Two months ago you published an article by George Monbiot (The Lake District as a world heritage site – what a disaster that would be, 10 May). I responded in a letter the Guardian published online (12 May). I wrote that George had not set his sights well, had failed to say which Lake District farmers have fought “tooth and nail” against conservation and “revile” the National Trust and the RSPB, and had failed to show why world heritage status conferred by Unesco should be disastrous for Lakeland.
In this week’s intemperate article (The Lake District as a world heritage site is a blatant assault on nature, 12 July), George has the sheep in his sights again, reviling them as “a fully automated system for ecological destruction”, and alleging that they “cleanse the land of almost all wildlife”. This is a travesty of the Lake District I know and love. Unesco’s award is conditional on conserving the area, and that includes its sheep, as well as its wildlife and its unique tranquillity.
I’d like the Guardian to reprint Steve Bell’s cartoon of snowbound deep sheep, which I have treasured since December 1999: “What are you doing for the Millennium, deep sheep?” “I think I’ll be staying put … Maybe have a few friends round.”
Does George really think sheep are wolves? I’m no sheep-worshipper, but I do enjoy a peaceful coexistence with them. Meanwhile, ravaging the unique landscape of Little Langdale are commercial 4x4s. Those are the wolves. May George set his sights against them!
Jinty Nelson
London
• George Monbiot’s anguished wail concerning the granting of Unesco world heritage status to the Lake District deserves a wide audience and a practical response. Scotland is currently quietly forging a middle way between sheep and trees, or – to put it another way – between a monoculture and a richer biodiversity.
The Eskdalemuir report, produced for Confor, the body that promotes forestry and wood, made a comparison of hill farming and forestry. Findings included: forestry produces three times the economic output of farming before subsidy; forestry’s spending in the local economy is double that of farming; and forestry supports the same number of jobs as farming.
While blanket afforestation is neither popular nor desirable, there is a growing body of research and practice, from the likes of the Woodland Trust, that suggests there is great potential for integrating agriculture and forestry to achieve environmental benefits without compromising productivity, eg correctly planted trees provide shelter for sheep, improve drainage and enhance grass growing conditions.
Paul Brannen MEP
Labour’s agriculture spokesperson in the European parliament
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters
