I am aware that my comment is quite beyond the main point of this article (the complexities of land management in highly contested cultural ground). I simply want to say that I recognise what you are saying regarding getting COVID after that meeting. I had a similar experience 2 years ago. I support your “correlation” and could provide an intelligible frame to it but this is not the right medium to do so. Enough to say: our immune system is indeed part of another very complex system, the human composite itself. Like amphibious creatures we too live in different environments and toxicity unfortunately doesn’t simply happen in physical grounds. Ecology 5.0 takes complexity and interrelatedness more to the core, from the subtle to the crass. Thanks for sharing.
Jonathan, I thoroughly enjoyed your observations on the Lough Neagh narratives and agree absolutely that we are host to a microcosm of the metacrises: and for that reason, I believe the issues are potentially generative for an entirely novel set of conversations , understandings and approaches to the future guardianship of and care for the Lough. Your challenge to the ridiculous scapegoating of Nick has support from an unlikely source: the former MP and civil rights legend, Bernadette McAliskey (nee Devlin) has also called out the scapegoating of Nick in one of NI's daily newspapers, The Irish News.
Hello Jonathan, The Earl of Shaftesbury must have told you that I’m not willing to talk. This is not accurate. I have conveyed to another of his friends - who has sent me many emails - that I’m ill following a virus in April. I have post viral fatigue. It was left with the Earl of Shaftesbury (through his friend) that when I am well enough, we will meet. I hope you will be able to acknowledge in your reply that this is how the situation was left with the Earl.
The Earl of Shaftesbury has chosen this week, the week of the Realisation Festival, to bring up the subject of his ownership. Some might conclude he has raised this to fend off criticism.
To show he is in earnest, the Earl must demonstrate he is open to speaking to the people in power in Northern Ireland. He should also set a timescale within which he hopes to achieve a transferral of ownership.
The Northern Ireland Environment Minister Andrew Muir is seeking a meeting with Earl Shaftesbury. Has this been arranged?
Who else is the Earl speaking to? If he is in earnest he will be busy chasing up his many contacts in Northern Ireland.
Unless and until the Earl of Shaftesbury discloses the sand dredging licenses, I cannot comment on their contents. However he now has the opportunity, clearly and without reservation, to condemn the dredging of sand from Lough Neagh.
Sorry to hear you have post viral fatigue. I wasn’t aware of the details, only that attempts had been made to talk and they hadn’t quite succeeded.
I’m not Nick’s spokesperson, but I do believe all your questions are answered in the substack post he just put out online that I linked to in my last response. In a multi-stakeholder context, where he has limited agency, it is not for Nick to set any timetable- that’s a misplaced expectation and an unreasonable demand.
Moreover, far from his recent statement just being a response to the defaming of the festival, the record reflects that Nick has been open to discussing ownership and has met with several key stakeholders in the Lough over several years now and will be meeting with Andrew Muir again soon, as indicated in Nick’s post and by this BBC story: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9777yg08y1o
All said and done, I believe if your concern is for nature in general and Lough Neagh in particular, you have the wrong target in Nick, and certainly in the realisation festival.
And if you feel sand dredging is the problem you want to focus on, there are ways to challenge it that will work better than clamouring for Nick to do things that are either illegal or ineffective.
Hello Jonathan, I see that you edited out the following phrase from your reply “I share the sense there are problematic issues here”. I know this because Substack sends out replies by email and I’ve received two versions of your reply.
We haven’t targeted or defamed either the Earl of Shaftesbury or the Realisation Festival. We’ve made one small film and some social media posts to raise awareness. We partnered with a craftivism group, Makers + Shakers Wimborne, who embroidered some coasters and sent them to you.
Other groups are similarly attempting to raise awareness, and they have written to you and to speakers. Most notably Save Lough Neagh and Sli Eile. Check them out on Instagram, they make important points.
I sense that both you and the Earl of Shaftesbury feel awkward about the situation because it is not a tenable in the long term.
No problem about the edit. I do share the sense that there are problematic issues here. And that’s hardly a secret given that I said as much in the post above this conversation. I edited it out only because this is already becoming drawn out and we don’t seem to be connecting. It’s true that the Wimborne XR campaign (yes I saw the video) and the Sli Eile campaigns should not be conflated. Your campaign is much more civilised, and the knitting is an elegant touch. But both campaigns are full of misunderstanding, as I’ve tried to indicate here and elsewhere. The two main asks: ‘give it back!’ and ‘stop the dredging!’ are not actually available options. What I feel mostly then is not awkwardness as much as frustration; there is so much wasted energy on all sides, and antagonism where there could be cooperation.
