[Diggers350] George Monbiot's 'Farm Free Future': Monbiotic Man, by Simon Fairlie

[Tony Gosling]

Monbiotic Man

https://www.thelandmagazine.org.uk/articles/monbiotic-man
Simon Fairlie assesses the farm-free future for 
humanity spelled out in George Monbiot’s latest book 'Regenesis'.

Regenesis starts harmlessly enough. In his first 
chapter George Monbiot illustrates the 
complexities of soil structure by describing what 
he sees when he looks at a sod dug up from his 
orchard through a 40x magnifying eyepiece. It is 
an elegant snapshot of the world beneath our feet 
that we always vaguely knew about, but rather 
took for granted until Merlin Sheldrake and 
others unveiled some of its mysteries.

In chapter two he lays into industrial 
agriculture, cataloguing failings and dangers 
that many readers of The Land will already be 
familiar with. The theme is carried forward in 
the following chapter, where he targets 
agricultural pollution and the excesses of the 
intensive livestock industry. He then goes on to 
visit three farms in the UK that are trying to 
address some of these problems. The first is Ian 
Tolhurst's stock-free market garden in 
Oxfordshire, which rightly meets with Monbiot's 
enthusiastic approval. His comments on the other 
two holdings he visits are also sound: the 
no-till arable farm would be more convincing were 
it not reliant on glyphosate weedkiller. The 
mixed farm employing mob-grazing and heritage 
grains has high aspirations but low yields.

Much of this is music to the ears of any reader 
supportive of agro-ecology and food sovereignty. 
Even if not much of it is breaking news, it is 
enlivened by Monbiot's acute observations and sharp turn of phrase.

However, it soon proves to be the overture to 
something more discordant. Soft cop George is 
buttering us up before hard cop Monbiot launches 
in with the tough questioning. The crime, he 
alleges, is not industrial agriculture, but 
agriculture itself: "Farming, whether intensive 
or extensive is the world's major cause of 
ecological destruction." Overheating the world's 
atmosphere and oceans through fossil fuel use apparently comes second.

The culprit is every farmer, big or small, 
chemical or organic (with the exception of Ian 
Tolhurst). A farm-free world is what Monbiot 
hopes to see, where everyone enjoys farm-free 
food. "We can now contemplate the end of most 
farming, the most destructive force ever to have 
been unleashed by humans." To this end he visits 
the Solar Foods laboratory in Finland where 
scientists are developing a high protein 
foodstuff made from bacteria fed on hydrogen. He 
eats a pancake made from the substance that he 
believes "represents the beginning of the end of 
most agriculture." Since this substance has no 
name, I call it "studge", after the breakfast 
cereal that readers of Saki may remember was 
marketed on the basis that "people will do things 
from a sense of duty that they would never attempt as a pleasure".
The Agribashers

George Monbiot is by no means the first writer to 
launch an all-out attack on agriculture. Since 
the publication of Marshall Sahlins' Stone Age 
Economics in 1972 (see p.53 of this issue) there 
has been a crescendo of variations on the theme 
that it all went wrong when people started 
keeping animals and growing crops. Examples 
include Paul Shephard's call for humanity to Come 
Home to the Pleistocene, the late James 
Lovelock's Revenge of Gaia, Yuval Noah Harari's 
contention that agriculture was "History's 
Biggest Fraud", James C Scott's Against the 
Grain, and the report Rethinking Food and 
Agriculture by the think tank Rethinkx. Three of 
these – Shepard, Lovelock and Rethinkx – propose 
the same solution as Monbiot: feeding people, in 
Lovelock's words, on "tissue cultures of meats 
and vegetables and junk food made from any convenient organism".

Two differences between Monbiot's book and 
earlier exponents of the agribashing tendency are 
worth mentioning. Firstly there are now start-up 
labs working to produce the junk food that will 
replace agricultural products; and there are 
generations of urban dwellers who are now so 
divorced from the land, and so wrapped up in 
cyberspace that they will probably be quite happy 
to eat the stuff. Secondly Monbiot, through his 
long association with The Guardian, has rather 
more influence than most of his predecessors. 
Regenesis was heralded by an hour-long 
documentary on the subject on Channel 4. In 2013 
when his book Feral came out, few people had even 
heard of rewilding: now it is UK government policy.
Neither Spare nor Share

Monbiots's third chapter, which bears the 
engaging title "Agricultural Sprawl", begins by 
continuing his onslaught upon industrial 
agriculture in the form of the factory chicken 
farms currently polluting the River Wye (see The 
Land 29). He continues in this vein for 17 pages 
until he abruptly changes his tone:
"You might, by now, have decided that you want 
nothing more to do with intensive farming: from 
now on you will eat only meat, eggs and milk from 
animals that can roam outdoors or have been 
certified as organic . . . If so I can offer you little comfort."

The problem with grazing animals, he continues, 
is that they occupy a rather large proportion of 
the world’s land area: 28 percent according to 
figures cited by Monbiot (slightly less than the 
31 percent covered by forest).1 Another 12 
percent is occupied by arable crops, and one 
percent by buildings. The rest is desert or icy waste.

