Wildfire in the United Kingdom: Status and Key Issues

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Wildfire in the United Kingdom: Status and Key Issues WILDFIRE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM: STATUS AND KEY ISSUES Julia McMorrow sources. First, fire statistics published by the School of Environment and Development, and Fire Department of Communities and Local Government Research Centre (CLG) and the MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging The University of Manchester, U.K. Spectroradiometer) active fire database are used [email protected] to demonstrate the frequency and timing of U.K. wildfires and to show deficiencies in the evidence base. Second, Community Risk Registers and CLG Abstract.—This paper reviews the status of wildfire reports are used to demonstrate the level of awareness risk in the United Kingdom and examines some of the of wildfire risk. Finally, findings from the 2007-2009 key issues in U.K. wildfire management. Wildfires Fire and Ecosystem Services (FIRES n.d.) seminar challenge the resources of U.K. Fire and Rescue series on fire and climate change in U.K. moorland and Services (FRSs), especially in dry years, yet FRSs are heaths are used to examine the relationships among poorly equipped and trained to deal with wildfire. A wildfire, prescribed burning, and ecosystem services brief geography of U.K. wildfires is presented using in moorlands and heathlands in the context of climate fire statistics from the Department of Communities change and changes in the rural economy. and Local Government (CLG) and the MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) 1.2 Wildfire, Moorlands, and Ecosystem active fire database. Citizens’ awareness of U.K. Services in the United Kingdom wildfires is reviewed using Community Risk Registers “Wildfire” is the de facto term in the United Kingdom and CLG reports. Residents have little awareness for uncontrolled vegetation fires that are large by U.K. because wildfire reporting is of poor quality, severe standards. The term “wildland fire” is rarely used since wildfires occur sporadically, they do not result in loss the United Kingdom has few wildlands in the North of life, and “property” is defined narrowly so that American sense of the word. Most U.K. land is not far environmental assets are not adequately considered. from settlements. In addition, this paper examines how government policy on habitat management in moorlands does Moorlands (Fig. 1) are arguably the United Kingdom’s not adequately address wildfire risk management. closest equivalent to wildlands. Moorlands are open Moorland managers express fear that conservation landscapes of dwarf shrubs, notably heather (especially restrictions, especially on prescribed burning, are Calluna vulgaris), cotton grass (Eriophorum increasing fuel loads and hence the risk of severe vaginatum), and acid grasslands. The United Kingdom wildfire. In the United Kingdom, management contains most of the world’s remaining heather, which for multiple land uses requires wildfire-aware is protected under European Union (E.U.) Biodiversity management of ecosystem services and ecosystem Action Plans. Much of the moorland in the north and service-aware management of wildfire. west of the United Kingdom is blanket bog on deep peat. This moorland is the U.K.’s most important carbon store, containing the equivalent of 20 years of 1.0 INTRODUCTION its CO2 emissions (Worrall and Evans 2009). 1.1 Aims and Data Sources It is important to recognize that even remote moorlands are only semi-natural ecosystems, altered To review the status of wildfire risk in the United by centuries of burning and grazing (Davies et al. Kingdom and examine some key issues in U.K. 2008). Many of the largest wildfires in the United wildfire management, this paper draws on three Proceedings of the Second Conference on the Human Dimensions of Wildland Fire GTR-NRS-P-84 44 Kingdom occur in moorlands because firefighters bird, red grouse (Lagopus lagopus scotica) (Fig. 1). have trouble reaching them and because peat fires Like heather moorland, lowland heath is another are especially dangerous and inherently difficult to fire-adapted ecosystem where severe wildfires control. are a problem. Heather and gorse are fire-adapted ecosystems because fire assists regeneration by, for An ecosystem services approach has been adopted instance, encouraging seed germination and preventing as a unifying framework by government agencies succession to scrubland (Davies et al. 2008). Lowland managing the British countryside (Defra 2007b). heath, made up of heather and gorse on sandy soils, Moorlands are important for a range of ecosystem is found in such areas as Dorset, the southwest of services (Bonn et al. 2009). Supporting services England, and East Anglia. These are important habitats include biodiversity and nutrient cycling, both of for rare species such as the ladybird spider (Eresus which depend on maintaining the peat substrate. cinnaberinus) and the Dartford warbler (Sylvia Provisioning services include timber, wool from undata). sheep, and food from grazing animals and game. Water supply, carbon cycle regulation, and flood protection The 14 National Parks in Great Britain (England, are examples of regulating services. Cultural services Wales, and Scotland, excluding Northern Ireland) are include game-shooting and informal recreation. not in public ownership (Quinn et al. 2010). They are cultural landscapes where people live, work, and go Heather moorland is a fire-adapted ecosystem for recreation; management for multiple land uses is maintained by rotational prescribed burning for the norm (Bonn et al. 2009). Wildfire management habitat management, especially for that of the game in the National Parks and other moorland habitat Figure 1.