Latest news with #GoogleEarth
The Guardian
12 hours ago
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
Experience: I've walked across three countries in a straight line
Growing up, I loved the outdoors. I gallivanted through the Staffordshire countryside with my stepbrother, Greg. We used to pick a point in the distance and create 'missions' to walk towards it. It was a mischievous challenge that saw us hopping fences, wading through rivers and sneaking around farmers. I was also obsessed with maps, and even read the Birmingham A-Z for fun. When Google Earth came out in 2005, I spent hours studying satellite images. As I got older, countryside adventures became rarer. In 2018, I was working as a van driver but made videos about geography and map-based games in my spare time. I found myself craving a challenge. I thought back to my hedge-hopping days. What if, instead of walking across a few fields, I could cross the width of a whole country – and in a perfectly straight line? I had no idea if it was possible, but using mapping software, I plotted a line across Wales from the English border to the west coast. Following a straight line might sound – literally – straightforward; the reality is anything but. Plot the wrong course, and you'll end up reaching rows of houses that are impossible to pass. You're forced to shimmy or climb over every obstacle. Trips would take multiple days, so I would carry food and toilet roll in my backpack and a tent to camp in at night. I would have to eat, sleep and 'use the toilet' without leaving the line. And even if I managed to navigate all these, there was still a risk being thrown off private farmland. My parents and my girlfriend, Verity, were sceptical and also concerned for my safety. They may have had a point. I didn't train for my first attempt, in early 2019. I got stuck on a mountain with no signal, darkness falling and hypothermia setting in. I had to abort the mission. Nonetheless, when I posted the footage online, I was blown away by the response. Viewers loved the silliness and originality of the concept, and recognised my joy as I scrambled over barbed wire, across rivers and through fields of startled sheep. I'd failed but knew I had to keep trying. After another failed Wales attempt in 2020, I decided to try Norway. The north of the country is less than 30km wide, with few farms and a right to roam – so no risk of angry farmers. But the landscape was alien to me. On one occasion, I barely escaped from a peat bog after being trapped up to my waist. Still, after two days, I finished it – crossing an entire country in a straight line for the first time. Verity was there at the finish line. It felt amazing to share the moment with her. But I couldn't stop there. After my first video, others began to try their own missions. In 2023, two straight-liners told me they planned to cross Wales. By that point, a GPS malfunction had caused my third attempt to fail; the idea of someone else doing it first was devastating. I devised a new route, prioritising mountains over farmland. It was longer, but I felt that avoiding farmers gave me the best chance of completion. I was right, and finished it in February that year, after four days. The satisfaction was incredible. Next came England, something I'd long thought was impossible. The route was more than 100km, twice the length of most of my previous walks. I travelled lighter and a crew followed me in a support van. We met whenever my line crossed a road, and I'd restock my supplies and sleep. It was my toughest challenge yet. Much of the route was forest, and on the last day I hit a sea of fallen trees. The height of the pile, and sharpness of the branches, meant a single slip could be fatal. I faced a gut-wrenching decision: abandon the mission after six days of pain or risk my life to continue. Miraculously, I found a route avoiding the worst of it and got to the end. Still, I'm glad I won't have to do it again. Since then, I've become a father, and my appetite for danger has changed. I'm incredibly thankful to my viewers, whose support has enabled me to do these challenges full-time. I'm certainly not your typical adventurer. But if I were to have any label, that's the one I'd choose – after all, isn't it every kid's dream? As told to Ed Harding Do you have an experience to share? Email experience@
The Advertiser
13 hours ago
- The Advertiser
A source of immense pride: Lambton Park could rival Hyde Park
About 15 years ago in Beijing, I used Google Earth to show a friend that Newcastle had many parks. I zeroed the picture in on one, Mayfield Park, tucked away behind Crebert Street. "That's not a park," he said. "That's just empty land." "But we have to use it for sport," I said, a bit miffed. "Maybe," he said. "But it's not a park." This got me thinking about how parks become less pretty when we allocate their space to sports and other practical purposes. At one end of the range of park designs is something like Civic Park, landscaped only for wandering, sitting and admiring. There seems to be no name for that kind, so let's call them ornamental parks. The big ones - call them grand ornamental parks - are the ones that people really love. These are the parks they most want to sit in, live near and show off to out-of-town visitors. Think of Hyde Park in Sydney, or Fitzroy Gardens in Melbourne, or King Edward Park in Newcastle. Most of our parks are at the other end of the range, basically just playing fields. Even those that have impressive old trees, such as Richardson Park in Hamilton North, are not too inviting, because most of their area is just a flat expanse of grass. Newcastle also has magnificent natural reserves: the Worimi, Glenrock and Awabakal parks, plus Belmont Wetlands, Hunter Wetlands and more. But these are lightly used, serving more as urban lungs than as places where people congregate, have picnics or relax. King Edward Park isn't enough. A city of this size should have a second grand ornamental park, and it should be Lambton Park. We should turn Lambton Park into what 19th-century Lambtonians would have created if they'd had plenty of money. The new design should, in fact, be in a 19th-century style. Going old-fashioned can be no mistake: old ornamental parks all over the world are delightful. The most loved feature that's in Lambton Park now is the rotunda, built in colonial times. We should indeed be aiming at the level of beauty achieved by Hyde Park, Sydney. Why not? Be ambitious, Newcastle. We have some big old trees in Lambton Park now. We'll need many more. The park has a natural water course, Lambton Ker-rai Creek. So we can easily have a pond. Then imagine more tree-lined paths, shaded places for picnics and interesting nooks and crannies. Following a motion submitted by councillors, including Peta Winney-Bartz and Elizabeth Adamczyk, last month, Newcastle council will develop a master plan for Lambton Park, a guide for its long-term development. The councillors' motion thoughtfully called for the plan to provide "opportunities for passive and active recreation for all age groups". But that should be restricted to space for families playing with balls. Organised-sports facilities should go elsewhere. Lambton Park can never be fully landscaped for beauty if some of it is laid out for field games, tennis and other sports. We also need to get rid of most of the buildings on the site, and we should even abolish the swimming centre. One reason for choosing this site for our second grand ornamental park is that it's fairly big. Its area is about 17 hectares if we count all the land as far as Durham Road. A much bigger site would be better. Centennial Parklands in Sydney are more than 10 times as large. But what we have at Lambton is as big a parcel as we'll ever have in inner Newcastle, unless the 47-hectare racecourse site is one day repurposed and landscaped. Lambton Park also has nearby shops, which could have a tram stop, and the space is easily accessible to a lot of people in the surrounding suburbs. These will be seen as inner-city suburbs in coming decades. Their density will rise, so yet more people will be close to Lambton Park, and they'll appreciate it all the more because they won't have big backyards. The park's boost to local land values, and therefore council rates, would help pay for the remodelling project. This leaves the question of what to do with the facilities that now clutter Lambton Park. Playing fields are in high demand in Newcastle, so replacements for the two in the park would be needed. The council should look for a new site for them. Maybe land can be found at Shortland, Hexham or Beresfield? Or maybe Lake Macquarie or Maitland councils could be paid to establish two new fields? The tennis courts at Lambton Park must also be abolished. They're clutter. Club Lambton (formerly Lambton Bowling Club) and the Society of Artists Newcastle are occupying ugly buildings in the park. Note that this is crown land. Removal of the artists' building should be a priority. Being artists, they've done their best to make it artistic, but the sooner it's gone, the better. Eventually, Club Lambton will have to go, too. The use of crown land by bowling clubs was no doubt justified when the sport was popular and we had more parkland than we knew what to do with. These days, fencing off large parts of public reserves for club members and guests looks increasingly indulgent, whether rent is paid or not. The swimming centre and its car park occupy 2.2 hectares of what could instead be beautiful park space. Its pools may not be needed after a regional aquatic