Post by Psamathe on Jul 27, 2021 12:03:26 GMT
An interesting letter in the Guardian that I'm uncertain about
I can appreciate the negative impact but at the same time people are getting out in the countryside (and learning to appreciate it). And whilst I don't question the impact at those sites used for wild swimming and that wild swimming has had a big increase in popularity, how much of our river environment is actually impacted compared to e.g. water companies pouring raw sewage into rivers and so much chemical run-off from modern farming practices.
And a proportion of those wild swimmers will start to argue for cleaner rivers which will benefit wildlife as well as the swimmers.
Are a few wild swimming locations a price to pay with benefits offsetting the damage caused?
I don't know and whilst I'm against environmental damage I do wonder about the overall balance.
Ian
Hazy phrases like “access to our blue spaces” hide the reality of the destructive impact on river wildlife caused by the popularity of wild swimming (Education calls grow after week of tragedies in England’s waters). My nearest river used to be a peaceful haven for wildlife. Its unofficial use last year as a “river beach” disturbed breeding kingfishers, causing them to abandon their nests. Wild swimming is the latest fashionable activity to prioritise the desires of human beings over other species’ right to survive.
(from www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/26/counting-the-cost-of-wild-swimming)
(from www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/26/counting-the-cost-of-wild-swimming)
I can appreciate the negative impact but at the same time people are getting out in the countryside (and learning to appreciate it). And whilst I don't question the impact at those sites used for wild swimming and that wild swimming has had a big increase in popularity, how much of our river environment is actually impacted compared to e.g. water companies pouring raw sewage into rivers and so much chemical run-off from modern farming practices.
And a proportion of those wild swimmers will start to argue for cleaner rivers which will benefit wildlife as well as the swimmers.
Are a few wild swimming locations a price to pay with benefits offsetting the damage caused?
I don't know and whilst I'm against environmental damage I do wonder about the overall balance.
Ian
I know raw sewage being discharged into rivers is an emotive subject, but, in my opinion, it really depends on how much is being discharged, how big the receiving river is and how much is from domestic / farmland and how much is chemical. Usually it is a lot of sewage into not much river and that is obviously bad for humans and wildlife. But smaller domestic discharges into larger river flows can actually increase biodiversity as it acts as an organic food source. Of course it can still be harmful to humans, but I just thought it was worth pointing out. I'm not saying it should be allowed or anything, just what I've seen from observation.