—Prescribed burning for grouse moor management, North Pennine moors, England. Proceedings of the Second Conference on the Human Dimensions of Wildland Fire GTR-NRS-P-84 45 areas faces the challenge of being superimposed on one in Northern Ireland. Each is governed and funded a framework of complex land ownership and diverse by a Fire Authority. The United Kingdom has no land uses. agency with specific responsibility to manage wildfire. Instead, wildfire management falls within the scope of Wildfires also occur in peri-urban grasslands and many agencies, and statutory responsibility rests with agricultural land, even though stubble burning is now FRSs under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 banned. One problem in analyzing U.K. wildfire count (or its equivalent for the devolved administrations of data is that pre-2009 CLG figures lumped everything Scotland and Northern Ireland). from small grassland fires and intentional stubble burning to major moorland, heathland, and forest fires FRSs do not have separate forces for fighting fires into one class—referred to hereafter by the normal in wildlands as opposed to structures and equipment CLG shorthand of “grassland fires”. and training favor preparation for structural fires. This bias reflects the partial funding of Fire Authorities 2.0 A BRIEF GEOGRAPHY from local taxation, the majority of which comes OF U.K. WILDFIRES from urban areas. Even though three-quarters of the fires attended by FRSs between 1995 and 2007 were outdoor fires and 38 percent of these were “grassland 2.1 Does the United Kingdom have Wildfires? fires,” FRSs are primarily equipped and trained to deal with structural fires in urban settings. Few have access The United Kingdom has a temperate climate that to all-terrain vehicles or wildland fighting equipment. is not usually associated with wildfire, yet wildfires Partnerships between rural land managers and agencies occur annually. Severe fires by U.K. standards can within a local fire group are helping to overcome this occur in any year but became a significant hazard in limitation. drought years such as 1976, 1995, and 2003. One peat fire in the Peak District (Fig. 2) in April 2003 burned The United Kingdom has a fire-averse attitude to 3 square miles of moorland, including areas under wildfire, regardless of intensity and duration. In this statutory conservation protection. Smoke closed major respect, U.K. policy is similar to the United States’ roads and disrupted air traffic at Manchester Airport; pre-1971 no-burn policy and “fire out by 10 a.m.” £2 million was ultimately required for restoration. objective (U.S. Fire Administration 2001). For the Another Peak District fire in July 2006 required safety of fire ground personnel, however, fires are 30 days of firefighting at a cost to taxpayers of not normally fought at night in the United Kingdom. approximately £1 million. A wildfire on the North York Zero-tolerance of wildfires is not surprising in a small Moors in May 2010 resulted in the evacuation of more country with a high population density and a history than 250 people from a campsite. Although these fires of multiple land uses. Much of England, especially did not cause fatalities and are not on the same scale in the southeast, is the equivalent of a wildland- as those that occur in North America, Australia, or the urban interface. The Local Authority-based planning Mediterranean countries, they had negative impacts on system regulates where houses are built, but wildfire ecosystem services in the short term, and represented risk is not normally a factor in housing decisions. a significant challenge to Fire and Rescue Services Dorset (Fig. 2) is an exception because gorse fires (FRS) resource resilience and service delivery. on heaths are a significant problem. No building is allowed within 0.25 miles of Natura heaths (an E.U. 2.2 Wildfire as a Challenge to FRS conservation designation). A mitigation fee of £1719 Resilience is charged for permission to build a house within 0.25 Fire suppression is organized regionally in the United to 3 miles of Natura heaths, and this fee finances an Kingdom and is free at the point of delivery. There are innovative wildfire management program as part of the 43 FRSs in England and Wales, six in Scotland, and Proceedings of the Second Conference on the Human Dimensions of Wildland Fire GTR-NRS-P-84 46 Figure 2.—MODIS Hotspot/Active Fire Detections for the U.K., excluding Shetland Islands, 1 Jan 2003 – 29 March 2010.