and recreation facility in the Broadmeadow redevelopment plan is built. If we find that we still need as many council pools as now, we should build a replacement swimming centre somewhere. More playing fields could be shifted to make space for one, or we might use what are now dog off-leash areas. Let's aim high. Let's create at Lambton a park that will be a source of immense pride and satisfaction to the city. About 15 years ago in Beijing, I used Google Earth to show a friend that Newcastle had many parks. I zeroed the picture in on one, Mayfield Park, tucked away behind Crebert Street. "That's not a park," he said. "That's just empty land." "But we have to use it for sport," I said, a bit miffed. "Maybe," he said. "But it's not a park." This got me thinking about how parks become less pretty when we allocate their space to sports and other practical purposes. At one end of the range of park designs is something like Civic Park, landscaped only for wandering, sitting and admiring. There seems to be no name for that kind, so let's call them ornamental parks. The big ones - call them grand ornamental parks - are the ones that people really love. These are the parks they most want to sit in, live near and show off to out-of-town visitors. Think of Hyde Park in Sydney, or Fitzroy Gardens in Melbourne, or King Edward Park in Newcastle. Most of our parks are at the other end of the range, basically just playing fields. Even those that have impressive old trees, such as Richardson Park in Hamilton North, are not too inviting, because most of their area is just a flat expanse of grass. Newcastle also has magnificent natural reserves: the Worimi, Glenrock and Awabakal parks, plus Belmont Wetlands, Hunter Wetlands and more. But these are lightly used, serving more as urban lungs than as places where people congregate, have picnics or relax. King Edward Park isn't enough. A city of this size should have a second grand ornamental park, and it should be Lambton Park. We should turn Lambton Park into what 19th-century Lambtonians would have created if they'd had plenty of money. The new design should, in fact, be in a 19th-century style. Going old-fashioned can be no mistake: old ornamental parks all over the world are delightful. The most loved feature that's in Lambton Park now is the rotunda, built in colonial times. We should indeed be aiming at the level of beauty achieved by Hyde Park, Sydney. Why not? Be ambitious, Newcastle. We have some big old trees in Lambton Park now. We'll need many more. The park has a natural water course, Lambton Ker-rai Creek. So we can easily have a pond. Then imagine more tree-lined paths, shaded places for picnics and interesting nooks and crannies. Following a motion submitted by councillors, including Peta Winney-Bartz and Elizabeth Adamczyk, last month, Newcastle council will develop a master plan for Lambton Park, a guide for its long-term development. The councillors' motion thoughtfully called for the plan to provide "opportunities for passive and active recreation for all age groups". But that should be restricted to space for families playing with balls. Organised-sports facilities should go elsewhere. Lambton Park can never be fully landscaped for beauty if some of it is laid out for field games, tennis and other sports. We also need to get rid of most of the buildings on the site, and we should even abolish the swimming centre. One reason for choosing this site for our second grand ornamental park is that it's fairly big. Its area is about 17 hectares if we count all the land as far as Durham Road. A much bigger site would be better. Centennial Parklands in Sydney are more than 10 times as large. But what we have at Lambton is as big a parcel as we'll ever have in inner Newcastle, unless the 47-hectare racecourse site is one day repurposed and landscaped. Lambton Park also has nearby shops, which could have a tram stop, and the space is easily accessible to a lot of people in the surrounding suburbs. These will be seen as inner-city suburbs in coming decades. Their density will rise, so yet more people will be close to Lambton Park, and they'll appreciate it all the more because they won't have big backyards. The park's boost to local land values, and therefore council rates, would help pay for the remodelling project. This leaves the question of what to do with the facilities that now clutter Lambton Park. Playing fields are in high demand in Newcastle, so replacements for the two in the park would be needed. The council should look for a new site for them. Maybe land can be found at Shortland, Hexham or Beresfield? Or maybe Lake Macquarie or Maitland councils could be paid to establish two new fields? The tennis courts at Lambton Park must also be abolished. They're clutter. Club Lambton (formerly Lambton