11 ms·

> The National Trust, which owns the land, has previously warned pilgrims not to do so, as the area is ecologically sensitive, but it seems that people still do

by gempir 1mo ago

> The National Trust, which owns the land, has previously warned pilgrims not to do so, as the area is ecologically sensitive, but it seems that people still do so. Ah okay, laying a few stones is ecologically sensitive, but if a billion dollar company wants to dig up the entire beach for a cable, that's not a problem.

bpodgursky 1mo ago
I have literally never heard anyone associated with the environmental movement say: "This area is ecologically insensitive. I'm not too worried what you do here." Until they define some map or scale of what "ecologically sensitive" means, I put zero weight on that statement. It's meaningless. They say it about everything because it is their job to do so.
- literalAardvark 1mo ago
  I'm guessing you also haven't asked. All places are very much not the same degrees of sensitive and important.
  - cjbgkagh 1mo ago
    A common trick in mining is to send surveyors to an area they don’t want so the various interests just so happen to decide that the area being surveyed is the one with historical / ecological significance. After that has been established they send surveyors for the area they do want.
    - kmoser 1mo ago
      Why wouldn't those various interests just complain about the next area being surveyed? Why would they stop after the first?
      - cjbgkagh 1mo ago
        The ecological studies also cover the surrounding areas. They can’t say that absolutely everything is significant so to make the stronger case they pile the significance into the area they think is the likely site to be developed. Then the miners are ‘responding’ to the feedback by relocating to a less significant location that already has been ecologically studied and deemed insignificant.
        gamblor956 1mo ago
        That's not how environmental surveys work, or the process for challenging them. They absolutely must include detailed information about the actual site and the activity proposed to occur at that site. Subsequent developments can take advantage of the initial survey but must still provide an environmental study about how their own activity will impact their specific site. The #1 reason for environmental surveys being deemed invalid in court is the course of action you discussed: developers trying to avoid scrutiny by not being sufficiently specific about what they are actually planning to do or where.
        cjbgkagh 1mo ago
        The miners were doing mining surveys for internal use only, the environmentalist were submitting the cultural / environmental surveys as complaints which they’re allowed to do as part of the law the local government made for itself since it was government land that was being leased. It was more of a public consultation process, if no one complained then that’s fine too. The miners already have strict environmental regulations they have to follow regardless of where they build. Having seen these submissions it’s often stuff like, there is a river and since rivers are where people tend to congregate if we were to look we might find some ancient stone age human artifact despite no such thing ever being found within 100s of kms. Also rivers move, especially small ones.
      - bronson 1mo ago
        If you say no 100% of the time, your work product won't be worth much.
      - 1mo ago
  - bpodgursky 1mo ago
    OK. What are some ecologically unimportant places in England? Somewhere I could throw up a nuclear power plant without anyone raising a fuss.
    - ErroneousBosh 1mo ago
      Anywhere in London would be good. There's nothing else worthwhile there.
    - tomasphan 1mo ago
      Birmingham?
      - bpodgursky 1mo ago
        Can you be more precise? Like an actual area on the map. Because when I look at England's map of greenbelt areas [1] literally everything around Birmingham is protected. [1] https://www.cpre.org.uk/interactive-map-of-englands-green-belt-land/?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=23515607255&gbraid=0AAAAAD1iFi7LQzVFV0S8n9a_3px9wTHN_&gclid=Cj0KCQjwkOvTBhDgARIsAKUNyRs6TpZefzB-wleJewbfP_NcvLq8pxDbi3q035GaYvW5x1PWc_pCToMaAiqFEALw_wcB https://www.cpre.org.uk/interactive-map-of-englands-green-be...
        smallerize 1mo ago
        I think they were joking. In a literal sense, cities require green spaces for water management. Otherwise you end up like Chicago where they paved everything and flood constantly.
        tptacek 1mo ago
        I mean, not really, right? Permeability would help, but the first and second principal components of our flooding situation are the fact that we're built on a flat swamp, so water has no natural place to go, and we're built around an undersized combined sewer system that would be dazzlingly expensive to replace.
        1mo ago
ceejayoz 1mo ago
Maybe the company has at least made committments to restore it to the way it was after?
wbl 1mo ago
Beaches are extremely dynamic environments and can heal in ways that other areas can't.
- lukan 1mo ago
  Still, people laying stones seems way less invasive, then digging it all up. So yes, people will continue to be there and the digging is once, but the impact seems literally deeper.
  - ceejayoz 1mo ago
    My yard got dug up to run a sewer line. They filled it in after and planted seed. I couldn't possibly tell you where it happened now. If they'd left a big pile of rocks in the spot, I'd bet I could find that.
    - skeeter2020 1mo ago
      When we're talking damage to a sensitive environment an ecologist would have the opposite answer to yours. If you dig up a natural environment you can't "plant seed" to reclaim it.