Recommended publications
  • The Sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit Era
    Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 2020, 151-168 The sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories in the Brexit era Maria Mut Bosque School of Law, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya, Spain MINECO DER 2017-86138, Ministry of Economic Affairs & Digital Transformation, Spain Institute of Commonwealth Studies, University of London, UK [email protected] (corresponding author) Abstract: This paper focuses on an analysis of the sovereignty of two territorial entities that have unique relations with the United Kingdom: the Crown Dependencies and the British Overseas Territories (BOTs). Each of these entities includes very different territories, with different legal statuses and varying forms of self-administration and constitutional linkages with the UK. However, they also share similarities and challenges that enable an analysis of these territories as a complete set. The incomplete sovereignty of the Crown Dependencies and BOTs has entailed that all these territories (except Gibraltar) have not been allowed to participate in the 2016 Brexit referendum or in the withdrawal negotiations with the EU. Moreover, it is reasonable to assume that Brexit is not an exceptional situation. In the future there will be more and more relevant international issues for these territories which will remain outside of their direct control, but will have a direct impact on them. Thus, if no adjustments are made to their statuses, these territories will have to keep trusting that the UK will be able to represent their interests at the same level as its own interests. Keywords: Brexit, British Overseas Territories (BOTs), constitutional status, Crown Dependencies, sovereignty https://doi.org/10.24043/isj.114 • Received June 2019, accepted March 2020 © 2020—Institute of Island Studies, University of Prince Edward Island, Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Arrangement Between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the States of Guernsey (The
    ARRANGEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND AND THE STATES OF GUERNSEY (THE GOVERNMENT OF GUERNSEY) CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION OF THE UNITED KINGDOM-CROWN DEPENDENCIES CUSTOMS UNION The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of Guernsey (together “the Governments”), ACKNOWLEDGING that the United Kingdom continues to be responsible for the international relations of Guernsey in international law and that this Arrangement cannot therefore create obligations which are binding under international law and is not intended to alter or affect the constitutional relationship between Guernsey and the United Kingdom, DESIRING to enter into a customs union covering all trade in goods involving the elimination between its members of customs duty on imports and exports and of any charges having equivalent effect, and the adoption of a common customs tariff in their relations with third countries, ACKNOWLEDGING that this Arrangement is without prejudice to the imposition of import value added tax (hereinafter referred to as “import VAT”) or excise duty, or any charges having equivalent effect to import VAT or excise duty, on goods imported into the United Kingdom from Guernsey or into Guernsey from the United Kingdom, RECOGNISING the importance of delivering a safe and fiscally secure customs regime, RECOGNISING the importance of cooperation in delivering such a regime, HAVE DECIDED as follows: PARAGRAPH 1 Object 1. This Arrangement concerns the establishment and operation of the United Kingdom- Crown Dependencies Customs Union (hereinafter referred to as “the Customs Union”), the members of which are the United Kingdom, Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man.
