on. Really?

1:04:32

No, I mean, my audience is America.

1:04:35

This film will broadcast on American public broadcasting his biggest donor base.

1:04:41

It's the United States, and it's like the optics just don't look good. No,

1:04:46

exactly. Mean why is the CEO of this major charity on the coal list?

1:04:51

Dave loves to hunt. I know that. So one other thing just came to mind.

1:04:56

There has been some talk by farmers about the reintroduction of lys

1:05:02

of brown bears, Eurasian brown bears potentially, and wolves.

1:05:07

Wolves being the big one. What is the reality of that?

1:05:10

And is that something that the rewilding movement is aspiring to?

1:05:14

I know there are individual people out there that are really working hard for

1:05:17

those types of species to be back in the landscape. Just kind of recap,

1:05:20

if you could, just the story about what does it mean and what really is reality there?

1:05:24

Yeah. We are one of the most nature depleted countries in the world in terms of the

1:05:30

number of species that we have lost in history and putting back together that

1:05:35

assemblage of species is part of Rewilding, but it's not all about wolves.

1:05:40

Rewilding has been in,

1:05:42

the popular media has become synonymous with wolves in and farmers out and all

1:05:45

these lurid headlines. So the reality is right now that bears are not even talked about.

1:05:51

Wolves are talked about in a sort of an ideological framework. But yeah,

1:05:56

the serious, the people in the game with the skin in the game are not even talking about

1:06:00

wolves. Lynx is a real possibility. Lynx is a much more, and I think, again,

1:06:04

what we need to avoid is conflating all of these species together as

1:06:09

large predators. Bears and wolves and lynx are very, very different animals.

1:06:14

So lynx could make a living in this landscape tomorrow. No problems,

1:06:17

plenty of food, plenty of habitat. It's people that are the barrier. So again,

1:06:22

whether it's expanding woodland, restoring peatland,

1:06:26

or reintroducing lynx, it's people that will make those decisions.

1:06:29

And so the people behind Lynx, and we are one of them,

1:06:33

they need to win hearts and minds. They need to make the case for links ecologically, socially,

1:06:39

and arguably also economically. Solyx is a work in progress.

1:06:45

I wouldn't say it's imminent, but it's certainly a serious conversation.

1:06:49

But wolves and bears, I wouldn't say not in my lifetime,

1:06:53

but I'd have to live probably to a good old age to see any progress on

1:06:58

any other large predator species. So just on the last one, what do you think about these wild boar,

1:07:03

feral swine that are on this plane? Nigel has 'em on his property,

1:07:09

and when I asked, I saw the rooting on the hill, and I'm like, Nigel,

1:07:13

what's up with this? And he's like, oh, we're going to have wild bore hunts driven wild bore hunts here. And I said,

1:07:19

do you understand the economic damage to agriculture wild and

1:07:24

just a huge ecological disaster on the landscape in the United States,

1:07:29

A $2 billion worth of environmental damage every year that occurs on farmland

1:07:34

and forest lands because of these pigs. What is your thought on that?

1:07:38

Because he's the chairman of organization and he's got pompoms, he's cheering.

1:07:43

Well, I think, again,

1:07:46

there's a word that you've used a couple of times there that I'm always nervous

1:07:50

about, and that's the word damage. So you could argue that wild bore impact on farmland or indeed beaver impact

1:07:58

on farmland could be construed as damage.

1:08:00

It is a challenge to the economic output of that particular land.

1:08:03

But in an area like this, for example, I would argue that beavers or wild boar,

1:08:09

they're not going to do damage. They're just going to exert change.

1:08:12

And so we shouldn't mistake change. We shouldn't interplay,

1:08:16

we shouldn't exchange. Start that again.

1:08:19

What's the word we shouldn't confuse. That's the word I'm looking for. Okay.

1:08:25

So interestingly, you use the word damage.

1:08:28

And I think if you're talking about the impact of boar or indeed a species like

1:08:32

beaver on agricultural and productive land,

1:08:35

then damage would be probably an appropriate term.

1:08:39

But in an area like this, I would argue that those two species are not exerting damage.

1:08:44

They're exerting change. And we shouldn't confuse those two things.

1:08:47

So from an ecological point of view,

1:08:50

beavers give huge bang for buck and an ecological point of view bore give huge

1:08:55

bang for buck. Does it jar with us visually the fallen trees or uprooted

1:09:02

heather or whatever it happens to be? Of course it does, because again,

1:09:04

we are used to tidiness and orderliness and us having control,

1:09:08

and these animals challenge that control. So boar have a role here,

1:09:12

ecologically speaking, they're a really, really productive animal,

1:09:16

but they come with baggage, as does any species.

1:09:19

The question is can we live alongside that baggage or can we mitigate against

1:09:24

it? For me, in Scotland,

1:09:27

while boar should be effectively the same as red deer,

1:09:31

they should be recognized as a native species. They could provide a sustainable,

1:09:36

healthy source of food, as does venison.

1:09:41

But at the moment, we've got this mixture of boar and hybrid pigs,

1:09:47

and the government just seems to be putting its fingers in its ears and hoping

1:09:49

it'll all go away. Meanwhile, they're spreading and in some cases,

1:09:54

pissing people off. So yeah,

1:09:57

we've got to get to grips with bore and decide what we want them to do,

1:10:00

how we want to perceive them, and how we're going to manage them.

1:10:03

Are these bores dangerous? Well.

1:10:07

I am told they're from Eastern Europe. The reality is nobody really knows.

