What's happening on Dartmoor?

[SilverLinings]

The proliferation of flights is shocking. When I was a teenager in the 1990s (so <30yrs ago) most kids I knew didn't go abroad for their holidays, and the ~third that did would only go on one family holiday per year. At work now I would say that more than 50% of the people I work with (of 120 people) go on three foreign holidays per year. One or two of those three may only be a weekend away in Europe, but it is still two more flights. Air travel used to be seen as a luxury but I think it's seen as a right now. I don't know what the answer is though, and I realise that many people travel for work or to see family, not just for 'fun'. It might help if the aviation industry had to make more effort to offset their carbon footprint though.

 

[reynold]

The number of flights is also linked to freight transport which comes round to the issue of rewilding.

Food imports from far afield have increased enormously over the last 30 years whilst UK farming is pushed to the wall, even with any subsidies.

The UK produces less than 50% of our food currently (both arable and livestock). With all the rewilding and reintroduction of extinct wildlife, along with the increase in solar farms and wind turbines there will be less and less UK farming. Hence food imports both by air and large lorry (a lot currently stuck in France) will increase even further.

Also to accommodate population growth in the UK more and more houses will be built on farmland which also reduces UK food production.

 

[SilverLinings]

The number of flights is also linked to freight transport which comes round to the issue of rewilding.

Food imports from far afield have increased enormously over the last 30 years whilst UK farming is pushed to the wall, even with any subsidies.

The UK produces less than 50% of our food currently (both arable and livestock). With all the rewilding and reintroduction of extinct wildlife, along with the increase in solar farms and wind turbines there will be less and less UK farming. Hence food imports both by air and large lorry (a lot currently stuck in France) will increase even further.

Also to accommodate population growth in the UK more and more houses will be built on farmland which also reduces UK food production.

It does seem ridiculous (and very wasteful) that we fly in food from a far flung country that we could be growing here (like apples). With the current population does anyone know if the UK still able - in theory - to grow/raise all the food it would need to feed the population, or is there no longer enough land for the number of people? I appreciate that this plan would mean no more buying strawberries in December, and would rule out certain things altogether (like melons and coconuts).

Presumably the country could still grow all of the native produce it needs though, so that we wouldn't need to fly in things like lamb, hard fruit, potatoes, beans etc. There is something wrong with the economics (and ethics) when it's cheaper to fly something in from South Africa than pay a farmer in the UK a decent sum to grow it, especially when we know the environmental damage air travel causes.

 

[cobgoblin]

It does seem ridiculous (and very wasteful) that we fly in food from a far flung country that we could be growing here (like apples). With the current population does anyone know if the UK still able - in theory - to grow/raise all the food it would need to feed the population, or is there no longer enough land for the number of people? I appreciate that this plan would mean no more buying strawberries in December, and would rule out certain things altogether (like melons and coconuts).

Presumably the country could still grow all of the native produce it needs though, so that we wouldn't need to fly in things like lamb, hard fruit, potatoes, beans etc. There is something wrong with the economics (and ethics) when it's cheaper to fly something in from South Africa than pay a farmer in the UK a decent sum to grow it, especially when we know the environmental damage air travel causes.

Melons grow very well here in a cold frame or greenhouse. Not sure if anyone has ever tried growing coconuts.
We used to grow plenty of our own apples and pears etc. but the orchards all disappeared when we joined the eu. It certainly killed off the garden of England.

 

[Spotherisk]

Importation isn’t new - see link - but flown importation must be. I actively do not buy fresh food which has been flown in ie sugar snap
Peas from Kenya, but I accept that vast quantities are trucked in from Europe.

Rationing in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[palo1]

Add in the return of beavers, wolves and lynx and there is a recipe for no farming of any sort over a large part of the country.