    [Show full text]
  • H 955 Great Britain
    Great Britain H 955 BACKGROUND: The heading Great Britain is used in both descriptive and subject cataloging as the conventional form for the United Kingdom, which comprises England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. This instruction sheet describes the usage of Great Britain, in contrast to England, as a subject heading. It also describes the usage of Great Britain, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales as geographic subdivisions. 1. Great Britain vs. England as a subject heading. In general assign the subject heading Great Britain, with topical and/or form subdivisions, as appropriate, to works about the United Kingdom as a whole. Assign England, with appropriate subdivision(s), to works limited to that country. Exception: Do not use the subdivisions BHistory or BPolitics and government under England. For a work on the history, politics, or government of England, assign the heading Great Britain, subdivided as required for the work. References in the subject authority file reflect this practice. Use the subdivision BForeign relations under England only in the restricted sense described in the scope note under EnglandBForeign relations in the subject authority file. 2. Geographic subdivision. a. Great Britain. Assign Great Britain directly after topics for works that discuss the topic in relation to Great Britain as a whole. Example: Title: History of the British theatre. 650 #0 $a Theater $z Great Britain $x History. b. England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales. Assign England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, or Wales directly after topics for works that limit their discussion to the topic in relation to one of the four constituent countries of Great Britain.
    [Show full text]
  • The Four Health Systems of the United Kingdom: How Do They Compare?
    The four health systems of the United Kingdom: how do they compare? Gwyn Bevan, Marina Karanikolos, Jo Exley, Ellen Nolte, Sheelah Connolly and Nicholas Mays Source report April 2014 About this research This report is the fourth in a series dating back to 1999 which looks at how the publicly financed health care systems in the four countries of the UK have fared before and after devolution. The report was commissioned jointly by The Health Foundation and the Nuffield Trust. The research team was led by Nicholas Mays at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The research looks at how the four national health systems compare and how they have performed in terms of quality and productivity before and after devolution. The research also examines performance in North East England, which is acknowledged to be the region that is most comparable to Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland in terms of socioeconomic and other indicators. This report, along with an accompanying summary report, data appendices, digital outputs and a short report on the history of devolution (to be published later in 2014), are available to download free of charge at www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/compare-uk-health www.health.org.uk/compareUKhealth. Acknowledgements We are grateful: to government statisticians in the four countries for guidance on sources of data, highlighting problems of comparability and for checking the data we have used; for comments on the draft report from anonymous referees and from Vernon Bogdanor, Alec Morton and Laura Schang; and for guidance on national clinical audits from Nick Black and on nursing data from Jim Buchan.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom’S DST, and Supports Findings OFFICE of the UNITED STATES I
