How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 13)
Discussion
Controlled burns on moorland in the U.K. are commonplace and happen every year
https://www.gwct.org.uk/advisory/briefings/driven-...
Snippet below :
Q: Does prescribed heather burning lead to wildfires?
A: There is evidence that sometimes prescribed burns are not adequately controlled and can lead to wildfires. However, evidence also suggests that the benefits for wildlife, wildfire reduction and promoting habitat growth outweigh the risks. For example, in the Peak District, grouse moor management is associated with a lower frequency of wildfire. There is evidence across the world for the benefits of prescribed burning in reducing wildfire risk, but there are not enough studies specifically referring to the UK moorlands, and experts call for more research.
Q: How could rotational burning reduce wildfire risk?
A: Fuel load and structure are critical factors in how fire behaves. Prescribed burning reduces the accumulation of old, woody heather, which can build up to a large stock of potential fuel, so heather burning reduces the likelihood (and intensity) of fire. Prescribed burning may also create fire breaks, which can hinder the spread of wildfire.
Q: Are wildfires always bad?
A: Wildfires are uncontrolled and may burn hot and deep, in the worst cases igniting the underlying peat and burning for months. This can then also lead to a cost to the public purse with extensive and prolonged use of the fire and emergency rescue services in difficult to reach areas. These factors are very rare occurrences in prescribed burns. However, there is also evidence that wildfire can have little or no lasting impact on habitat or wildlife.
https://www.gwct.org.uk/advisory/briefings/driven-...
Snippet below :
Q: Does prescribed heather burning lead to wildfires?
A: There is evidence that sometimes prescribed burns are not adequately controlled and can lead to wildfires. However, evidence also suggests that the benefits for wildlife, wildfire reduction and promoting habitat growth outweigh the risks. For example, in the Peak District, grouse moor management is associated with a lower frequency of wildfire. There is evidence across the world for the benefits of prescribed burning in reducing wildfire risk, but there are not enough studies specifically referring to the UK moorlands, and experts call for more research.
Q: How could rotational burning reduce wildfire risk?
A: Fuel load and structure are critical factors in how fire behaves. Prescribed burning reduces the accumulation of old, woody heather, which can build up to a large stock of potential fuel, so heather burning reduces the likelihood (and intensity) of fire. Prescribed burning may also create fire breaks, which can hinder the spread of wildfire.
Q: Are wildfires always bad?
A: Wildfires are uncontrolled and may burn hot and deep, in the worst cases igniting the underlying peat and burning for months. This can then also lead to a cost to the public purse with extensive and prolonged use of the fire and emergency rescue services in difficult to reach areas. These factors are very rare occurrences in prescribed burns. However, there is also evidence that wildfire can have little or no lasting impact on habitat or wildlife.
Dont like rolls said:
Coca-Cola is a brand, Champagne is a controlled method of production from a specific geographical area like Melton Pork Pies, nobody protects Cola or Pork Pies.
Fair point - there is no American equivalent to a protected geographic indicator (like Champagne). You can't defend 'Bronx Biscuits', or 'Cincinnati Chicken' as being unique to the region. So we see a combination of Trade Mark and brand protection in most of the world. The case of Champagne is pretty unusual (can anyone think of others??).DeepEnd said:
There is no need to start calling people names - “chicken littles?” really? - and fearful of change when discussing these facts.
I wasn't calling anyone names, I was describing an attitude of responding to anything as though the sky is falling in.In two words, it's possible to get the idea across without making a meal of it.
Tuna said:
Fair point - there is no American equivalent to a protected geographic indicator (like Champagne). You can't defend 'Bronx Biscuits', or 'Cincinnati Chicken' as being unique to the region. So we see a combination of Trade Mark and brand protection in most of the world. The case of Champagne is pretty unusual (can anyone think of others??).
Europe has quite a few - from Port through Roquefort, Parmigiano-reggano, parma ham, etc.As has been said, the UK has 65. Some are exceptionally niche.
Brooking10 said:
Tuna said:
The case of Champagne is pretty unusual (can anyone think of others??).
It really isn’t. Don't have the figures to hand, but I'd suggest three quarters at the very least are European in origin.
But then, we've perhaps as a continent the longest history of "brand" specialisms? Certainly to the level of "this cheese only tastes like this as it's matured in caves with a pretty unique geology, for at least x years".
Brooking10 said:
It really isn’t.
Reading up the complex situation in the USA, it seems to me it is. For sure there are (as Sway has pointed out) plenty of examples of Geographical Indicators in Europe, but how many have successfully taken that fight to the US, which doesn't recognise the concept in the first place?