To clarify, I mentioned the Sli Eile and Save Lough Neagh campaigns as they are important, not to comment on whether they are “civilised” (your word) or not. I think it’s really vital to see other points of view, especially in countries where there is a history of oppression. Lough Neagh is a huge cultural icon to our neighbours across the Irish Sea. “Give it back” as you summarise it, is of course an available option, no one is forcing the Earl to continue to own it. “Stop the dredging” may not immediately be an option - as I say, I haven’t seen the licences. However the Earl could disclose the licences, and condemn the sand dredging as harmful to Lough Neagh. What’s stopping him? I certainly feel no antagonism to anyone involved: there’s so much more at stake than personal feelings. The Realisation Festival is an “opportunity to reckon with our times”. We live on the threshold of climate disaster and the collapse of the natural world. Any high profile organisation such as Perspectiva or Realisation should be careful not to greenwash activities which are destroying nature
“Give it back” implies that there is a “back” and it implies the possibility of conferring liability to an entity that is not even asking for it. There really is no such option. But that’s not to say the ownership question doesn’t matter or can’t be explored.
Of course people feel passion for places, for land and for nature in general, but there are few things sadder than misdirected passion, and that’s what I feel is evident here.
For instance the very idea of greenwashing in this context is totally misplaced, reflects ignorance of the festival, and feels absurd to the organisers and participants.
I am sure you are doing what you can to convey your perspective in good faith, and so am I. However, sadly, I’m not sure we’re making much progress through this medium. And while I am interested in the issues surrounding this conversation, Lough Neagh is not my personal battle to fight, so I feel I have to leave this conversation here for now.
Jonathan, can we establish firstly, that you’re absolutely okay with an absentee landlord owning a major if not the major home of biodiversity in a country in which he doesn’t reside.
Secondly that you don’t have a problem with 1% (as you say) of Lough Neagh’s bed being torn up by sand dredging.
Would your acceptance extend to the depth of the sand dredging, which in places has excavated this relatively shallow lake to a depth of 69 feet?
And to the 1.7 million tons of sand a year being scooped out?
Do you feel comfortable about the scooping up of the contents of a nature reserve, and the destruction of an irreplaceable habitat and the risk to waterfowl, fish populations, water quality?
The UK is one of the most nature depleted countries on the planet. Your friend and business partner, the Earl of Shaftesbury, owns the largest lake in the UK and is profiting from destructive sand dredging. A day will come when our children will look back at all of us, aristocrats and commoners alike, and say, What were you thinking? What were you doing?
The natural world is dying. Holding the Realisation Festival at St Giles House whilst the Earl of Shaftesbury fails to condemn the sand dredging and to do all he can to stop it, and whilst he fails to make every effort to transfer the Lough to the people of Northern Ireland within a set timetable and without further delay, makes you complicit.
In the context of our involvement in the situation as a whole, and the charge of 'complicity', it would be good to talk, either at the festival or beforehand. If that's a possibility please email me and we can figure out how best to do it. My understanding is that sadly you don't want to talk, but I would be glad to be wrong. In any case here we are in my Substack comments...
I do offer an outline of my views both on ownership and sand dredging above, though there is plenty more to say (and some of it is below).
There is no substantive or financial connection between the ecological problems of Lough Neagh and the Realisation Festival. The tenuous basis of that connection stemmed from an ambiguous line in an old interview of Nick in Vanity Fair, which was misinterpreted by the Belfast Herald and even that line has since been withdrawn in the recent article linking the Lough to the festival.
So I also feel a bit sad about it all. This campaign is based on sand in a literal and figurative sense, and it risks turning potential allies into adversaries in a way that is a loss for everyone.
All I can say for now, then, is that we are not as far apart in spirit as you might think, but that the details matter, and have implications for what you are seeking. I've shared a few links below that might indicate where there is common ground, where the current campaign is just rhetorical heat rather than clarifying light, and where there is new work to be done.
There is currently no direct or swift pathway to change ownership, and any such pathway would have to be collaborative and co-created. Nick is proactively trying to do that now, but the "give it back" language is undiscerning and doesn't help. It would be much more helpful to support or inform or inspire existing actors to clarify what community ownership (perhaps informed by rights of nature) would look like in practice, and create a pathway towards that.