I don't think there is any chance of returning wolves or lynx tbh and beavers, in the right place, are potentially helpful. Those things COULD co-exist with farming too but those schemes, whilst being inspirational to many people, are an utter nonsense, total intellectual frivolity whilst we have the real and immediate crises of land management, sustainable food production, pollution, air travel and with every single political party stating that they want to see growth economies. It sickens me to be honest. @PurBee 's point about air travel is so pertinent, so ridiculously obvious that every farmer and farming person I know, as well as most environmentally interested people, are bewildered as to why there is not more attention given to it. Removing hill ponies, cattle and even all of the sheep grazing the uplands (as some would wish to see) would be not even a drop in the ocean in comparison to a reduction in air travel. I have just been for a ride around our hill; all the sheep are off it at the moment because they are lambing on their various farms. We have huge hares, nesting snipe, curlew and hundreds of larks as well as foxes, deer on the margins and newts, frogs and toads in the natural ponds (I saw toadspawn, tadpoles and evidence of newts this morning). We have ravens, kites, orchids, natural mountain herbs and a huge variety of heathland plants as well as increasing heather, fungi, lichens and all manner of insects. You have to look for those things - they are not obvious but they absolutely are there. On the farm we have woodpeckers, jays, treecreepers and nuthatches, several sorts of thrush, finches, wrens, blackbirds, robins, larks, at least 2 kinds of owl, sparrowhawks and weasels (I particularly love them!) and many other things as part of the complex and delicate ecology that exists here. All of those species live within the existing system and I weep to think of what may happen if there is change forced at the level suggested. Rewilding is interesting but there are winners and losers in that system too; what will happen to the vulnerable but important species; does anyone actually know? I love the fact that Knepp estate has encouraged wonderful populations of nightingale and purple emperor butterly - I have no beef with that at all but that has come out of a very different starting point to what NE are trying to enforce on a wholly other kind of ecosystem.

 

[J&S]

The truth of it is: nothing makes sense any more. We can all see the damage done, we can all work out for ourselves what would be a "better plan" but it is impossible to come to fruition because of big business and big bucks. I can well remember the moment over 30 years ago when I turned to my friend out riding and declared that everything should STOP and we should start to go backwards!! And, what about AI?? The scientists themselves realise they have given birth to a monster.

 

[palo1]

The truth of it is: nothing makes sense any more. We can all see the damage done, we can all work out for ourselves what would be a "better plan" but it is impossible to come to fruition because of big business and big bucks. I can well remember the moment over 30 years ago when I turned to my friend out riding and declared that everything should STOP and we should start to go backwards!! And, what about AI?? The scientists themselves realise they have given birth to a monster.

The truth is that people can make better decisions, individual choices add up so if people were genuinely concerned about climate change they could stop flying, buying unneccessary manufactured sh**, learn to live less impactful lives and perhaps even have time to think about stuff and talk to/spend time with people they love. It is possible. People just have to really want that; at the moment it feels like most people want to see climate armageddon tbh.

 

[cobgoblin]

The truth is that people can make better decisions, individual choices add up so if people were genuinely concerned about climate change they could stop flying, buying unneccessary manufactured sh**, learn to live less impactful lives and perhaps even have time to think about stuff and talk to/spend time with people they love. It is possible. People just have to really want that; at the moment it feels like most people want to see climate armageddon tbh.

And where would the mega corporations make money out of that?

 

[cauda equina]

Meanwhile, in order to grow sugar beet, farmers are permitted to use neonicotinoids which are extremely harmful to bees
Never mind that sugar is deemed to be bad enough for humans that it needs its own tax
As someone said upthread, there's no joined up thinking

 

[suestowford]

Yes, nature had a good year in 2020. Emissions were much reduced thanks to reduced flights and reduced car use.
Cows & sheep were still farting and didn't seem to have an adverse affect so the argument from some eco-warriors that cows & sheep are the worst pollutants doesn't wash with me.

 

[Burnttoast]

I think what's sometimes missed is that increasing wild biomass (flora and fauna) is just as important (possibly more important) than preserving very niche habitats that were probably even more niche before human interference in the landscape began. Rewilding is excellent at doing this. When you consider the figures that came out recently just making more space for more animals and plants is crucial. Domesticated animals weigh in at 630 million tonnes, human biomass is estimated at 390 million tonnes, and *all* wild land mammals make up 22 million tonnes. That's obscene. And people flying is only a small part of the cause of that.

 

[cobgoblin]

So feral farts are better than domesticated farts?

 

[palo1]

I think what's sometimes missed is that increasing wild biomass (flora and fauna) is just as important (possibly more important) than preserving very niche habitats that were probably even more niche before human interference in the landscape began. Rewilding is excellent at doing this. When you consider the figures that came out recently just making more space for more animals and plants is crucial. Domesticated animals weigh in at 630 million tonnes, human biomass is estimated at 390 million tonnes, and *all* wild land mammals make up 22 million tonnes. That's obscene. And people flying is only a small part of the cause of that.