Bowling Club) and the Society of Artists Newcastle are occupying ugly buildings in the park. Note that this is crown land. Removal of the artists' building should be a priority. Being artists, they've done their best to make it artistic, but the sooner it's gone, the better. Eventually, Club Lambton will have to go, too. The use of crown land by bowling clubs was no doubt justified when the sport was popular and we had more parkland than we knew what to do with. These days, fencing off large parts of public reserves for club members and guests looks increasingly indulgent, whether rent is paid or not. The swimming centre and its car park occupy 2.2 hectares of what could instead be beautiful park space. Its pools may not be needed after a regional aquatic and recreation facility in the Broadmeadow redevelopment plan is built. If we find that we still need as many council pools as now, we should build a replacement swimming centre somewhere. More playing fields could be shifted to make space for one, or we might use what are now dog off-leash areas. Let's aim high. Let's create at Lambton a park that will be a source of immense pride and satisfaction to the city. About 15 years ago in Beijing, I used Google Earth to show a friend that Newcastle had many parks. I zeroed the picture in on one, Mayfield Park, tucked away behind Crebert Street. "That's not a park," he said. "That's just empty land." "But we have to use it for sport," I said, a bit miffed. "Maybe," he said. "But it's not a park." This got me thinking about how parks become less pretty when we allocate their space to sports and other practical purposes. At one end of the range of park designs is something like Civic Park, landscaped only for wandering, sitting and admiring. There seems to be no name for that kind, so let's call them ornamental parks. The big ones - call them grand ornamental parks - are the ones that people really love. These are the parks they most want to sit in, live near and show off to out-of-town visitors. Think of Hyde Park in Sydney, or Fitzroy Gardens in Melbourne, or King Edward Park in Newcastle. Most of our parks are at the other end of the range, basically just playing fields. Even those that have impressive old trees, such as Richardson Park in Hamilton North, are not too inviting, because most of their area is just a flat expanse of grass. Newcastle also has magnificent natural reserves: the Worimi, Glenrock and Awabakal parks, plus Belmont Wetlands, Hunter Wetlands and more. But these are lightly used, serving more as urban lungs than as places where people congregate, have picnics or relax. King Edward Park isn't enough. A city of this size should have a second grand ornamental park, and it should be Lambton Park. We should turn Lambton Park into what 19th-century Lambtonians would have created if they'd had plenty of money. The new design should, in fact, be in a 19th-century style. Going old-fashioned can be no mistake: old ornamental parks all over the world are delightful. The most loved feature that's in Lambton Park now is the rotunda, built in colonial times. We should indeed be aiming at the level of beauty achieved by Hyde Park, Sydney. Why not? Be ambitious, Newcastle. We have some big old trees in Lambton Park now. We'll need many more. The park has a natural water course, Lambton Ker-rai Creek. So we can easily have a pond. Then imagine more tree-lined paths, shaded places for picnics and interesting nooks and crannies. Following a motion submitted by councillors, including Peta Winney-Bartz and Elizabeth Adamczyk, last month, Newcastle council will develop a master plan for Lambton Park, a guide for its long-term development. The councillors' motion thoughtfully called for the plan to provide "opportunities for passive and active recreation for all age groups". But that should be restricted to space for families playing with balls. Organised-sports facilities should go elsewhere. Lambton Park can never be fully landscaped for beauty if some of it is laid out for field games, tennis and other sports. We also need to get rid of most of the buildings on the site, and we should even abolish the swimming centre. One reason for choosing this site for our second grand ornamental park is that it's fairly big. Its area is about 17 hectares if we count all the land as far as Durham Road. A much bigger site would be better. Centennial Parklands in Sydney are more than 10 times as large. But what we have at Lambton is as big a parcel as we'll ever have in inner Newcastle, unless the 47-hectare racecourse site is one day repurposed and landscaped. Lambton Park also has nearby shops, which could have a tram stop, and the space is easily accessible to a lot of people in the surrounding suburbs. These will be seen as inner-city suburbs in coming