Sovereign Shetland

[Ghostrider]

if I had to predict the future, I'd be very much surprised if in 100 years the population is any more than the 5000-10000 mark, 99.9% residents of Lerwick/Scalloway and the vast majority either transplants or descendants of transplants during the previous 150 years.

 

Interesting prediction. The first point on population size is plausible enough, though really nothing more than a guess. The second point is highly unlikely - as long as the land is suitable for rearing and growing food here people will be using it. Increasingly so in the future I'd say, particularly as oil gets harder to come by and imports become too expensive. The final point is bizarre (quite apart from the weird term 'transplants'). Where do you expect all the 'native' Shetlanders to go exactly? Are you anticipating some kind of ethnic cleansing?

 

Yes, the population is more or less a guess, based on the opinion that I can't see how the isles could sustain a permanent population of greater number by then.

 

I'll disagree with you though of the second point, largely for the self same reasons you cite to support your opinion. Certainly some land probably will still be in production, however don't forget that as well as raising the cost of imports, more expensive fuel will have a knock on affect on all aspects of mechanised agriculture and transport. The local market is finite, if the population drops it will be more finite still, the range of crops which can be successfully grown commercially in Shetland is small, a few large outfits run by a small number of staff could easily cover local market demand for the products they are capable of producing.

 

Fuel costs will curtail if not obliterate the activities of part-timers in agriculture living on the who commute to other jobs eleswhere, and do likewise to part-timers who commute to tend their land. Commercial agriculture is only profitable in Shetland on anything but the largest scale due to subsidised transport to/from the mainland for importing materials and exporting product. Given the more expensive fuel gets the greater than subsidy will have to be to maintain its value in real terms, can we rely on a Govt. to keep dipping in to its pocket and doing that, can we rely on getting any subsidy at all in 100 years for that matter?

 

If not the export market will shrink greatly if not vanish altogether, and it is dubious if even those supplying the local market can be expected to continue, as their margins will take a hit as the real terms value of the subsidy decreases, or vanishes altogether due to the increase in costs of their raw material imports. Already local agriculture finds it difficult to compete with imports produced in a better climate, and benefitting from the cost savings of scale that could never be possible here, there simply isn't that amount of suitable land in one place to be able to have 100+ acre fields of tatties, carrots etc.

 

Granted many variables enter in to the equation, future Govt's may not only maintain the real terms value of shipping subsidies, they could actually increase them. I won't be holding my breath though. Technological advances could make possible sea transportation vessels that utilise ultra-cheap energy, but as no significant advances have been made in that area in the last 100 years, it doesn't much look like they might, and in any case, if they did, it blows your expensive imports argument right out of the water, as the shipping cost of imports would be slashed as well. The climate is continually evolving, always has, and almost certainly always will, but as the "experts" in that field have revised their thinking on that one more times than I care to try and count in the last couple of decades alone, I'm not about to expect the climate here to be all that significantly different, and thus making growing conditions more favourable, than they have been for the last few hundred years.

 

I thought "transplant" was a commonly used and widely known term, it certainly is in the circles in which I move, but maybe its just grumpy old codgers like me that are of an age to know it. Substitute it with "incomer", "relocated" or similar of your choice, the meaning is the same.

 

'Native' is your choice of term (and one I think that shows you knew what I meant by 'transplant'), I'm not about to use it though, as I would tend to think the only natives of Shetland wear fur or feathers, and either walk on four legs or fly.

 

The distinction I was trying to make was between Shetlanders who can trace their ancestory back for multiple generations in Shetland, and those who only moved her post 1970, or can trace their ancestory in Shetland no further back than that point. Based on a random sample of people which I am aware of their status, approx 50% of couples are currently "mixed", the remaining 50% being approx split 50/50 within their respective groups.

 

If that same division is then projected further it shows that already only approx 25% of babies being born at the moment have long term local ancestory, then if you turn it on to all of those who are currently under 18, and who potentially have the ability to have produced the next 5 generations or so 100 years from now, and the liklihood of the already "mixed" becoming inter bred, plus inevitable further interbreeding of either 25% with the other two groupings, you have a situation where potentially 100 years from now a baby born who can trace their entire ancestory back to pre-1970 Shetland will be a rarity, and even one who can trace 50% of their ancestory that far back will have become uncommon.

 

As those having their entire ancestory in Shetland pre-1970 only amounts to approx 25% of the total of babies currently being born, they already only form a small minority of future Shetlanders, and are a minority that can only continue to shrink quickly as people are still relocating to here, not only that, our local powers that be are all but begging people to come.

 

By the time the next 5 or so generations are up and running in 100 years, the genetic material carried by your average Shetlander which was already here pre-1970 will be negligible. I could cite two much smaller scale actual local examples of why I believe this will be the case, but given the size of Shetland its not really possible to do so publically without the individuals I'm referring to posentially being identifiable, if not by others, then certainly by themselves.