I have heard those statistics too and whilst they are shocking, there isn't much information about how they got there. I am not saying the data is wrong but I think it isn't particularly helpful either. I get the point about niche habitats but actually they are significant and important as well so as well as having vast tracts of fashionable scrub with large herbivores, there are ecologists that see preservation and conservation of niche habitats as vital too. I have heard lots of arguments about the value of heather moorland - particularly in relation to the very contentious use for grouse but the UK has a huge share of that rare habitat; should we really just abandon that and all of it's inhabitants? Do we really understand what the impact of that will be? It is complex and there is considerable uncertainty as to what is best but past mistakes REALLY show what bad practice it is to chuck the baby out with the bathwater. Rewilding may be part of the answer in places (and yes, I think that should also happen in urban places) but it is not the answer everywhere. As an aside and from a personal perspective I am boggled by the idea that there are people who see parts of our uplands as ripe for some of the projects; we produce low impact, high welfare food in the form of lamb and some cattle where no other food will grow and given the chance of rewilding, vast tracts of bracken, gorse or sitka spruce will produce nothing that we can eat or that will support the existing fragile fauna and flora. I get that this isn't important to everyone of course but given the complexity of food, animal welfare and environmental concerns that still boggles me.

 

[Spotherisk]

Todays Western Morning News

 

[catkin]

Yes, I saw that - and also that the person concerned is described as 'the chief executive of a finance company'.

Hmmm

 

[paddy555]

Todays Western Morning News
View attachment 110957

At the end of the day, which will be in a long time, there will have to be a compromise. Lots of arguing in the meantime.
We do have problems. Overstocking, over grazing, damage to the common from animals, animal welfare is a big one round me. The state of some of the cattle and sheep and ponies kept on the common is dreadful. I have reported ponies but no action taken. I shan't be signing the pony petition.

Some of the farmers are just turning stock out for the winter so that they can damage the common rather than their fields. The animals don't go onto the high moorland where there is grazing, they just hang around the roads and edges of the common with the resultant poaching.

The moor used to be used for summer grazing. I have known several farmers from outside the region (lower down) who remember driving cattle up onto the common with their fathers. They were driven in a herd on the roads. Sheep made the reverse journey for lower down and climatically easier winter grazing.
Just because people have done something for generations doesn't always make it good. There are several good farmers who have only been here a relatively short time in terms of generations.

 

[palo1]

At the end of the day, which will be in a long time, there will have to be a compromise. Lots of arguing in the meantime.
We do have problems. Overstocking, over grazing, damage to the common from animals, animal welfare is a big one round me. The state of some of the cattle and sheep and ponies kept on the common is dreadful. I have reported ponies but no action taken. I shan't be signing the pony petition.

Some of the farmers are just turning stock out for the winter so that they can damage the common rather than their fields. The animals don't go onto the high moorland where there is grazing, they just hang around the roads and edges of the common with the resultant poaching.

The moor used to be used for summer grazing. I have known several farmers from outside the region (lower down) who remember driving cattle up onto the common with their fathers. They were driven in a herd on the roads. Sheep made the reverse journey for lower down and climatically easier winter grazing.
Just because people have done something for generations doesn't always make it good. There are several good farmers who have only been here a relatively short time in terms of generations.

Totally agree with this. There are problems and have been other problems with common grazing historically. Some of those problems were promoted by subsidies which were provided by head of sheep/cattle. Some subsidies encouraged hill grazing (to cull bracken and for other reasons at different times). Some farmers now have so little incentive or money that common grazing is considered a necessity even when it ruins the commons. There are laws about that though - it is a criminal offence to allow stock to 'cut a common'. Not many years ago my FIL still drove his cattle to their summer grazing and sheep are still moved that way. Here sheep are driven up to the top of the hills if they are overwintering but the numbers are much fewer. It is a problem that fields are wetter, straw bedding etc far more expensive, fields more fragile and those things are related to climate change.

It is always good to see people innovating and improving; farming needs that and needs people to try different methods and there are some really great younger farmers who have a fresher understanding of how contentious their work is and yes, just because something is traditional, does not make it right. BUT, some of that historic wisdom and practice is there for good reason and is sustainable. The job is to work out which practices are good and which aren't - the stakes are very high though and whilst farmers are generally pretty conservative they are faced in opposition but some that are extreme in their views and have the lobby to really influence things.