decades. Their density will rise, so yet more people will be close to Lambton Park, and they'll appreciate it all the more because they won't have big backyards. The park's boost to local land values, and therefore council rates, would help pay for the remodelling project. This leaves the question of what to do with the facilities that now clutter Lambton Park. Playing fields are in high demand in Newcastle, so replacements for the two in the park would be needed. The council should look for a new site for them. Maybe land can be found at Shortland, Hexham or Beresfield? Or maybe Lake Macquarie or Maitland councils could be paid to establish two new fields? The tennis courts at Lambton Park must also be abolished. They're clutter. Club Lambton (formerly Lambton Bowling Club) and the Society of Artists Newcastle are occupying ugly buildings in the park. Note that this is crown land. Removal of the artists' building should be a priority. Being artists, they've done their best to make it artistic, but the sooner it's gone, the better. Eventually, Club Lambton will have to go, too. The use of crown land by bowling clubs was no doubt justified when the sport was popular and we had more parkland than we knew what to do with. These days, fencing off large parts of public reserves for club members and guests looks increasingly indulgent, whether rent is paid or not. The swimming centre and its car park occupy 2.2 hectares of what could instead be beautiful park space. Its pools may not be needed after a regional aquatic and recreation facility in the Broadmeadow redevelopment plan is built. If we find that we still need as many council pools as now, we should build a replacement swimming centre somewhere. More playing fields could be shifted to make space for one, or we might use what are now dog off-leash areas. Let's aim high. Let's create at Lambton a park that will be a source of immense pride and satisfaction to the city. About 15 years ago in Beijing, I used Google Earth to show a friend that Newcastle had many parks. I zeroed the picture in on one, Mayfield Park, tucked away behind Crebert Street. "That's not a park," he said. "That's just empty land." "But we have to use it for sport," I said, a bit miffed. "Maybe," he said. "But it's not a park." This got me thinking about how parks become less pretty when we allocate their space to sports and other practical purposes. At one end of the range of park designs is something like Civic Park, landscaped only for wandering, sitting and admiring. There seems to be no name for that kind, so let's call them ornamental parks. The big ones - call them grand ornamental parks - are the ones that people really love. These are the parks they most want to sit in, live near and show off to out-of-town visitors. Think of Hyde Park in Sydney, or Fitzroy Gardens in Melbourne, or King Edward Park in Newcastle. Most of our parks are at the other end of the range, basically just playing fields. Even those that have impressive old trees, such as Richardson Park in Hamilton North, are not too inviting, because most of their area is just a flat expanse of grass. Newcastle also has magnificent natural reserves: the Worimi, Glenrock and Awabakal parks, plus Belmont Wetlands, Hunter Wetlands and more. But these are lightly used, serving more as urban lungs than as places where people congregate, have picnics or relax. King Edward Park isn't enough. A city of this size should have a second grand ornamental park, and it should be Lambton Park. We should turn Lambton Park into what 19th-century Lambtonians would have created if they'd had plenty of money. The new design should, in fact, be in a 19th-century style. Going old-fashioned can be no mistake: old ornamental parks all over the world are delightful. The most loved feature that's in Lambton Park now is the rotunda, built in colonial times. We should indeed be aiming at the level of beauty achieved by Hyde Park, Sydney. Why not? Be ambitious, Newcastle. We have some big old trees in Lambton Park now. We'll need many more. The park has a natural water course, Lambton Ker-rai Creek. So we can easily have a pond. Then imagine more tree-lined paths, shaded places for picnics and interesting nooks and crannies. Following a motion submitted by councillors, including Peta Winney-Bartz and Elizabeth Adamczyk, last month, Newcastle council will develop a master plan for Lambton Park, a guide for its long-term development. The councillors' motion thoughtfully called for the plan to provide "opportunities for passive and active recreation for all age groups". But that should be restricted to space for families playing with balls. Organised-sports facilities should go elsewhere. Lambton Park can never be fully landscaped for beauty if some of it is laid out for field games, tennis