      - ceejayoz 1mo ago
        An ecologist would readily note that we do restoration work on damaged environments on a regular basis, so it is clearly possible to undo some level of damage. They'd also likely note that consulting an ecologist as part of the process might limit the damage in a way that a bunch of Harry Potter fans making a pile would not know. Not doing anything might indeed be better for the environment alone in isolation, but has to be balanced with other considerations, like the benefits of a power cable carrying clean power from wind farms to replace coal. It is also entirely possible to plant native, locally appropriate seeds in a reasonably natural fashion. I am obviously not proposing a layer of lawn sod.
        lukan 1mo ago
throw0101a 1mo ago
> Ah okay, laying a few stones is ecologically sensitive, but if a billion dollar company wants to dig up the entire beach for a cable, that's not a problem. The billion dollar company is monitored by ecologists and other professionals to make sure they build things according to environmental impact laws and follow their permits (e.g., after digging, restoring the top soil, etc). Randos moving and stacking stones, especially in large numbers, may alter habits for (small) animals and cause erosion: * https://www.ausableriver.org/blog/leaving-no-trace-rock-stacking https://www.ausableriver.org/blog/leaving-no-trace-rock-stac... * https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/conservation/issues/rock-cairns.htm https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/conservation... * https://www.nps.gov/articles/rockcairns.htm https://www.nps.gov/articles/rockcairns.htm
- Timshel 1mo ago
  You would think so but not the case for the construction of the controvsersial A69 highway in France. Infractions are fixed through authorization change ... https://france3-regions.franceinfo.fr/occitanie/tarn/albi/autoroute-a69-l-etat-regularise-les-emprises-illegales-du-chantier-grace-a-une-nouvelle-autorisation-environnementale-3386977.html https://france3-regions.franceinfo.fr/occitanie/tarn/albi/au... Almost as if ecoologist are not listened to. What a surprise ...
  - throw0101a 1mo ago
    > Around the beginning of the construction work, between 2022 and 2023, criticism of the project was given national media coverage, with several associations highlighting its negative environmental impact, as well as its high price for users and the fact that the current free expressways bypassing the towns of Puylaurens and Soual would be incorporated into the motorway and made toll-paying.[1][2] The project received unfavourable opinions from the National Council for the Protection of Nature [fr][3] and the Environmental Authority [fr].[4] Throughout 2023 and early 2024, demonstrations were organised, bringing together up to several thousand environmental activists. On 27 February 2025, the administrative court of Toulouse annulled the environmental permits, leading to the suspension of the construction work.[5] On 28 May, the administrative court of appeal of Toulouse, allowed the work to resume awaiting the final judgement planned for the 11 December 2025.[6] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A69_highway_(France) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A69_highway_(France) Seems to illustrate my point: large projects are high profile and may be scrutinized. People making changes to the local environment in ones and twos will hardly be noticed individually, but if enough ones and twos are added up over time, in aggregate they can cause problems. * https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2025/09/visitors-reminded-not-move-rocks-after-eastern-hellbender-found-dead-great-smoky-mountains https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2025/09/visitors-remin... * https://friendsofthesmokies.org/blog/dont-move-rocks/ https://friendsofthesmokies.org/blog/dont-move-rocks/ * https://www.hrwc.org/stop-stacking-rocks-in-the-river/ https://www.hrwc.org/stop-stacking-rocks-in-the-river/ Certainly not as serious as oil spills or climate change, but it is also simpler for you to deal with than you trying to solve those two big issues: all you have to do is not touch/move the stones/rocks.
jlarocco 1mo ago
Yeah, isn't it crazy how that works? There's some open space near my house with a fenced off area saying to stay on trail to protect the ecosystem, but of course oil and gas companies can drive their trucks through to setup fracking rigs.
Lammy 1mo ago
Humanity collectively benefits by having electrical infrastructure so there can be more of us who can accomplish more things. I'm so sick of these effectively Original Sin arguments dressed up as pretending to care more about some fish or shore birds than about your fellow humans. I'm not sorry for existing, and I want lots of cheap power :)
subscribed 1mo ago
Especially in the case of the UK which famously permits seabed trawling in the Marine "Protected" Areas. https://oceandesk.org/destructive-bottom-trawling-occurs-in-98-of-the-uks-marine-protected-areas/ https://oceandesk.org/destructive-bottom-trawling-occurs-in-... We need heroes like this: https://planetwild.com/missions/21-underwater-sculptures-italy https://planetwild.com/missions/21-underwater-sculptures-ita...
aaron695 1mo ago
[dead]

by gempir 1mo ago

bpodgursky 1mo ago

I have literally never heard anyone associated with the environmental movement say: "This area is ecologically insensitive. I'm not too worried what you do here." Until they define some map or scale of what "ecologically sensitive" means, I put zero weight on that statement. It's meaningless. They say it about everything because it is their job to do so.