 

[palo1]

Totally agree with this. There are problems and have been other problems with common grazing historically. Some of those problems were promoted by subsidies which were provided by head of sheep/cattle. Some subsidies encouraged hill grazing (to cull bracken and for other reasons at different times). Some farmers now have so little incentive or money that common grazing is considered a necessity even when it ruins the commons. There are laws about that though - it is a criminal offence to allow stock to 'cut a common'. Not many years ago my FIL still drove his cattle to their summer grazing and sheep are still moved that way. Here sheep are driven up to the top of the hills if they are overwintering but the numbers are much fewer. It is a problem that fields are wetter, straw bedding etc far more expensive, fields more fragile and those things are related to climate change.

It is always good to see people innovating and improving; farming needs that and needs people to try different methods and there are some really great younger farmers who have a fresher understanding of how contentious their work is and yes, just because something is traditional, does not make it right. BUT, some of that historic wisdom and practice is there for good reason and is sustainable. The job is to work out which practices are good and which aren't - the stakes are very high though and whilst farmers are generally pretty conservative they are faced in opposition but some that are extreme in their views and have the lobby to really influence things.

ETA - I have also seen some appalling animal husbandry; sometimes good old fashioned ignorance/neglect and sometimes it is dressed up as 'unintensive/sustainable/special rare breed' nonsense. We have seen rare breed cattle locally in the most godawful conditions wintering out and questions from concerned people have been met with arrogance and dismissal.

 

[cobgoblin]

There is currently a ' consultation ' on a bill to allow gene editing of agricultural animals and crops. So don't be surprised when Dartmoor is taken over by sheep the size of hippos.

 

[MiJodsR2BlinkinTite]

I wouldn't particularly object to the Dartmoor hill ponies going, they are a relatively modern invention and until quite recently couldn't find buyers other than the meat man. A lot of the hill ponies I've seen on Dartmoor have appalling conformation and are too small to be useful for anything other than a leadrein pony, but there isn't much of a market for feral ponies to be trained as LR pets. The Dartmoor Pony (actual breed) IMO should be preserved and continue to be allowed to graze on the moor as they have for millenia. Removing the hill ponies would be to the advantage of the true Dartmoor pony, which is now an endangered rare breed.

^^^ I have just this last week fallen out with a "friend" for saying exactly this on a post she put up about the "Dartmoor hill ponies".

I don't live on Dartmoor, I'm in East Devon; but can remember way way back in the '60s when Lady Sayer was warning about the fact that Shetland stallions were being allowed onto the moor and inter-breeding with what was already up there, and the result of it - which is evident now in poor little runty ponies that no-one wants and I sadly witnessed at auction pre-Covid where it was "buy one get one free" and still no-one wanted them. The ones that were at market that day were being sold for £5.

Friend said I was "a cruel and horrible person" for saying that actually shooting them is better and more humane than either (a) leaving them on the moor to basically starve and/or get hungry and go to where people park (and unfortunately feed them) where they are then in danger of being knocked down; OR being shunted into cattle trucks and being driven half-way across Europe to be slaughtered.

I actually know the person who is doing the knackering; he is a true professional, good at his trade and will have been doing it humanely and professionally. We have had him at my yard to despatch horses and I would heartily recommend him to anyone for doing a good job.

The problem is - in all things equine - is that Sentimentality is the greatest enemy of Compassion. Sometimes tough decisions need to be made, and the problem of the "Dartmoor hill ponies" is one of them. It isn't going to go away easily; and any sensible debate about the problem is being hindered by the "fluffy" brigade who do not seem to realise that there are a million worse fates that could happen to these poor little ponies than being humanely destroyed.......

 

[meleeka]

^^^ I have just this last week fallen out with a "friend" for saying exactly this on a post she put up about the "Dartmoor hill ponies".

I don't live on Dartmoor, I'm in East Devon; but can remember way way back in the '60s when Lady Sayer was warning about the fact that Shetland stallions were being allowed onto the moor and inter-breeding with what was already up there, and the result of it - which is evident now in poor little runty ponies that no-one wants and I sadly witnessed at auction pre-Covid where it was "buy one get one free" and still no-one wanted them. The ones that were at market that day were being sold for £5.

Friend said I was "a cruel and horrible person" for saying that actually shooting them is better and more humane than either (a) leaving them on the moor to basically starve and/or get hungry and go to where people park (and unfortunately feed them) where they are then in danger of being knocked down; OR being shunted into cattle trucks and being driven half-way across Europe to be slaughtered.

I actually know the person who is doing the knackering; he is a true professional, good at his trade and will have been doing it humanely and professionally. We have had him at my yard to despatch horses and I would heartily recommend him to anyone for doing a good job.

The problem is - in all things equine - is that Sentimentality is the greatest enemy of Compassion. Sometimes tough decisions need to be made, and the problem of the "Dartmoor hill ponies" is one of them. It isn't going to go away easily; and any sensible debate about the problem is being hindered by the "fluffy" brigade who do not seem to realise that there are a million worse fates that could happen to these poor little ponies than being humanely destroyed.......

I agree with you, but the root cause is the over breeding of poor stock. I don’t support just shooting the excess. The New Forest ponies were once poor and overbred, but they now strictly limit the quantity of stallions and only choose those that are a good example of the breed. They aren’t allowed out all year so this reduces the numbers on the ground, which it turn not only pushes the prices up, but helps the landscape that’s not overgrazed.

 

[J&S]

When I came to Devon from the New Forest I was horrified at the "hill ponies". Scrawny, ewe necked and cow hocked . The true Dartmoor is a completely different animal. However, I have seen the odd hill pony taken off, fed and looked after correctly and have turned into useful ponies. Limiting the numbers of the hill ponies would be to their own advantage and that of the breeders, financially, they might get more than the £1.00 they have been getting.

 

[paddy555]

I don't live on Dartmoor, I'm in East Devon;

either (a) leaving them on the moor to basically starve and/or get hungry and go to where people park (and unfortunately feed them) where they are then in danger of being knocked down; OR being shunted into cattle trucks and being driven half-way across Europe to be slaughtered.



The problem is - in all things equine - is that Sentimentality is the greatest enemy of Compassion. Sometimes tough decisions need to be made, and the problem of the "Dartmoor hill ponies" is one of them. It isn't going to go away easily; and any sensible debate about the problem is being hindered by the "fluffy" brigade who do not seem to realise that there are a million worse fates that could happen to these poor little ponies than being humanely destroyed.......

can I ask what your own experience is of handling and dealing with hill ponies off the moor is? halter breaking, socialising,training etc.

It is difficult to gauge numbers but per google 60 years ago there were 10k of them and now around 1k so there has been a significant reduction in numbers over time. I don't have a breakdown of how many of those would be able to breed. Half maybe? difficult to say.

I'm not sure why they would basically starve on the moor. There is plenty to eat. The ponies tend to go higher up on the moorland. Being knocked down is nothing to do with the ponies, it is because people will not reduce their speed. If you were to completely stop this you would have to remove all ponies, then what about cattle and sheep, there are just as prone to being on the roads.
This problem could be very simply stopped by introducing a 30mph speed limit, erecting a lot of speed cameras and fining absolutely everyone breaking the speed limit.
I say this very enthusiastically as we were hit by a speeding van driver. We were stationary having pulled in he was exceeding the 40mph speed limit. He wrote off his vehicle, has cost many many thousands of pounds damage to mine and cost me 6 weeks of not riding or doing very much at all. A pony would have had no chance yet the hill ponies don't cause this.


The ponies won't starve if they didn't go to car parks. Again that is the fault of humans. Nothing to blame the ponies for. If the humans obeyed the signs and left them alone they wouldn't be tempted.

The ponies to my mind have several purposes. One of those purposes is for the tourists.

Looking at their other uses then grazing is one of them. The other one is their use as a domestic pony. I find it interesting to read comments about basically how poor and useless they are. Then I read comments from people who have one. Those are very different views. How easy they are, how they wouldn't be without them etc. I know this is true from my own experience of dealing with them.

I'm not sure what the problem you refer to of the hill ponies actually is. To solve their apparent "problems" are you going to cull the whole lot of them? What are you going to replace them with? are you proposing there should be no ponies on Dartmoor because any other pony will have the problems of roads and car parks.
The emblem of the Dartmoor Nat Park is the pony. That will have to be replaced.

 

[Sanversera]

Surely stopping overgrazing and reducing the production of scrubby mostly unwanted foals can only be a good thing. I won't be signing the petition.

 

[SO1]

I agree they are breeding more small ponies than there is a market for. Humans in the UK seem to be growing taller and heavier so the number of kids and adults who can ride these ponies is diminishing.

There is no breed standard as far as I am aware for a Dartmoor hill pony. If you have two Dartmoor hill ponies and say live in France and bred from those ponies are their offspring Dartmoor hill ponies or are they just ponies or is it being born on Dartmoor than gives them their status. It is not like a Dartmoor pony which could be bred anywhere from registered parents and that meets the correct standard.