and other sports. We also need to get rid of most of the buildings on the site, and we should even abolish the swimming centre. One reason for choosing this site for our second grand ornamental park is that it's fairly big. Its area is about 17 hectares if we count all the land as far as Durham Road. A much bigger site would be better. Centennial Parklands in Sydney are more than 10 times as large. But what we have at Lambton is as big a parcel as we'll ever have in inner Newcastle, unless the 47-hectare racecourse site is one day repurposed and landscaped. Lambton Park also has nearby shops, which could have a tram stop, and the space is easily accessible to a lot of people in the surrounding suburbs. These will be seen as inner-city suburbs in coming decades. Their density will rise, so yet more people will be close to Lambton Park, and they'll appreciate it all the more because they won't have big backyards. The park's boost to local land values, and therefore council rates, would help pay for the remodelling project. This leaves the question of what to do with the facilities that now clutter Lambton Park. Playing fields are in high demand in Newcastle, so replacements for the two in the park would be needed. The council should look for a new site for them. Maybe land can be found at Shortland, Hexham or Beresfield? Or maybe Lake Macquarie or Maitland councils could be paid to establish two new fields? The tennis courts at Lambton Park must also be abolished. They're clutter. Club Lambton (formerly Lambton Bowling Club) and the Society of Artists Newcastle are occupying ugly buildings in the park. Note that this is crown land. Removal of the artists' building should be a priority. Being artists, they've done their best to make it artistic, but the sooner it's gone, the better. Eventually, Club Lambton will have to go, too. The use of crown land by bowling clubs was no doubt justified when the sport was popular and we had more parkland than we knew what to do with. These days, fencing off large parts of public reserves for club members and guests looks increasingly indulgent, whether rent is paid or not. The swimming centre and its car park occupy 2.2 hectares of what could instead be beautiful park space. Its pools may not be needed after a regional aquatic and recreation facility in the Broadmeadow redevelopment plan is built. If we find that we still need as many council pools as now, we should build a replacement swimming centre somewhere. More playing fields could be shifted to make space for one, or we might use what are now dog off-leash areas. Let's aim high. Let's create at Lambton a park that will be a source of immense pride and satisfaction to the city.
The Journal
2 days ago
- General
- The Journal
Clothes worn in Europe from brands like Penneys and Zara found in huge dumps at Ghana nature reserve
FASHION WASTE FROM well-known brands like Penneys, Zara and Marks & Spencer has been found exported from Europe and dumped in massive quantities in Ghana in fragile areas of nature. Greenpeace's investigative unit Unearthed and its Africa branch have gathered photographic evidence and footage of discarded clothes at a huge new dumpsite expanding in a protected nature site that is home to rare birds and turtle species. The team found garments discarded by from high street brands in areas at or close to two open-air waste dumps that recently appeared inside the Densu Delta – designated as a habitat of 'international importance' under the Convention on Wetlands. One of the dumps, Glefe, has been established for four years, according to Google Earth historical images, and is taller than a two-storey building in places. The second, Akkaway is less than a year old but rapidly expanding, Greenpeace said. Clothes from Zara, H&M and Penneys were also found at a third dump on a riverbank outside the nature reserve, from where fashion waste often floats downstream, polluting the wetlands. The campaigners said they are concerned about the impact of microplastics and chemicals released from the textiles waste on the local wildlife. Meanwhile, local communities say their fishing nets, waterways and beaches are clogged with synthetic fast fashion exported to Ghana from the UK and Europe, they said. Ghana is the world's largest importer of used clothing, with 15 million items of discarded garments arriving each week, according to Greenpeace research. This overspill has overwhelmed Ghana's capital city Accra, resulting in new waste dumps rising up on the outskirts of the city, Greenpeace said. Advertisement The Densu Delta provides a habitat for birds such as rare roseate terns, which migrate from the UK, and curlew sandpipers, which visit from the Arctic tundra. The endangered leatherback and green turtles lay their eggs on the conservation area's beach, as does the olive ridley turtle, known for nesting en masse on the same beach where it hatched, local wildlife experts say. Baby goats at the Weija Ashbread landfill, an older textile dump site upriver from the Densu Delta protected wetlands, outside Accra, Ghana Michael Takyi Lartey / Unearthed / Greenpeace Michael Takyi Lartey / Unearthed / Greenpeace / Unearthed / Greenpeace Laura Burley, Greenpeace UK's plastic campaigner, said: 'It's heartbreaking to see a protected nature site turning into a waste dump because of our addiction to fast fashion. 