Tuna said:
Brooking10 said:
It really isn’t.
Reading up the complex situation in the USA, it seems to me it is. For sure there are (as Sway has pointed out) plenty of examples of Geographical Indicators in Europe, but how many have successfully taken that fight to the US, which doesn't recognise the concept in the first place?
Tuna said:
Reading up the complex situation in the USA, it seems to me it is.
For sure there are (as Sway has pointed out) plenty of examples of Geographical Indicators in Europe, but how many have successfully taken that fight to the US, which doesn't recognise the concept in the first place?
Well, if they do; we are going to have problems in a trade deal. For sure there are (as Sway has pointed out) plenty of examples of Geographical Indicators in Europe, but how many have successfully taken that fight to the US, which doesn't recognise the concept in the first place?
Or maybe people just move on, largely as before and concentrate on the real issues at hand.
stongle said:
Tuna said:
Reading up the complex situation in the USA, it seems to me it is.
For sure there are (as Sway has pointed out) plenty of examples of Geographical Indicators in Europe, but how many have successfully taken that fight to the US, which doesn't recognise the concept in the first place?
Well, if they do; we are going to have problems in a trade deal. For sure there are (as Sway has pointed out) plenty of examples of Geographical Indicators in Europe, but how many have successfully taken that fight to the US, which doesn't recognise the concept in the first place?
Or maybe people just move on, largely as before and concentrate on the real issues at hand.
Vanden Saab said:
Or may be we have already signed an agreement with the USA to protect Scotch Whisky and Irish whiskey, Tennessee whiskey and bourbon...
Indeed.https://www.thespiritsbusiness.com/2019/02/us-and-...
Tuna said:
Brooking10 said:
It really isn’t.
Reading up the complex situation in the USA, it seems to me it is. For sure there are (as Sway has pointed out) plenty of examples of Geographical Indicators in Europe, but how many have successfully taken that fight to the US, which doesn't recognise the concept in the first place?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/...
The point, is that when it comes to food especially, the US (even the upscale, expensive places) really aren't very specific in their nuances and understanding of these things.
So Parmigiano-reggiano, labelled as such, sold in the US will be 'proper' parmesan cheese. However, parmesan isn't protected - and so you get dozens if not hundreds of cheap s
te sold - and American consumers lap it up. They simply do not notice the difference. Import tariffs, and "proper" production methods/ingredients, mean that it's so expensive virtually no one buys it. The US consumer just doesn't give a s
t. Hence the US regulations don't give a st. The practices, labelling standards, etc. are simply appalling and no one cares. This is pretty obvious to anyone who's spent time in the US, and pays attention to their food (and it's ingredients) - and to be fair, isn't just specific to food. Hence 'model year' is king when it comes to cars - the market perception is very simple and unsophisticed, if it is newer it is therefore better. Even if the changes from year to year are nothing more than a different colour scheme and a different wheel option. Oddly, the average US consumer is exceptionally well versed in noticing these differences.
It's odd. But then, so is the US. Land of the Free - yet every shop, restaurant or workplace you enter has three quarters of it's doors covered in legal statements telling you exactly what you cannot do. Every food package points out that the State of California is certain that it'll cause cancer. And so on. The most conformist, regulated nation on earth - claimed from the rooftops to be the "land of the free".
I'm really into my "proper" BBQ. Love smoking a big lump of meat for up to 36 hours. Amusingly, recent trends in the UK has been for "USDA Brisket" (to be fair, grain fed brisket compared to our grass fed is a LOT more forgiving and a lot juicier). When you actually look into it - USDA in itself means nothing. All meat from the US is USDA approved. The top grade "USDA Prime" has certification based purely on appearance... It's meaningless - yet demands a pretty chunky premium.
Oh, and it's all legal in the UK/EU as long as it hasn't come from stocks pumped full of antibiotics.
I've spent a fair bit of time in the US working - I love the place in the main. Sophistication just isn't in their culture though, and I always without fail feel like s
te after a month there even though I try my best to "eat well". You simply can't, unless a millionaire and in a couple of very specific places. As always, there are exceptions - none of the absolutes I've stated truly are - but those exceptions are in a staggeringly tiny minority.
One thing I will say is taste wise, if not actual quality, they absolutely smash it. Some of the tastiest meals I've ever eaten have been in little places in Bumf
knowhere, Middle America - but I'd hate to know the actual provenance and practices involved in the supply chain!That isn't going to change. Regardless of trade deal, "protections", or anything else.