On the sand dredging, there is a contract and licence that predates Nick's inheritance, and it extends to 2046. Nick cannot 'stop the dredging', and nor could any other owner. The best chance of stopping it is to create a campaign not to renew the planning permission for the license, which is due for renewal in 2032. That would be a constructive campaign and a chance to substantiate and test the significance of the updated ecological understanding you share. In the meantime, Nick has said publicly that he is in the process of redirecting royalties from the activity towards the restoration of the Lough. Again, if you have views on how he should do that, campaigning on that specifically would make sense.
As I indicated in my post, I find the Shaftesbury estate's ownership of the bed and soil of the Lough (not the Lough as a whole) "bizarre". There are other words I could use, and I am not "absolutely ok" with it. However, I am not "absolutely ok" with thousands of other things, including misinformation and scapegoating, which I see a lot of in the context of Lough Neagh. I don't find political hope in performative moral purity, but rather in recognising our various degrees of entanglement and helping each other to do our best with the cards we are dealt.
The details matter. The government of Northern Ireland is not asking for ownership of the bed and soil of the Lough, and were even advised against seeking it, because it is liability. It's also true that celebrated activist Bernadette McAliskey (nee Devlin) has described Nick as "a handy scapegoat", and that there are major political and economic culprits that have much more agency to affect change than Nick does, who rarely get any heat at all.
If your driving concern and motivation is Nature dying, are you sure attacking The Realisation Festival through Nick and vice-versa, is the best use of your campaigning energy and time?
I hope we get a chance to talk. Some links are below.
I am aware that my comment is quite beyond the main point of this article (the complexities of land management in highly contested cultural ground). I simply want to say that I recognise what you are saying regarding getting COVID after that meeting. I had a similar experience 2 years ago. I support your “correlation” and could provide an intelligible frame to it but this is not the right medium to do so. Enough to say: our immune system is indeed part of another very complex system, the human composite itself. Like amphibious creatures we too live in different environments and toxicity unfortunately doesn’t simply happen in physical grounds. Ecology 5.0 takes complexity and interrelatedness more to the core, from the subtle to the crass. Thanks for sharing.
Jonathan, I thoroughly enjoyed your observations on the Lough Neagh narratives and agree absolutely that we are host to a microcosm of the metacrises: and for that reason, I believe the issues are potentially generative for an entirely novel set of conversations , understandings and approaches to the future guardianship of and care for the Lough. Your challenge to the ridiculous scapegoating of Nick has support from an unlikely source: the former MP and civil rights legend, Bernadette McAliskey (nee Devlin) has also called out the scapegoating of Nick in one of NI's daily newspapers, The Irish News.
Thanks Peter. I didn't know about the Bernadette Devlin/McAliskey observation, and found it here: https://archive.ph/ylw9y
As you'll see in another comment on this post here, I refer to this point, which is indeed helpful to get things in perspective.
Hopefully this will all lead somewhere good.
J+
With regard to notions of ownership, I co-wrote a piece on it a few years ago with Monica Mitchell. Don’t know if it might interest you, but here’s the link: https://www.governforimpact.org/reconceptualizing-ownership
Thanks Hartger. Very useful, and pertinent for the ownership question in general.
For how it applies to the Lough, there is also this report:
https://ejni.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/EJNI-Briefing-Sept-23-Lough-Neagh-Future-Ownership.pdf
Hello Jonathan, The Earl of Shaftesbury must have told you that I’m not willing to talk. This is not accurate. I have conveyed to another of his friends - who has sent me many emails - that I’m ill following a virus in April. I have post viral fatigue. It was left with the Earl of Shaftesbury (through his friend) that when I am well enough, we will meet. I hope you will be able to acknowledge in your reply that this is how the situation was left with the Earl.
The Earl of Shaftesbury has chosen this week, the week of the Realisation Festival, to bring up the subject of his ownership. Some might conclude he has raised this to fend off criticism.
To show he is in earnest, the Earl must demonstrate he is open to speaking to the people in power in Northern Ireland. He should also set a timescale within which he hopes to achieve a transferral of ownership.
The Northern Ireland Environment Minister Andrew Muir is seeking a meeting with Earl Shaftesbury. Has this been arranged?
Who else is the Earl speaking to? If he is in earnest he will be busy chasing up his many contacts in Northern Ireland.