'A dress designed to be worn just once or twice before being thrown away could pose a threat to rare birds and marine turtles in these protected wetlands for decades to come, while also harming people's livelihoods. 'And with the majority of these garments made of plastic fibres, our throwaway clothes are adding to the plastic pollution choking our oceans. 'The UK Government should force fashion retailers to take some responsibility for the waste they create while backing strong targets to cut plastic production in the UN Global Plastics Treaty.' Dr Jones Quartey, a wetland ecologist at the University of Ghana, told Unearthed that disposing of textiles in wetlands could cause irreparable harm. 'This is dangerous – more so when we don't know what chemicals are in the textile waste,' he said. 'The bioaccumulation and biomagnification of microplastics in aquatic organisms and humans could pose risks such as physical damage, chemical exposure and disruption of biological processes.' When contacted by Unearthed, the fashion labels acknowledged that the industry faces challenges around processing textile waste. M&S and Primark said they run 'take-back' schemes to help address the issue while H&M and Zara said they would support an extended producer responsibility framework to hold labels accountable for their products' end-of-life impact.
New York Post
2 days ago
- New York Post
Cops accused of squatting in uber-exclusive Long Island getaway after breaking in with crowbars: ‘Not seen in 200 years'
This ritzy island has a cop squatter problem. The peace on bucolic Fishers Island – an uber-exclusive getaway far off Long Island only reachable by boat – has been shattered by a platoon of police officers who broke into a home with crowbars and forcefully kicked out ferry workers living there, a shocking new lawsuit claims. The $2 million suit filed by Fishers Island Ferry District officials argues the snooty town and Southold police have been trespassing at 357 Whistler Ave. for half a year – and brazenly broke property laws prohibiting wrongful evictions. Advertisement The 'actions have not been seen in this country, if at all, in at least 200 years,' the lawsuit argued. 3 Cops on ritzy Fishers Island are accused of squatting in a home. Google Earth The tempest on the isolated isle began soon after Southold cops took over the island's policing duties in November. Advertisement But the island's deteriorating police barracks – which were vacated by state police in 2023 – evidently weren't up to snuff, so town officials offered the Ferry District's home a few houses over as a temporary place for the cops to set up shop, according to the lawsuit. Instead, Southold town board members voted on Dec. 17 to revoke the Ferry District's control of the property, without referring to any law permitting the action, the lawsuit contends. The Ferry District didn't approve of the idea, given they had renovated and got it permitted for staff housing, the lawsuit states. District board members rejected the planned seizure in a vote of their on Dec. 30, but on New Year's Day the cops still forced their way inside, the suit claims. Advertisement 'In the face of the Ferry District's refusal… the Town Board directed the police department to engage in self-help by breaking into and occupying the property,' the complaint states. 3 Southold Town Police Department cops are now occupying the Fishers Island home. Facebook/Southold Town Police Department 3 Southold took over policing duties on Fishers Island in November. Facebook/Southold Town Police Department The lawsuit claims the police department forcibly kicked out the Ferry District's staff and cops have been living there illegally for more than five months, threatening to arrest anyone who tries to remove them. Advertisement The district is now working to obtain a court order to remove the allegedly squatting cops from the property, declaring the 'occupation' as unconstitutional, and seeking $2 million in damages. Southold Town Supervisor Al Krupski declined to comment, but said the town remains committed to renovating the abandoned police barracks. Both sides are due in court for a pre-motion conference on June 25 before Suffolk Supreme Court Justice Joseph Farneti.