I've always assumed that the US situation is a hangover from the days when many communities were effectively geographically isolated - so the food they got was often in poor condition and came via circuitous routes. Not much room there to be picky about whether your Parmesan cheese is 'actually' Parmesan. Close enough was close enough.
The tale I was told about Hershey's chocolate was that the milk supplier was some distance away, so the milk they used for the chocolate was always on the edge of turning. People got used to the flavour (I really can't cope with it). When transport and technology improved to the point that Hersheys could make chocolate with genuinely fresh milk - the people hated it, because they'd got used to the old stuff. So now they artificially sour the milk.
The tale I was told about Hershey's chocolate was that the milk supplier was some distance away, so the milk they used for the chocolate was always on the edge of turning. People got used to the flavour (I really can't cope with it). When transport and technology improved to the point that Hersheys could make chocolate with genuinely fresh milk - the people hated it, because they'd got used to the old stuff. So now they artificially sour the milk.
Vanden Saab said:
Or may be we have already signed an agreement with the USA to protect Scotch Whisky and Irish whiskey, Tennessee whiskey and bourbon...
I was taking the piss. But I do wonder, if maybe there are more pressing issues to resolve. When I go to a bar, I don't order "a lager" or a "champagne"; but I'd order "2 pints of Brooklyn, pack of pork scratchings and a L'Ermitage for the Doris; please Jeff". I tend to know exactly what I want. The whole regional naming thing really seems to me to be some sort of protectionist BS. Probably why the EC is so keen on it.What am I missing here?
stongle said:
I was taking the piss. But I do wonder, if maybe there are more pressing issues to resolve. When I go to a bar, I don't order "a lager" or a "champagne"; but I'd order "2 pints of Brooklyn, pack of pork scratchings and a L'Ermitage for the Doris; please Jeff". I tend to know exactly what I want. The whole regional naming thing really seems to me to be some sort of protectionist BS. Probably why the EC is so keen on it.
What am I missing here?
Nothing much. It is largely protectionist BS. I'm all for labelling food accurately but I don't care, so long as I know, where it comes from, how it was made and what it has in it.What am I missing here?
And those scheming Frogs stole the methode champenoise from us Brits in the first place...
Tuna said:
I've always assumed that the US situation is a hangover from the days when many communities were effectively geographically isolated - so the food they got was often in poor condition and came via circuitous routes. Not much room there to be picky about whether your Parmesan cheese is 'actually' Parmesan. Close enough was close enough.
The tale I was told about Hershey's chocolate was that the milk supplier was some distance away, so the milk they used for the chocolate was always on the edge of turning. People got used to the flavour (I really can't cope with it). When transport and technology improved to the point that Hersheys could make chocolate with genuinely fresh milk - the people hated it, because they'd got used to the old stuff. So now they artificially sour the milk.
We learn to enjoy the food that is naturally abundant in the area we live, what can taste utterly rank to you will taste delicious to a local who had that as part of their diet when growing up. It's a basic function required to prosper.The tale I was told about Hershey's chocolate was that the milk supplier was some distance away, so the milk they used for the chocolate was always on the edge of turning. People got used to the flavour (I really can't cope with it). When transport and technology improved to the point that Hersheys could make chocolate with genuinely fresh milk - the people hated it, because they'd got used to the old stuff. So now they artificially sour the milk.
Worst time food wise i ever had was when i spent a while in Taiwan, i found the food almost inedible, despite me usually loving asian food. The last day i found a McDonalds, as grim as that is it was a godsend.
stongle said:
I was taking the piss. But I do wonder, if maybe there are more pressing issues to resolve. When I go to a bar, I don't order "a lager" or a "champagne"; but I'd order "2 pints of Brooklyn, pack of pork scratchings and a L'Ermitage for the Doris; please Jeff". I tend to know exactly what I want. The whole regional naming thing really seems to me to be some sort of protectionist BS. Probably why the EC is so keen on it.
What am I missing here?
Quite a bit... What am I missing here?
If you take many of the cheeses, it is the mix of local (specific breed/diet) milk and very specific maturation conditions (such as natural caves which have effectively "unique" atmospheres) that create the final result. Hence why, though they might all be very bloody tasty, there are so many different "base" cheese types so closely linked to specific areas.
Now, these flavours can of course be artificially replicated - but this mostly means the use of 'not great' additives - and will almost always be much cheaper.
Seeing as these products have a heritage many hundreds of years old, and the local culture is steeped in a conjoined history - I think it's right that standards are put in place to both maintain quality (not just of outcome, but method/ingredient) and the generations old social enterprise.