Unless and until the Earl of Shaftesbury discloses the sand dredging licenses, I cannot comment on their contents. However he now has the opportunity, clearly and without reservation, to condemn the dredging of sand from Lough Neagh.
Hello Joanna,
Sorry to hear you have post viral fatigue. I wasn’t aware of the details, only that attempts had been made to talk and they hadn’t quite succeeded.
I’m not Nick’s spokesperson, but I do believe all your questions are answered in the substack post he just put out online that I linked to in my last response. In a multi-stakeholder context, where he has limited agency, it is not for Nick to set any timetable- that’s a misplaced expectation and an unreasonable demand.
Moreover, far from his recent statement just being a response to the defaming of the festival, the record reflects that Nick has been open to discussing ownership and has met with several key stakeholders in the Lough over several years now and will be meeting with Andrew Muir again soon, as indicated in Nick’s post and by this BBC story: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9777yg08y1o
All said and done, I believe if your concern is for nature in general and Lough Neagh in particular, you have the wrong target in Nick, and certainly in the realisation festival.
And if you feel sand dredging is the problem you want to focus on, there are ways to challenge it that will work better than clamouring for Nick to do things that are either illegal or ineffective.
Jonathan.
Hello Jonathan, I see that you edited out the following phrase from your reply “I share the sense there are problematic issues here”. I know this because Substack sends out replies by email and I’ve received two versions of your reply.
We haven’t targeted or defamed either the Earl of Shaftesbury or the Realisation Festival. We’ve made one small film and some social media posts to raise awareness. We partnered with a craftivism group, Makers + Shakers Wimborne, who embroidered some coasters and sent them to you.
Other groups are similarly attempting to raise awareness, and they have written to you and to speakers. Most notably Save Lough Neagh and Sli Eile. Check them out on Instagram, they make important points.
I sense that both you and the Earl of Shaftesbury feel awkward about the situation because it is not a tenable in the long term.
Here is a link to the film in case you haven’t seen it https://youtu.be/bISxUdU_hvU?si=gjNuZ7GkoN_mWiMq
No problem about the edit. I do share the sense that there are problematic issues here. And that’s hardly a secret given that I said as much in the post above this conversation. I edited it out only because this is already becoming drawn out and we don’t seem to be connecting. It’s true that the Wimborne XR campaign (yes I saw the video) and the Sli Eile campaigns should not be conflated. Your campaign is much more civilised, and the knitting is an elegant touch. But both campaigns are full of misunderstanding, as I’ve tried to indicate here and elsewhere. The two main asks: ‘give it back!’ and ‘stop the dredging!’ are not actually available options. What I feel mostly then is not awkwardness as much as frustration; there is so much wasted energy on all sides, and antagonism where there could be cooperation.
To clarify, I mentioned the Sli Eile and Save Lough Neagh campaigns as they are important, not to comment on whether they are “civilised” (your word) or not. I think it’s really vital to see other points of view, especially in countries where there is a history of oppression. Lough Neagh is a huge cultural icon to our neighbours across the Irish Sea. “Give it back” as you summarise it, is of course an available option, no one is forcing the Earl to continue to own it. “Stop the dredging” may not immediately be an option - as I say, I haven’t seen the licences. However the Earl could disclose the licences, and condemn the sand dredging as harmful to Lough Neagh. What’s stopping him? I certainly feel no antagonism to anyone involved: there’s so much more at stake than personal feelings. The Realisation Festival is an “opportunity to reckon with our times”. We live on the threshold of climate disaster and the collapse of the natural world. Any high profile organisation such as Perspectiva or Realisation should be careful not to greenwash activities which are destroying nature
“Give it back” implies that there is a “back” and it implies the possibility of conferring liability to an entity that is not even asking for it. There really is no such option. But that’s not to say the ownership question doesn’t matter or can’t be explored.
Of course people feel passion for places, for land and for nature in general, but there are few things sadder than misdirected passion, and that’s what I feel is evident here.
For instance the very idea of greenwashing in this context is totally misplaced, reflects ignorance of the festival, and feels absurd to the organisers and participants.
I am sure you are doing what you can to convey your perspective in good faith, and so am I. However, sadly, I’m not sure we’re making much progress through this medium. And while I am interested in the issues surrounding this conversation, Lough Neagh is not my personal battle to fight, so I feel I have to leave this conversation here for now.
🙏
Jonathan, can we establish firstly, that you’re absolutely okay with an absentee landlord owning a major if not the major home of biodiversity in a country in which he doesn’t reside.