North Wales Chronicle
2 days ago
- General
- North Wales Chronicle
Discarded clothes from UK brands found in protected Ghana wetlands
The campaign group's investigative unit Unearthed and its Africa branch gathered stills and footage of discarded clothes at a huge new dumpsite growing in a protected nature site which is home to rare birds and turtle species. The team found garments discarded by UK consumers from high street brands in areas at or close to two open-air waste dumps that recently appeared inside the Densu Delta – designated as a habitat of 'international importance' under the Convention on Wetlands. One of the dumps, Glefe, has been established for four years, according to Google Earth historical images, and looms taller than a two-storey building in places. The second, Akkaway is less than a year old but rapidly expanding, Greenpeace said. Clothes from Zara, H&M and Primark were also found at a third dump on a riverbank outside the nature reserve, from where fashion waste often floats downstream, polluting the wetlands. The campaigners said they are concerned about the impact of microplastics and chemicals released from the textiles waste on the local wildlife. Meanwhile, local communities say their fishing nets, waterways and beaches are clogged with synthetic fast fashion exported to Ghana from the UK and Europe, they said. Ghana is the world's largest importer of used clothing, with 15 million items of discarded garments arriving each week, according to Greenpeace research. Meanwhile, UN trade data shows the UK sent 57,000 tonnes of fashion waste to Ghana last year – more than to any other country except the United Arab Emirates. This overspill has overwhelmed Ghana's capital city Accra, resulting in new waste dumps appearing just outside, Greenpeace said. The Densu Delta provides a habitat for birds such as rare roseate terns, which migrate from the UK, and curlew sandpipers, which visit from the Arctic tundra. The endangered leatherback and green turtles lay their eggs on the conservation area's beach, as does the olive ridley turtle, known for nesting en masse on the same beach where it hatched, local wildlife experts say. Laura Burley, Greenpeace UK's plastic campaigner, said: 'It's heartbreaking to see a protected nature site turning into a waste dump because of our addiction to fast fashion. 'A dress designed to be worn just once or twice before being thrown away could pose a threat to rare birds and marine turtles in these protected wetlands for decades to come, while also harming people's livelihoods. 'And with the majority of these garments made of plastic fibres, our throwaway clothes are adding to the plastic pollution choking our oceans. 'The UK Government should force fashion retailers to take some responsibility for the waste they create while backing strong targets to cut plastic production in the UN Global Plastics Treaty.' Dr Jones Quartey, a wetland ecologist at the University of Ghana, told Unearthed that disposing of textiles in wetlands could cause irreparable harm. 'This is dangerous – more so when we don't know what chemicals are in the textile waste,' he said. 'The bioaccumulation and biomagnification of microplastics in aquatic organisms and humans could pose risks such as physical damage, chemical exposure and disruption of biological processes.' When contacted by Unearthed, the fashion labels acknowledged that the industry faces challenges around processing textile waste. M&S, George and Primark said they run 'take-back' schemes to help address the issue while H&M, Zara and George said they would support an extended producer responsibility framework to hold labels accountable for their products' end-of-life impact. An H&M spokesperson said: 'While this is an industry-wide challenge, we acknowledge our role in contributing to the problem, notably when our products reach markets with inadequate or no waste management or recycling infrastructures. 'We will continue to strengthen our strategy and actions for end-of-life textiles and interact with relevant stakeholders.' An M&S spokesperson said: 'M&S does not send excess clothing to any other country or landfill. 'We take our responsibility to provide end of life options for our clothes seriously and offer our customers options to give their clothes another life with our recently launched repair service by Sojo, and with our in-store take back recycling schemes with partners such as Oxfam for clothing and Handle for beauty products, as part of our Plan A to reduce our impact on the planet.' An Environment Department spokesperson said: 'Our Plan for Change is focused on cleaning up Britain and ensuring that the £4.5 billion worth of clothes we currently throw away are kept in use for longer. 'Fashion should not come at the cost of our natural environment, and textiles is one sector where our Circular Economy Taskforce aims to end our throwaway society for good.'