    30364 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 107 / Monday, June 7, 2021 / Notices HTSUS subheading Product description 7019.90.50 ................. Glass fibers (including glass wool), nesoi, and articles thereof, nesoi. 7403.29.01 ................. Copper alloys (o/than copper-zinc, copper-tin alloys), unwrought nesoi. 8418.10.00 ................. Combined refrigerator-freezers, fitted with separate external doors, electric or other. 9003.11.00 ................. Frames and mountings, of plastics, for spectacles, goggles or the like. 9005.10.00 ................. Binoculars. 9005.80.40 ................. Optical telescopes, including monoculars. 9005.80.60 ................. Monoculars and astronomical instruments other than binoculars and optical telescopes but not including instruments for radio-astronomy. 9010.60.00 ................. Projection screens. 9012.10.00 ................. Microscopes other than optical microscopes; diffraction apparatus. 9015.40.80 ................. Photogrammetrical surveying instruments and appliances, other than electrical. 9015.80.20 ................. Optical surveying, hydrographic, oceanographic, hydrological, meteorological or geophysical instruments and appliances, nesoi. 9027.50.80 ................. Nonelectrical instruments and apparatus using optical radiations (ultraviolet, visible, infrared), nesoi. [FR Doc. 2021–11856 Filed 6–4–21; 8:45 am] implementation of additional duties on investigations/section-301- BILLING CODE 3290–F1–P products, contact [email protected]. digitalservices-taxes. The report
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the Committee Is Based Service Provided by the Manufactu- on Information Gathered by the Rers to the Farmers Was Also Noted
    REPORREPORTT OFOF THETHE COMMITTEECOMMITTEE ON REVIEW OF THE SCHEME "PROMOTION OF AGRICULTURAL MECHANISATION FOR IN-SITU MANAGEMENT OF CROP RESIDUE IN STATES OF PUNJAB, HARYANA, UTTAR PRADESH AND NCT OF DELHI" GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE (DEPTT. OF AGRICULTURE, COOPERATION & FARMERS WELFARE) KRISHI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI NEW DELHI, MAY 2019 CROP RESIDUE MANAGEMENT MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE (DEPTT. OF AGRICULTURE, COOPERATION & FARMERS WELFARE, KRISHI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI ) CROP RESIDUE MANAGEMENT CONTENTS Chapter Subject Page No. Number I Introduction 1 II Assessment of the Problems. 4 III Measures by the Government of India to reduce Crop Residue Burning. 8 IV Assessment of the Scheme 16 V Assessment and impact of the machinery use by the farmers & Assessment of the benefits accrued to the farmers. 30 VI Paddy Varieties for Promoting Better Straw Management 36 VII Crop Diversification 42 VIII Observations from the Field 47 IX Use of crop Residue 52 X Summary & Recommendations 56 Annexure - I to Annexure - XVI 59 to 84 MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FARMERS WELFARE (DEPTT. OF AGRICULTURE, COOPERATION & FARMERS WELFARE, KRISHI BHAWAN, NEW DELHI ) CROP RESIDUE MANAGEMENT REPORT ON CROP RESIDUE MANAGEMENT CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1.1 Paddy straw burning is practiced in 1.3 The State Governments and the Punjab, Haryana & Uttar Pradesh to Government of India have taken a clear the fields for Rabi Crop sowing number of steps in the past to during October/November i.e persuade farmers to stop burning mainly wheat and potato, because crop residue. Notifications banning the time window available between burning of crop residue, subsidy to the harvesting of paddy crop and farmers to acquire farm machinery the sowing of next crop is very that could promote in-situ crop short (2-3 weeks).Use of paddy residue management, use of paddy straw as fodder is limited due to high straw in power plants and other silica content.
    [Show full text]
  • Background, Brexit, and Relations with the United States
    The United Kingdom: Background, Brexit, and Relations with the United States Updated April 16, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL33105 SUMMARY RL33105 The United Kingdom: Background, Brexit, and April 16, 2021 Relations with the United States Derek E. Mix Many U.S. officials and Members of Congress view the United Kingdom (UK) as the United Specialist in European States’ closest and most reliable ally. This perception stems from a combination of factors, Affairs including a sense of shared history, values, and culture; a large and mutually beneficial economic relationship; and extensive cooperation on foreign policy and security issues. The UK’s January 2020 withdrawal from the European Union (EU), often referred to as Brexit, is likely to change its international role and outlook in ways that affect U.S.-UK relations. Conservative Party Leads UK Government The government of the UK is led by Prime Minister Boris Johnson of the Conservative Party. Brexit has dominated UK domestic politics since the 2016 referendum on whether to leave the EU. In an early election held in December 2019—called in order to break a political deadlock over how and when the UK would exit the EU—the Conservative Party secured a sizeable parliamentary majority, winning 365 seats in the 650-seat House of Commons. The election results paved the way for Parliament’s approval of a withdrawal agreement negotiated between Johnson’s government and the EU. UK Is Out of the EU, Concludes Trade and Cooperation Agreement On January 31, 2020, the UK’s 47-year EU membership came to an end.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Commonwealth Countries, British Overseas Territories, British Crown Dependencies and EU Member States
    List of Commonwealth countries, British Overseas Territories, British Crown Dependencies and EU member states Commonwealth countries1 Antigua and Barbuda Kenya St Vincent and the Grenadines Australia Kiribati Samoa The Bahamas Lesotho Seychelles Bangladesh Malawi Sierra Leone Barbados Malaysia Singapore Belize Malta* Solomon Islands Botswana Mauritius South Africa Brunei Mozambique Sri Lanka Cameroon Namibia Swaziland Canada Nauru Tonga Dominica New Zealand Trinidad and Tobago Fiji Nigeria Tuvalu Ghana Pakistan Uganda Grenada Papua New Guinea United Kingdom* Guyana Republic of Cyprus* United Republic of Tanzania India Rwanda Vanuatu Jamaica St Christopher and Nevis Zambia St Lucia Zimbabwe *Although also EU member states, citizens of the UK, Cyprus and Malta are eligible to be registered to vote in respect of all elections held in the UK. 1 Citizens of Commonwealth countries that have been suspended from the Commonwealth retain their voting rights. Their voting rights would only be affected if their country was also deleted from the list of Commonwealth countries in the British Nationality Act 1981 through an Act of the UK Parliament. British Overseas Territories Anguilla Pitcairn, Henderson, Ducie and Oeno Islands Bermuda St Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha British Antarctic Territory South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands British Indian Ocean Territory Sovereign Base areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia on Cyprus Cayman Islands Falkland Islands Turks and Caicos Islands Gibraltar Virgin Islands Montserrat British Crown Dependencies
    [Show full text]
  • Straw Burning, PM2.5 and Death: Evidence from China
    Straw Burning, PM2.5 and Death: Evidence from China Guojun HE, Tong LIU, and Maigeng ZHOU HKUST IEMS Working Paper No. 2019-66 HKUST IEMS working papers are distributed for discussion and comment purposes. The views expressed in these papers are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of HKUST IEMS. More HKUST IEMS working papers are available at: http://iems.ust.hk/WP Straw Burning, PM2.5 and Death: Evidence from China Guojun HE, Tong LIU, and Maigeng ZHOU HKUST IEMS Working Paper No. 2019-66 Abstract This study uses satellite data to detect agricultural straw burnings and estimates its impact on air pollution and health in China. We find that straw burning increases particulate matter pollution and causes people to die from cardio-respiratory diseases. Middle-aged and old people in rural areas are particularly sensitive to straw burning pollution. We estimate that a 10µg/m3 increase in PM2.5 will increase mortality by 3.25%. Subsidizing the recycling of straw brings significant health benefits and is estimated to avert 21,400 pre-mature deaths annually. Key words: straw burning, stubble burning, air pollution, mortality, straw recycling JEL Classifications: I18, I31, Q18, Q53, R1 Author’s contact information Guojun He Division of Social Science, Division of Environment and Sustainability, Department of Economics, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. E: [email protected] Tong Liu Division of Social Science, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. E: [email protected] Maigeng Zhou National Center for Chronic and Non-Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention.
    [Show full text]
  • The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Is Situated on the British Isles
    Дата: 15.10.2020 Группа: 102Фк Специальность: Лечебное дело Тема: The United Kingdom. England. Scotland. Задание лекции: перевести слова под текстом. Домашнее задание – найти: 1) Столицы стран Великобритании 2) Символы стран Великобритании 3) Флаги стран Великобритании 4) Национальные блюда стран Великобритании The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is situated on the British Isles. The British Isles consist of two large islands, Great Britain and Ireland, and about five thousands small islands. Their total area is over 244 000 square kilometres. The United ingdom is one o! the world"s smaller #ountries. Its population is over $% million. &bout '0 (er#ent o! the (o(ulation is urban. The United ingdom is made up of !our #ountries) *ngland, +ales, ,#otland and -orthern Ireland. Their #a(itals are .ondon, /ardi0, *dinburgh and Bel!ast res(e#tivel1. Great Britain #onsists o! *ngland, ,#otland and +ales and does not include -orthern Ireland. But in everyday s(ee#h 2Great Britain» is used in the meaning o! the 2United ingdom o! Great Britain and -orthern Ireland3. The #a(ital o! the U is .ondon. The British Isles are separated from the /ontinent by the -orth ,ea, the *nglish /hannel and the ,trait o! 4over. The western #oast o! Great Britain is washed by the &tlanti# 5#ean and the Irish ,ea. The surface o! the British Isles varies very mu#h. The north o! ,#otland is mountainous and is #alled 6ighlands. The south, whi#h has beauti!ul valleys and plains, is #alled .owlands. The north and west o! *ngland are mountainous, but the eastern, #entral and south-eastern (arts o! *ngland are a vast (lain.
    [Show full text]
  • Controversial Ne Exeat Clause Grants Custodial Power Under Abbott V
    Mercer Law Review Volume 62 Number 2 Articles Edition Article 14 3-2011 The Last Rights: Controversial Ne Exeat Clause Grants Custodial Power Under Abbott v. Abbott Danielle L. Brewer Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr Part of the Family Law Commons, and the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Brewer, Danielle L. (2011) "The Last Rights: Controversial Ne Exeat Clause Grants Custodial Power Under Abbott v. Abbott," Mercer Law Review: Vol. 62 : No. 2 , Article 14. Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr/vol62/iss2/14 This Casenote is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Mercer Law School Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Mercer Law Review by an authorized editor of Mercer Law School Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Casenote The Last Rights: Controversial Ne Exeat Clause Grants Custodial Power Under Abbott v. Abbott I. INTRODUCTION The weight to be assigned to the laws and practices of foreign legal systems in the analysis of international agreements and domestic statutory disputes has long been a topic of debate in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of the United States government.' On 1. Compare Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304, 348 (2002) (Scalia, J., dissenting) (alterations in original) (quoting Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815, 868 n.4 (1988) (Scalia, J., dissenting)) (internal quotation marks omitted) ("We must never forget that it is a Constitution for the United States of America that we are expounding. ... [W]here there is not first a settled consensus among our own people, the views of other nations, however enlightened the Justices of this Court may think them to be, cannot be imposed upon Americans through the Constitution."), with Printz v.
    [Show full text]
  • Economy Profile United Kingdom
    Doing Business 2020 United Kingdom Economy Profile United Kingdom Page 1 Doing Business 2020 United Kingdom Economy Profile of United Kingdom Doing Business 2020 Indicators (in order of appearance in the document) Starting a business Procedures, time, cost and paid-in minimum capital to start a limited liability company Dealing with construction permits Procedures, time and cost to complete all formalities to build a warehouse and the quality control and safety mechanisms in the construction permitting system Getting electricity Procedures, time and cost to get connected to the electrical grid, and the reliability of the electricity supply and the transparency of tariffs Registering property Procedures, time and cost to transfer a property and the quality of the land administration system Getting credit Movable collateral laws and credit information systems Protecting minority investors Minority shareholders’ rights in related-party transactions and in corporate governance Paying taxes Payments, time, total tax and contribution rate for a firm to comply with all tax regulations as well as postfiling processes Trading across borders Time and cost to export the product of comparative advantage and import auto parts Enforcing contracts Time and cost to resolve a commercial dispute and the quality of judicial processes Resolving insolvency Time, cost, outcome and recovery rate for a commercial insolvency and the strength of the legal framework for insolvency Employing workers Flexibility in employment regulation and redundancy cost Page 2 Doing Business 2020 United Kingdom About Doing Business The Doing Business project provides objective measures of business regulations and their enforcement across 190 economies and selected cities at the subnational and regional level.
    [Show full text]