 

Before the lynch mob starts, I'd just like to make it clear that the above is not intended as having a go at or criticising anyone, its simply an acknowledgement of how the present will shape the future as I see it. The Shetlander of 100 years from now will be a very different beast from the one of today, they will find a considerably larger percentage of their heritage and culture is outside the Sooth Mooth rather than in their "homeland", which I expect will feel quite strange. Probably much like many present day Americans, who also as transplants randomly thrown together in a genetic melting pot, cannot find any real roots in their "homeland", have developed an unnatural affection often bordering on the obsession for whichever "old country" they feel they identify with most.

[engineer21]

ok its a bit laughable that a norweigen woman thinks we should become part of Norway! most norweigens would love that! then there ownership of northsea oil and gas would most likely double, all the guys i know reckon it was a mistake we were given up (if indeed we were or whatever)

 

would shetlanders really want to be part of norway? much higer taxes, higher cost of living, and the salerys dont excatly match, i know i work with enough of them. they have problems with immigrants like we do.

 

last thing i want is another 20% of my wages taken off me and no pay rise as i work for norweigens now!

 

why bother trying to change that we are part of the uk? we are thats it let it be and get on with your life

 

only my view i add

[paulb]

Ghost your missing the fact that our agricultral land may become more important. If global warming exsists then a lot of arable land will drop out of production. thus putting a greater strain on any usable land. your perdictions are probably right if the agri system stays the same. however if the crofting/farming system went back to mixed farming it could meet most of the islands needs. its a big pity that the arable land that we have is not used better.

[Infiltrator]

ok its a bit laughable that a norweigen woman thinks we should become part of Norway! most norweigens would love that! then there ownership of northsea oil and gas would most likely double, all the guys i know reckon it was a mistake we were given up (if indeed we were or whatever)

 

would shetlanders really want to be part of norway? much higer taxes, higher cost of living, and the salerys dont excatly match, i know i work with enough of them. they have problems with immigrants like we do.

 

last thing i want is another 20% of my wages taken off me and no pay rise as i work for norweigens now!

 

why bother trying to change that we are part of the uk? we are thats it let it be and get on with your life

 

only my view i add

 

And therein lies the quandary;

 

1) human nature dictates that we always want something other than what we have - grass is always greener.

 

2) no-one knows what this 'other' actually is - everyone assumes it's better on the basis it can't be any worse.

[joenorth]

The Shetlander of 100 years from now will be a very different beast from the one of today, they will find a considerably larger percentage of their heritage and culture is outside the Sooth Mooth rather than in their "homeland&quot

 

Absolutely. I don't think we'll have to wait anything like a hundred years for this to happen, though. I don't think it's got much to do with genetic heritage either. The rate of sociocultural change we're seeing in Shetland today is unprecedented in terms of local recorded history. Not intrinsically 'bad', of course, but I often find myself personally bemused by the lack of 'connectedness' between generations in Shetland today. There are, quite simply, often massive gulfs between the formative social and cultural constitutions of older and younger islanders.

 

Shetland is an island in physical geography only, today. The isolation which has preserved a unique north Atlantic culture has gone.

 

 

 

however if the crofting/farming system went back to mixed farming it could meet most of the islands needs. its a big pity that the arable land that we have is not used better.

 

Very debatable. The contemporary islander aspires to a much higher standard of living than his/her forebears did. Life was bloody hard for the traditional crofter. Even if we ditched our expectations of satellite telly and a new car every couple of years we'd be lucky to scratch a living from arable/livestock crofting. A small proportion of local needs could be met. perhaps. A non-subsidy focused local agricultural industry could certainly supplement living in Shetland, which would be good in various ways.

[pickle]

ddd

[Ghostrider]

Ghost your missing the fact that our agricultral land may become more important. If global warming exsists then a lot of arable land will drop out of production. thus putting a greater strain on any usable land. your perdictions are probably right if the agri system stays the same. however if the crofting/farming system went back to mixed farming it could meet most of the islands needs. its a big pity that the arable land that we have is not used better.

 

I stuck with a "little change" option, as that is what occured over the last 100 years. Predictions for the next 100 years, IMHO, are so diverse that quite literally anything *could* happen. Yes, certainly viable and fertile land *could* become scarcer and Shetland's growing conditions *could* improve, but by exactly the same token, currently unviable land elsewhere worldwide *could* be similarly affected by the evolving climate resulting in either no change, or in an actual increase in the viable productive global acreage. Likewise (say if the "Shetland will be warmer, but also windier and wetter camp are largely correct), conditions *could* quite easily become that Shetland is no longer viable for crop production (unless it gets warm enough we can plant rice paddy fields of course).