Could it not be managed like the new forest? There are some shetlands and donkeys out there but mainly new forest ponies. It is much more profitable for breeders to bred less but better quality that is easier to sell and having less ponies to be responsible for must be easier as well.

I agree with you, but the root cause is the over breeding of poor stock. I don’t support just shooting the excess. The New Forest ponies were once poor and overbred, but they now strictly limit the quantity of stallions and only choose those that are a good example of the breed. They aren’t allowed out all year so this reduces the numbers on the ground, which it turn not only pushes the prices up, but helps the landscape that’s not overgrazed.

 

[Spotherisk]

There are pure bred Dartmoor ponies, Heritage Dartmoor, and hill ponies.

 

[stangs]

This is lifted directly from FB, written by hill farmer Anton Coaker, dated 20/3/2023.

MONDAY MESSAGE!!

Today is a post from the Anton Coaker column about Dartmoor and Natural England. Please share with your fellow farmers.

Eliminated
There’s only one story on Dartmoor this week, and that’s the emerging news that government agency Natural England intend to drive my hill farming culture and our livestock from their historic pastures, eliminating centuries of what we’ve done.

I realise this sounds unbelievable, and I’ve been hesitant to report it, as they’ve lately hit me very hard for speaking out about West Penwith last December. But it’s here, now, and you need to know.

Natural England will deny this, claiming that a few marginal cuts here and there are needed where some particular precious habitats are being damaged. We’ll come back to the underlying reasons for this smokescreen, first we’d better deal with the lie itself. Much of Dartmoors open land was legally designated SSSI – Sites of Special Scientific Interest- decades ago. More SSSIs are being planned, and as our colleagues in West Penwith have discovered, nowadays designation comes the clear intent to change the landscape, rather than preserve what’s there now

Sticking to Dartmoor, it hardly takes a very elastic imagination to realise that if something was precious enough to be so designated decades ago, and livestock had been grazing them for centuries previously, then the livestock themselves are probably part of the matrix. Now consider that in the last 20 years numbers of animals grazing Dartmoor have been roughly halved. After the Foot and Mouth culls claimed vast numbers of our stock, we were ‘encouraged’ into agreements where we accepted money not to fully restock.

And after 20 years of continuing incremental cuts, Natural England are now talking about a 100% reduction of remaining winter grazing sheep. This would be bad enough, as there is a nucleus of tough hill ewes who live out on the hill all year round. We’ve very carefully bred these resilient hardy sheep to persist on the poorest land. Bringing such flocks down into the ‘hay fields’ for the winter, or heaven forbid, indoors, would change the very nature of what they are. Managing to keep them on their acclimatised ‘lear’ miles out on the peat wilderness for a short summer season would become very difficult.

However, as we struggled with this news, one of our number asked to see the calculations for the rest of the year. And discovered, buried in NE’s paperwork is the clear intent to remove circa 80% of all livestock through the rest of the year. Effectively, a 90% reduction altogether.

This would be the end for many of the small family farms who run these flocks and herds. Straight forward working hill farmers who produce lamb and beef off beloved unimproved moorland pastures. I’ve oft pointed out, I gather a lot of mine on foot. They have a carbon footprint when they leave here of zero.

As I say, NE will bleat about this being necessary to protect and restore damaged habitats. Well, curiously, when a neighbouring farming family recently challenged such a draconian cut, they hired an ecologist to report on the area in question. He found that the damage was little to do with over-grazing, but a result of historic factors and a changing environmental – I’ve often observed, airborne pollution and warmer winters has changed the habitat around me.

After our friends had contracted this ecologist to do their study, NE unknowingly also approached him to survey the same SSSI. He rightly demurred, as he had already been retained. So, their own choice of expert is saying it isn’t the livestock that’s causing the change in habitats.

Another thing NE will soon raise is all of the money we’ve been paid- some of them sound like it comes out of their salary. In truth, we’re forced into their schemes- I once suggested I might not sign up for the next round… and was suddenly subjected to ‘random inspections’. My aforementioned friends declined the latest agreement, and were quickly told to remove their stock, agreement or otherwise. It’s not ‘carrot or stick’, it’s ‘stick- with optional carrot’. And it’s happening across the country.

Why are they really doing this? Because a large slice of urban society want to pretend that they’re going to save the world by rewilding the hills. They want to continue to fly in planes, shop in concrete and steel supermarkets, and have every consumer luxury….but it’ll all be OK because they read a trendy book about rewilding/tree planting/bog rewetting.

I need you to help stop this gross injustice. Write to your MP today. Tell him who you are, and demand he specifically acts to change this insanity.

I’m already being targeted for speaking out, and my poor dear Alison has begged me not to write this piece. But I owe it to both centuries of my grazing forebears, and –hopefully- my successors.

Thank you for sharing, very interesting and well-explained. However, he does do the same thing that the NE do - saying that there is evidence that the problem on the moor is ___ without providing a reference.

well from where I'm sitting there would be less problem with over grazing if the gorse was swaled properly. What areas can be swaled are controlled by NE. Acres and acres of gorse some of which is taller than I am are useless. Nothing grazes them, neither animals or walkers can get through them. Most of all they are a serious fire risk and I am sitting below one such common with this serious problem that will only take one mistake in the middle of the summer from a tourist.

Last I heard in rewilding circles, goats were recommended for dealing with gorse but I presume adding more animals is the last thing on NE's mind.

Could it not be managed like the new forest? There are some shetlands and donkeys out there but mainly new forest ponies. It is much more profitable for breeders to bred less but better quality that is easier to sell and having less ponies to be responsible for must be easier as well.

I think the problem is that most people don't need a good quality small pony, when they can get a 'poor quality' pony for half the price who'll do the job (low level driving, LR) just as well. In contrast, a good quality NF has competitive potential; it can do a lot more than a good quality DHP, just by nature of size.

They need managing like the Chincoteague Ponies imo: make people feel like they're buying into a legacy, and prioritise making pretty ponies (and more ponies over 13hh) over pure bloodlines, let the environment ensure hardiness. But that again requires a reduction in the populations of herds no one wants or else the legacy's too easy to buy into, a blasphemous approach to bloodlines, and care in making sure the actual Dartmoor pony isn't harmed along the way.

 

[ester]

TBF all the DHP I know are competitive at their job (probably more than the foresters I know) and are very nice ponies though that might be slightly skewed given they are the ones bought to be off the hill and in work.

 

[meleeka]

can I ask what your own experience is of handling and dealing with hill ponies off the moor is? halter breaking, socialising,training etc.

It is difficult to gauge numbers but per google 60 years ago there were 10k of them and now around 1k so there has been a significant reduction in numbers over time. I don't have a breakdown of how many of those would be able to breed. Half maybe? difficult to say.

I'm not sure why they would basically starve on the moor. There is plenty to eat. The ponies tend to go higher up on the moorland. Being knocked down is nothing to do with the ponies, it is because people will not reduce their speed. If you were to completely stop this you would have to remove all ponies, then what about cattle and sheep, there are just as prone to being on the roads.
This problem could be very simply stopped by introducing a 30mph speed limit, erecting a lot of speed cameras and fining absolutely everyone breaking the speed limit.
I say this very enthusiastically as we were hit by a speeding van driver. We were stationary having pulled in he was exceeding the 40mph speed limit. He wrote off his vehicle, has cost many many thousands of pounds damage to mine and cost me 6 weeks of not riding or doing very much at all. A pony would have had no chance yet the hill ponies don't cause this.


The ponies won't starve if they didn't go to car parks. Again that is the fault of humans. Nothing to blame the ponies for. If the humans obeyed the signs and left them alone they wouldn't be tempted.

The ponies to my mind have several purposes. One of those purposes is for the tourists.

Looking at their other uses then grazing is one of them. The other one is their use as a domestic pony. I find it interesting to read comments about basically how poor and useless they are. Then I read comments from people who have one. Those are very different views. How easy they are, how they wouldn't be without them etc. I know this is true from my own experience of dealing with them.

I'm not sure what the problem you refer to of the hill ponies actually is. To solve their apparent "problems" are you going to cull the whole lot of them? What are you going to replace them with? are you proposing there should be no ponies on Dartmoor because any other pony will have the problems of roads and car parks.
The emblem of the Dartmoor Nat Park is the pony. That will have to be replaced.

All the issues with speeding traffic and tourists is the same in the New Forest. There definitely seems to be a problem with the quality of ponies from the moor, or they’d be selling for more than £1. Unless the offspring has a fair chance at a useful/happy life what’s the point of breeding them? Just for the tourists? I’m not sure that’s any better for the ponies than what NE is proposing.