Would you never, for example, buy a "special" cheddar from the cheese counter/deli, instead of Cathedral City? Indeed, compare Cathedral City with one of Co-Op's 'own brands', and the difference is staggering. Many "cheddars" don't even melt and bubble under the grill!
Is air cured ham damned tasty, no matter where it comes from? Generally, yes as long as the pork was decent to begin with and it's not had s
tty cures added to speed the process. Do they come close in flavour to a prosciutto de parma, or an iberico? Nowhere near.Should a modern, factory produced air cured ham be able to "claim" a name that isn't only associated with a specific town, process and level of quality - but a genuine driver of a culture? Not to my mind.
So yes in summary it is protectionist - but not all protectionism is bad. Prevention of misleading claims of association is very different from massive tariffs on the same stuff purely because local producers are crap at efficiency.
Edited by Sway on Saturday 18th January 23:46
Sway said:
stongle said:
I was taking the piss. But I do wonder, if maybe there are more pressing issues to resolve. When I go to a bar, I don't order "a lager" or a "champagne"; but I'd order "2 pints of Brooklyn, pack of pork scratchings and a L'Ermitage for the Doris; please Jeff". I tend to know exactly what I want. The whole regional naming thing really seems to me to be some sort of protectionist BS. Probably why the EC is so keen on it.
What am I missing here?
Quite a bit... What am I missing here?
If you take many of the cheeses, it is the mix of local (specific breed/diet) milk and very specific maturation conditions (such as natural caves which have effectively "unique" atmospheres) that create the final result. Hence why, though they might all be very bloody tasty, there are so many different "base" cheese types so closely linked to specific areas.
Now, these flavours can of course be artificially replicated - but this mostly means the use of 'not great' additives - and will almost always be much cheaper.
Seeing as these products have a heritage many hundreds of years old, and the local culture is steeped in a conjoined history - I think it's right that standards are put in place to both maintain quality (not just of outcome, but method/ingredient) and the generations old social enterprise.
Would you never, for example, buy a "special" cheddar from the cheese counter/deli, instead of Cathedral City? Indeed, compare Cathedral City with one of Co-Op's 'own brands', and the difference is staggering. Many "cheddars" don't even melt and bubble under the grill!
Is air cured ham damned tasty, no matter where it comes from? Generally, yes as long as the pork was decent to begin with and it's not had s
tty cures added to speed the process. Do they come close in flavour to a prosciutto de parma, or an iberico? Nowhere near.Should a modern, factory produced air cured ham be able to "claim" a name that isn't only associated with a specific town, process and level of quality - but a genuine driver of a culture? Not to my mind.
So yes in summary it is protectionist - but not all protectionism is bad. Prevention of misleading claims of association is very different from massive tariffs on the same stuff purely because local producers are crap at efficiency.
Edited by Sway on Saturday 18th January 23:46
I get what you are saying, but with food; if it tastes good I'll eat it. I'm not worried where it comes from (by and large), anywhere on the planet. That's why I used the example of L'Ermitage, at its price point its significantly better than any "champagnes" IMHO. Its wholly subjective of course. But once its packaged, consumers are going to pick what's tastes bestest; probably over provenance (unless it's an unbranded / packaged fresh food I guess). Mind you, I'm not much of a foodie, so maybe I've been doing it wrong for years.
Tastes good, oh yes - far more important than a 'name'.
But it's also a quality of input protection too.
Preventing, as the example, parmesans that are really little slabs of ste additives rather than three simple, natural ingredients that by virtue of a unique set of circumstances create an incredible taste.
In the US, I personally have spent over a hundred bucks on "Kobe steak". It tasted delicious, but wasn't kobe. It was steak from the cows that get the most pumped full of growth hormone and artifical feedstock - so it grows so fast the muscles can't keep up, and the end result bears a resemblance to the healthy, natural, Kobe beef using Wagyu breed cows reared with more care and attention than most people give their children.
But it's also a quality of input protection too.
Preventing, as the example, parmesans that are really little slabs of s
te additives rather than three simple, natural ingredients that by virtue of a unique set of circumstances create an incredible taste.In the US, I personally have spent over a hundred bucks on "Kobe steak". It tasted delicious, but wasn't kobe. It was steak from the cows that get the most pumped full of growth hormone and artifical feedstock - so it grows so fast the muscles can't keep up, and the end result bears a resemblance to the healthy, natural, Kobe beef using Wagyu breed cows reared with more care and attention than most people give their children.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff