The way this article reports the campaigners, you'd be forgiven for thinking that there are no existing rights of access in law, and for thinking that private ownership of land necessarily means absolute access restrictions.
This is not just a problem with this specific article; I've seen it numerous times, and it makes me think that this is a consistent pattern of this campaign; the campaigners are either wilfully ignoring the rights which already exist or are themselves woefully ignorant. Either way, they're doing the public a disservice by spreading what looks a lot like misinformation.
Another bit of ignorance: they refer to 'commons' as if that meant, in English, unrestricted public use or access. It doesn't. A commons is a piece of land with specific usage rights for specific people - e.g. local farmers allowed particular grazing rights. "give the commons back to the public" implies a history which this country has never had.
It's from an Old English toponym, and those are sometimes quite variable across the country; for example locally in Sheffield any steep hillsides are named 'cliffe' e.g. Attercliffe, Brincliffe.
Maybe? But a few things count against that hypothesis. Elephants are already very mobile animals, so they can simply move away if they don't like the smell; dislike of the smell would, you'd think, drive them to move away rather than remaining with the corpse, moving it around, and trumpeting loudly.
Secondly, do elephants do that with other animal corpses they discover in their travels? We would expect not, though this would need observation and trials to find out for sure.
Thirdly, does this way of burying the corpse make it more difficult for scavenging animals to discover the corpse? If so, that counts for the other hypothesis.
> Take Joyce Higashi, a San Jose homeowner who built an ADU in her backyard. She now rents out her 500-square-foot abode for $3,000 per month to traveling nurses.
That's not scalping, though is it? Scalping is when somebody illicitly buys up a lot of a limited resource (e.g. concert tickets) and then pushes the price up.
What this person has done is to add to the stock of the resource (rentable property), and rent it out at the market price.
For me scalping is jacking up the prices to unreasonable levels - how he goods were obtained (bought up all tickets, or inherited a garden from grampa) doesn't matter.
Is this considered to be a reasonable price, especially for traveling healthcare workers? (Asking it, not challenging. These prices seem to be waiting for FAANG workers, at least in my eyes)
I realised a while ago that I dislike the "Show, don't tell" rule; I much prefer writers who allow themselves to tell, to be story-tellers.
A couple of particular examples: Angelica Gordischer's Kalpa Imperial, and all of Susanna Clarke's writing. Both quite storyteller-y, and better for it.
Well, no-longer-local-seeming language roots. I don't know about ghent, but pen y is pretty Welsh. The locals who don't recognize it have mostly just forgotten it.
.jpg){kind=link}