Wild of the Mark

Sheffield Moors Partnership is currently writing its Master Plan. They have had the original not to say unusual (or even convenient) idea of writing the plan before consultation. SMP's close relative is EMP Eastern Moors Partnership. One of the more revealing exchanges in responses to its consultation is within this document.
The comment made on the text of the draft management plan was thus:

When the word „wild‟ is used by local conservation officials and even „wilderness‟ in the context of this kind of writing it seems to indicate that „wild‟ is something valued. It evokes a sense of anticipation and a sense of otherness, and a sense of mystery –  something which captures the imagination as only a selfmotivating landscape with its free spirited unshackled wildlife could do. But the way that the landscape is described both as it is now and how it is intended to become after „exemplary‟ management is nothing of the sort. The writers of this brochure know that but still insist on using the word wild about land that is given a farm management prescription. I do not understand why this fundamental error continues to be repeated and can only assume there is come kind of deception going on.

The response that came back was this

The Eastern Moors are not a“wilderness” but the term “wild”is used to describe the nature of the open moorland. People will continue to refer to moorland as open and wild even though it‟s not in its natural state. Is the term “wildlife” correct when many non domesticated creatures that we refer to as wildlife are dependant on the human management of the moors? We use the term “Wild” as a description that most people use of the moorlands

Chief of the non domesticated wildlife that is dependant on human management is of course the grouse. There's no serious doubt that without management it would survive albeit in smaller numbers. There's nothing like needing to have something to kill to get people to look after it.