[Ghostrider]

The Shetlander of 100 years from now will be a very different beast from the one of today, they will find a considerably larger percentage of their heritage and culture is outside the Sooth Mooth rather than in their "homeland&quot

 

Absolutely. I don't think we'll have to wait anything like a hundred years for this to happen, though. I don't think it's got much to do with genetic heritage either. The rate of sociocultural change we're seeing in Shetland today is unprecedented in terms of local recorded history. Not intrinsically 'bad', of course, but I often find myself personally bemused by the lack of 'connectedness' between generations in Shetland today. There are, quite simply, often massive gulfs between the formative social and cultural constitutions of older and younger islanders.

 

Shetland is an island in physical geography only, today. The isolation which has preserved a unique north Atlantic culture has gone.

 

A good point, it would have occured regardless, the oil era and its accompanying affluence may have caused it to begin slightly sooner than otherwise, speeded the process and made it more pronounced, but it didn't cause it. If "fault" is to be assigned, it lies with the advances in transport and communications, once Shetland could access the rest of the world quickly, at an affordable cost, and it us, the die was cast. Relative isolation preserved us, increased inclusion assilimates us.

[amno]

ghost i think youre probably right about this but itl be fine.. ohnestly, the old shetland wont go away they will just be married with the new shetland, in 100 years i dont think people will have any better or worse lives becuase there viking heratige has been watered down to tell you the truth i was born in scotland but have no scottish ancestry beyond my grandparents but i will always consider myself scottish and nothing else id like to think future shetlanders will aswell regardless of where there ancestors came from,

at the end of the day they will be born in shetland and will not have any where else to call home

i am not a shetlander as i was not born here and didnt grow up here but id like to think if i have children of my own in the isles they will be considered shetlanders by all regardless of whether there mother is local or not,

it would be very sad i think if we ended up like northen ireland where poeple are very particular about identities ie im not irish im brittish but there families have been there for 400 years

[amno]

just so you dont all kill me i mean future shetlanders will consider themselves shetlanders not scottish, dont go mental!

[Kavi Ugl]

What this issue is highlighting is part of why I wish Stuart Hill well in his campaign and also advocate a return to Norway.

 

On the present road Shetland as a vibrant and prosperous place is finished. When the oil and gas has finally run out and the EU+GB have finally destroyed the Shetland fishing industry Shetland's population will be reduced by, at a guess, 50%. So, you're down to 11,000......possibly.

 

I'm afraid that an independant Scotland will look after Shetland no better than the EU or even London - infact Shetland might even find itself sacrificed in favour of John o' Groats and south i.e when it comes to such things as funding etc.

 

It is a tragedy that the future Shetland we're looking at will be made up of retirees from England mixed with a (possible)salmon/seafood industry. I still maintain that the EU, SNH, WWF et al are ultimately working towards making Shetland a world conservation area, void of any inhabitants, or a chosen few like Fair Isle.

 

As far as subsistence living goes, there is no way that people will ever be able(or willing) to go back to even living 50% off the land.

 

Shetland's problem is that we have no less than three states in control of us who at best don't care about us and at worst(which is happening) are working against us(viz fishing).

 

The other problem is that we, as a community, are not prepared to stand up and do anything about it so as it stands it's not a question of if Shetland will die but when.......

[Guest SJP17]

11000 !

 

There is more chance of you winning the euro millions than the population going that low !

 

Not a chance in my opinion

[Baron Farkoff]

This is pie in the sky.

Spain wants Gibraltar back. Britain does not want to give it back.

Spain does not get Gibraltar back. The end.

 

Norway does not want Shetland "back". Britain does not want to give it back. Norway does not get Shetland back. The end.

 

Argentina wants the Falklands back.... etc.

 

Kavi Ugl says:

"we, as a community, are not prepared to stand up and do anything about it..."

I think that the reason for this is simple: "the community" is happy with the way things are.

I don't know many Shetlanders who are pining for the fjords.

[shetlandpeat]

What this issue is highlighting is part of why I wish Stuart Hill well in his campaign and also advocate a return to Norway.

 

When the oil and gas has finally run out and the EU+GB have finally destroyed the Shetland fishing industry Shetland's population will be reduced by, at a guess, 50%.

 

 

.

 

Norway adopt EU policies in cases.

 

I wish Stuart well in his quest, it ain't gonna hurt any one, and does he want to go to Norway??. You though my friend have started to upset folk with your creedism. One real reason the population may dip, if you scare folk away.

[engineer21]

Pine for high taxes, high fuel prices, higher food and drink costs, without any real benifits no thanks.

Excatly grass is always greener cant people be happy with what they have sometimes!

 

and why is there always talk of shetlanders being shetlanders and not scottish?

 

you are both!! just like aberdonians are scottish!! invernesians are scottish the list goes on! shetland is not that uniquie!!

 

any supporters of mr hill remeber when your car insurance has gone up he is part of the reason!