literalAardvark 1mo ago
I'm guessing you also haven't asked. All places are very much not the same degrees of sensitive and important.
- cjbgkagh 1mo ago
  A common trick in mining is to send surveyors to an area they don’t want so the various interests just so happen to decide that the area being surveyed is the one with historical / ecological significance. After that has been established they send surveyors for the area they do want.
  - kmoser 1mo ago
    Why wouldn't those various interests just complain about the next area being surveyed? Why would they stop after the first?
    - cjbgkagh 1mo ago
      The ecological studies also cover the surrounding areas. They can’t say that absolutely everything is significant so to make the stronger case they pile the significance into the area they think is the likely site to be developed. Then the miners are ‘responding’ to the feedback by relocating to a less significant location that already has been ecologically studied and deemed insignificant.
      - gamblor956 1mo ago
        That's not how environmental surveys work, or the process for challenging them. They absolutely must include detailed information about the actual site and the activity proposed to occur at that site. Subsequent developments can take advantage of the initial survey but must still provide an environmental study about how their own activity will impact their specific site. The #1 reason for environmental surveys being deemed invalid in court is the course of action you discussed: developers trying to avoid scrutiny by not being sufficiently specific about what they are actually planning to do or where.
        cjbgkagh 1mo ago
        The miners were doing mining surveys for internal use only, the environmentalist were submitting the cultural / environmental surveys as complaints which they’re allowed to do as part of the law the local government made for itself since it was government land that was being leased. It was more of a public consultation process, if no one complained then that’s fine too. The miners already have strict environmental regulations they have to follow regardless of where they build. Having seen these submissions it’s often stuff like, there is a river and since rivers are where people tend to congregate if we were to look we might find some ancient stone age human artifact despite no such thing ever being found within 100s of kms. Also rivers move, especially small ones.
    - bronson 1mo ago
      If you say no 100% of the time, your work product won't be worth much.
    - 1mo ago
- bpodgursky 1mo ago
  OK. What are some ecologically unimportant places in England? Somewhere I could throw up a nuclear power plant without anyone raising a fuss.
  - ErroneousBosh 1mo ago
    Anywhere in London would be good. There's nothing else worthwhile there.
  - tomasphan 1mo ago
    Birmingham?
    - bpodgursky 1mo ago
      Can you be more precise? Like an actual area on the map. Because when I look at England's map of greenbelt areas [1] literally everything around Birmingham is protected. [1] https://www.cpre.org.uk/interactive-map-of-englands-green-belt-land/?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=23515607255&gbraid=0AAAAAD1iFi7LQzVFV0S8n9a_3px9wTHN_&gclid=Cj0KCQjwkOvTBhDgARIsAKUNyRs6TpZefzB-wleJewbfP_NcvLq8pxDbi3q035GaYvW5x1PWc_pCToMaAiqFEALw_wcB https://www.cpre.org.uk/interactive-map-of-englands-green-be...
      - smallerize 1mo ago
        I think they were joking. In a literal sense, cities require green spaces for water management. Otherwise you end up like Chicago where they paved everything and flood constantly.
        tptacek 1mo ago
        I mean, not really, right? Permeability would help, but the first and second principal components of our flooding situation are the fact that we're built on a flat swamp, so water has no natural place to go, and we're built around an undersized combined sewer system that would be dazzlingly expensive to replace.
      - 1mo ago

ceejayoz 1mo ago

Maybe the company has at least made committments to restore it to the way it was after?

wbl 1mo ago

Beaches are extremely dynamic environments and can heal in ways that other areas can't.