Secondly that you don’t have a problem with 1% (as you say) of Lough Neagh’s bed being torn up by sand dredging.
Would your acceptance extend to the depth of the sand dredging, which in places has excavated this relatively shallow lake to a depth of 69 feet?
And to the 1.7 million tons of sand a year being scooped out?
Do you feel comfortable about the scooping up of the contents of a nature reserve, and the destruction of an irreplaceable habitat and the risk to waterfowl, fish populations, water quality?
The UK is one of the most nature depleted countries on the planet. Your friend and business partner, the Earl of Shaftesbury, owns the largest lake in the UK and is profiting from destructive sand dredging. A day will come when our children will look back at all of us, aristocrats and commoners alike, and say, What were you thinking? What were you doing?
The natural world is dying. Holding the Realisation Festival at St Giles House whilst the Earl of Shaftesbury fails to condemn the sand dredging and to do all he can to stop it, and whilst he fails to make every effort to transfer the Lough to the people of Northern Ireland within a set timetable and without further delay, makes you complicit.
No more excuses please.
Hello Joanna.
In the context of our involvement in the situation as a whole, and the charge of 'complicity', it would be good to talk, either at the festival or beforehand. If that's a possibility please email me and we can figure out how best to do it. My understanding is that sadly you don't want to talk, but I would be glad to be wrong. In any case here we are in my Substack comments...
I do offer an outline of my views both on ownership and sand dredging above, though there is plenty more to say (and some of it is below).
There is no substantive or financial connection between the ecological problems of Lough Neagh and the Realisation Festival. The tenuous basis of that connection stemmed from an ambiguous line in an old interview of Nick in Vanity Fair, which was misinterpreted by the Belfast Herald and even that line has since been withdrawn in the recent article linking the Lough to the festival.
So I also feel a bit sad about it all. This campaign is based on sand in a literal and figurative sense, and it risks turning potential allies into adversaries in a way that is a loss for everyone.
All I can say for now, then, is that we are not as far apart in spirit as you might think, but that the details matter, and have implications for what you are seeking. I've shared a few links below that might indicate where there is common ground, where the current campaign is just rhetorical heat rather than clarifying light, and where there is new work to be done.
There is currently no direct or swift pathway to change ownership, and any such pathway would have to be collaborative and co-created. Nick is proactively trying to do that now, but the "give it back" language is undiscerning and doesn't help. It would be much more helpful to support or inform or inspire existing actors to clarify what community ownership (perhaps informed by rights of nature) would look like in practice, and create a pathway towards that.
On the sand dredging, there is a contract and licence that predates Nick's inheritance, and it extends to 2046. Nick cannot 'stop the dredging', and nor could any other owner. The best chance of stopping it is to create a campaign not to renew the planning permission for the license, which is due for renewal in 2032. That would be a constructive campaign and a chance to substantiate and test the significance of the updated ecological understanding you share. In the meantime, Nick has said publicly that he is in the process of redirecting royalties from the activity towards the restoration of the Lough. Again, if you have views on how he should do that, campaigning on that specifically would make sense.
As I indicated in my post, I find the Shaftesbury estate's ownership of the bed and soil of the Lough (not the Lough as a whole) "bizarre". There are other words I could use, and I am not "absolutely ok" with it. However, I am not "absolutely ok" with thousands of other things, including misinformation and scapegoating, which I see a lot of in the context of Lough Neagh. I don't find political hope in performative moral purity, but rather in recognising our various degrees of entanglement and helping each other to do our best with the cards we are dealt.
The details matter. The government of Northern Ireland is not asking for ownership of the bed and soil of the Lough, and were even advised against seeking it, because it is liability. It's also true that celebrated activist Bernadette McAliskey (nee Devlin) has described Nick as "a handy scapegoat", and that there are major political and economic culprits that have much more agency to affect change than Nick does, who rarely get any heat at all.
If your driving concern and motivation is Nature dying, are you sure attacking The Realisation Festival through Nick and vice-versa, is the best use of your campaigning energy and time?
I hope we get a chance to talk. Some links are below.
Jonathan.
The Festival Response to the campaign(s): https://realisationfestival.com/blog/the-festival-has-been-subject-to-activist-pressure-this-year-tell-me-more/
Nick Shaftesbury's Recent Public Statement (including several links) https://nickashleycooper.substack.com/p/thoughts-on-lough-neagh