1:10:12

I suspect there's a mixture of purebred wild boar,

1:10:16

and in some cases they're hybridized with feral pigs. So

1:10:20

in any population of wild boar, you're probably going to have varying degrees of hybridization.

1:10:26

But again, it could be argued that genetic purity is

1:10:32

one thing, but their ecological impact on the landscape is pretty much the same,

1:10:37

whether it's a pig or a bore or whatever. So no, forget that. That's bollocks.

1:10:41

Leave it at that. Okay. Well, Peter, this has been an excellent, just an absolutely great interview.

1:10:48

And one of the better ones I've done in the time I've spent here in Scotland,

1:10:55

I really hope that all these disparate sides can come together

1:11:00

for the greater good of not only Scotland, but our whole planet.

1:11:05

And the answer in Scotland across all of those people that you've spoken to is

1:11:09

no, none of them want to leave that.

1:11:11

Legacy. Yeah, they're all basically saying the same thing.

1:11:13

Exactly. And that's the frustrating thing. And going back to your question,

1:11:18

it is, but it has all of that baggage. And as you rightly say,

1:11:23

that baggage is entrenched from way back. And

1:11:28

if you said to me right now, if I could give you one thing, what would it be?

1:11:33

I'd say a Scottish accent. Because what that would do is authentic size,

1:11:38

my voice in the eyes of Peter Fraser, Craig, Craig Ross, et cetera.

1:11:43

Because at the moment, and it's a generalization, but at the moment,

1:11:47

there is an element of what's this guy with an English accent doing telling us

1:11:51

what to do? Now, that's not the way I feel about it,

1:11:54

and I'm not telling anybody what to do. I don't think I'm that stupid or arrogant,

1:11:58

but the perception is that I'm one of the establishment.

1:12:01

I'm one of the very people that they're rallying against.

1:12:05

I'm one of those civil servants in the city halls with the ranchers telling that

1:12:09

wolves are a good rd. It's all of that sort of stuff.

1:12:12

So you've got all of that historical baggage percolating to the

1:12:16

surface in all of this stuff, whether it's deer, beavers, trees, Heather, Mo,

1:12:20

and grouse, whatever. And it all does, I mean,

1:12:24

the word bias or prejudice is the word,

1:12:26

because it prejudices people's perspectives from the very beginning.

1:12:30

Just going very quickly to one thing you said about collaboration,

1:12:34

there's an initiative going on at the moment called Finding the Common

1:12:39

Ground, ironically, and it's been commissioned by Scottish Environment Link,

1:12:44

which is a sort of coalition of all the environmental groups in Scotland and the

1:12:48

Association of Deer Management Groups, which as you know,

1:12:52

they manage deer populations in Scotland. But interestingly,

1:12:56

it's being facilitated. So it is ironic that Dave Bahari said to you,

1:12:59

you come along as a filmmaker, you think with all due respect,

1:13:03

you are not the person. Yes, you're impartial,

1:13:06

but you need a social science facilitator.

1:13:08

You need somebody that understands people to play that role.

1:13:12

And what this finding the common ground has done is found that.

1:13:15

So there's a facilitator in Edinburgh doing it.

1:13:17

They know nothing about Red Deer. They don't need to. They know about people.

1:13:21

And I went along just as an observer, really, to one of the events.

1:13:24

There was about 70 people there. There was folk from Vesti Ground,

1:13:27

there was loaded stalkers managers, conservationists, Mike Daniels was there,

1:13:33

and what they did, very cleverly, but very simply,

1:13:35

it's just stripped away the badge, the uniform.

1:13:39

So people were there in tweeds and or goretex,

1:13:42

but actually they were not physically stripped away, but metaphorically.

1:13:45

And the atmosphere in the room changed completely. And I thought they handled the whole thing really, really interestingly,

1:13:51

and started off, okay, what do we all agree on that we all know what we don't agree on,

1:13:55

but what do we agree on? And then they built out from that,

1:13:58

and it's just basic social science, but we've been shit at doing that.

1:14:03

So whether it's beavers or trees or rewilding or deer management or whatever,

1:14:07

I think that sort of social people focused approach is

1:14:12

the way forward. And not trying to cherry pick this evidence and shovel it down people's throats

1:14:17

in the hope that they'll swallow it and change. It just doesn't work that way.

1:14:21

I wish it did, but it doesn't. Anyway. Yeah,

1:14:24

so it is interesting that the process of starting to understand

1:14:29

the motivations behind some of these perspectives is starting to roll out

1:14:34

finally. Anyway. Well, thank you, Peter. It's been a great discussion. Very thought provoking,

1:14:42

and I hope that the folks that not only watch The Last Keeper,

1:14:46

the film that we've got coming out, we'll learn more about the issues here in Scotland,

1:14:51

and hopefully the folks of Scotland, especially the urban folks,

1:14:55

will have an opportunity to see what the realities are on the ground so that

1:15:00

we can start to make decisions as a society

1:15:04

that make more common sense. Thanks Peter. And folks,

1:15:09

thanks for listening to the Shepherds of the Wild Podcast,

1:15:11

brought to you by the Shepherds of Wildlife Society,

1:15:14

available on all places where a great podcast live.

1:15:19

Please sign up to our [email protected] slash

1:15:23

keeper to get updates on the new film where it'll be available film festivals,

1:15:28

our digital cinema event that'll be happening the end of June of 2024.

1:15:34

And then we'll be launching it out through online platforms all across the

1:15:38

internet. Thanks for listening.

1:15:41

You can find this podcast wherever great podcasts live,

1:15:44

including on the Shepherds of Wildlife Society [email protected].

1:15:49

Please tell a friend and let's save wildlife together.