lukan 1mo ago
Still, people laying stones seems way less invasive, then digging it all up. So yes, people will continue to be there and the digging is once, but the impact seems literally deeper.
- ceejayoz 1mo ago
  My yard got dug up to run a sewer line. They filled it in after and planted seed. I couldn't possibly tell you where it happened now. If they'd left a big pile of rocks in the spot, I'd bet I could find that.
  - skeeter2020 1mo ago
    When we're talking damage to a sensitive environment an ecologist would have the opposite answer to yours. If you dig up a natural environment you can't "plant seed" to reclaim it.
    - ceejayoz 1mo ago
      An ecologist would readily note that we do restoration work on damaged environments on a regular basis, so it is clearly possible to undo some level of damage. They'd also likely note that consulting an ecologist as part of the process might limit the damage in a way that a bunch of Harry Potter fans making a pile would not know. Not doing anything might indeed be better for the environment alone in isolation, but has to be balanced with other considerations, like the benefits of a power cable carrying clean power from wind farms to replace coal. It is also entirely possible to plant native, locally appropriate seeds in a reasonably natural fashion. I am obviously not proposing a layer of lawn sod.
      - lukan 1mo ago

throw0101a 1mo ago

> Ah okay, laying a few stones is ecologically sensitive, but if a billion dollar company wants to dig up the entire beach for a cable, that's not a problem. The billion dollar company is monitored by ecologists and other professionals to make sure they build things according to environmental impact laws and follow their permits (e.g., after digging, restoring the top soil, etc). Randos moving and stacking stones, especially in large numbers, may alter habits for (small) animals and cause erosion: * https://www.ausableriver.org/blog/leaving-no-trace-rock-stacking https://www.ausableriver.org/blog/leaving-no-trace-rock-stac... * https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/conservation/issues/rock-cairns.htm https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/conservation... * https://www.nps.gov/articles/rockcairns.htm https://www.nps.gov/articles/rockcairns.htm

Timshel 1mo ago
You would think so but not the case for the construction of the controvsersial A69 highway in France. Infractions are fixed through authorization change ... https://france3-regions.franceinfo.fr/occitanie/tarn/albi/autoroute-a69-l-etat-regularise-les-emprises-illegales-du-chantier-grace-a-une-nouvelle-autorisation-environnementale-3386977.html https://france3-regions.franceinfo.fr/occitanie/tarn/albi/au... Almost as if ecoologist are not listened to. What a surprise ...
- throw0101a 1mo ago
  > Around the beginning of the construction work, between 2022 and 2023, criticism of the project was given national media coverage, with several associations highlighting its negative environmental impact, as well as its high price for users and the fact that the current free expressways bypassing the towns of Puylaurens and Soual would be incorporated into the motorway and made toll-paying.[1][2] The project received unfavourable opinions from the National Council for the Protection of Nature [fr][3] and the Environmental Authority [fr].[4] Throughout 2023 and early 2024, demonstrations were organised, bringing together up to several thousand environmental activists. On 27 February 2025, the administrative court of Toulouse annulled the environmental permits, leading to the suspension of the construction work.[5] On 28 May, the administrative court of appeal of Toulouse, allowed the work to resume awaiting the final judgement planned for the 11 December 2025.[6] * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A69_highway_(France) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A69_highway_(France) Seems to illustrate my point: large projects are high profile and may be scrutinized. People making changes to the local environment in ones and twos will hardly be noticed individually, but if enough ones and twos are added up over time, in aggregate they can cause problems. * https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2025/09/visitors-reminded-not-move-rocks-after-eastern-hellbender-found-dead-great-smoky-mountains https://www.nationalparkstraveler.org/2025/09/visitors-remin... * https://friendsofthesmokies.org/blog/dont-move-rocks/ https://friendsofthesmokies.org/blog/dont-move-rocks/ * https://www.hrwc.org/stop-stacking-rocks-in-the-river/ https://www.hrwc.org/stop-stacking-rocks-in-the-river/ Certainly not as serious as oil spills or climate change, but it is also simpler for you to deal with than you trying to solve those two big issues: all you have to do is not touch/move the stones/rocks.

jlarocco 1mo ago

Yeah, isn't it crazy how that works? There's some open space near my house with a fenced off area saying to stay on trail to protect the ecosystem, but of course oil and gas companies can drive their trucks through to setup fracking rigs.

Lammy 1mo ago

Humanity collectively benefits by having electrical infrastructure so there can be more of us who can accomplish more things. I'm so sick of these effectively Original Sin arguments dressed up as pretending to care more about some fish or shore birds than about your fellow humans. I'm not sorry for existing, and I want lots of cheap power :)

subscribed 1mo ago

Especially in the case of the UK which famously permits seabed trawling in the Marine "Protected" Areas. https://oceandesk.org/destructive-bottom-trawling-occurs-in-98-of-the-uks-marine-protected-areas/ https://oceandesk.org/destructive-bottom-trawling-occurs-in-... We need heroes like this: https://planetwild.com/missions/21-underwater-sculptures-italy https://planetwild.com/missions/21-underwater-sculptures-ita...

aaron695 1mo ago

[dead]