Forty percent of the world’s land surface is 
devoted to agriculture, and as such is a threat 
to global biodiversity because “the great 
majority of the world’s species cannot survive in 
a farmed landscape”. The reference for this 
statement is a trio of UK papers on the benefits 
of “land-sparing” as opposed to “land-sharing”. 
But Monbiot is in favour of neither. Land-sparing 
– pursuing highly intensive agriculture over a 
relatively small area in order to give 
extensively farmed land back to Nature – would 
triple pesticide use and lead to even greater use 
of arable land for animal feeds and biofuels. 
Land sharing through organic farming and 
regenerative agriculture has lower yields and 
takes up too much land. The problem with intensive farming, writes Monbiot:

“is not the adjective, it is the noun . . . We 
appear to be trapped between two dangerous 
forces: efficiency and sprawl. Farming is both 
too intensive and too extensive. It uses too many 
pesticides, too much fertiliser, too much water and too much land.”
Rural Sprawl

It is indisputable that the task of nourishing 
seven billion people has reduced the areas of 
wilderness on the Earth to enclaves and condemned 
numerous species to decline and extinction. Such 
wilderness and many of the species associated 
with it in the UK disappeared centuries ago. This 
is a matter of genuine concern, which I will come back to it later.

But whether the conceit that this represents 
“agricultural sprawl” is a helpful one is another 
matter. Monbiot focuses mainly on the UK, and so 
will I. Look out of the window on a train journey 
from the less intensively farmed West Country up 
to London and you will catch glimpses of a great 
many landscape features: fields of wheat, maize, 
potatoes or rape, meadows cut for silage or left 
to grow for hay, pastures of every feasible 
ecological status and condition, downland grazed 
by sheep, water meadows where rivers weave oxbow 
curves, old commons turning to scrub, fields left 
to grow wild, stately parks with spreading oaks, 
edge of town allotments, oak, beech or sycamore 
woodlands, hazel coppice, conifer plantations, 
spinneys, hedgerows, ditches and bogs.

Within this mosaic, thousands if not millions of 
species find their niche. Most evolved over the 
long period of time that preceded the neolithic 
agricultural revolution, but many have benefited 
from the disturbance caused by agriculture, or 
adapted to its rhythms. According to Plantlife:

     “Hundreds of different wild flowers and 
fungi have co-evolved over millennia with farmers 
managing the land as hay meadows and pasture. 
This unparalleled plant diversity provides the 
life support for our invertebrates, birds, 
mammals . . . More than 120 species of 
wildflowers grow in arable habitats and together 
make up one of the most threatened groups of 
plants in the UK. Many of our most beloved plants 
– such as cornflower, corn marigold and 
corncockle – have drastically declined and no longer colour our farmland.”

This diversity of landscape features and species 
is the result of about 6,000 years of 
co-operation between the people of this island 
and its environment in the name of agriculture, 
and to most people’s eyes it looks green and 
pleasant, even if it doesn’t have the romance or 
mystery of Pleistocene wilderness. Yes, it has 
become degraded and species are under threat 
largely because of industrial farming methods. A 
judicious measure of rewilding might help to 
redress the balance. But complete abandonment of 
agriculture would be detrimental to biodiversity, 
since we would lose many of the wild species that 
have successfully adapted to agricultural 
disturbance, as well as the innumerable varieties 
of domestic plants and animals that are utterly 
dependent on a farmed ecosystem.

On your train journey you will also find that for 
much of the time you can’t see anything of the 
landscape, because of all the trees growing up by 
the side of the track. This is nature, 
wilderness, trying to regain lost territory, 
which it would do if Network Rail didn’t arrange 
for it to be hacked back from time to time. If 
Monbiot’s farm-free landscape were let loose, 
that is pretty much all we would see for much of 
the journey. A return to the blanket of woodland 
which covered much of Britain before our 
forefathers let the light in and allowed sun- and 
disturbance-loving plants and insects to 
proliferate, might feel more like sprawl than the 
highly variegated farming landscape that much of Britain enjoys now.
Urban Sprawl

Anyway, real sprawl is in a different league. It 
multiplies on the outskirts of towns like Didcot 
and Basingstoke, increasing in intensity, until 
by the time you get to Woking or Slough it is 
relentless. Rows of terraced houses give way to 
new semi-detached estates while half-built 
roundabouts map out the frontiers of future 
building sites. Who are all these people? What do 
they do, apart from ‘taking in each other’s 
washing’? Why so many? By the time you get to 
Vauxhall or Paddington the sprawl becomes 
vertical, as office blocks and residential 
towers, starved for space, stretch skyward like plants competing for light.

Monbiot’s hatred of farming has become so 
visceral that the pastures and cornfields of the 
West Country are in his view more to be feared 
than the spread of concrete and tarmac. The cows 
and sheep that we glimpse from the train window, 
along with the pigs and chickens that we don’t 
see, he reckons threaten the carrying capacity of 
the planet, more than the people who rear them:

     “While the human population growth rate has 
fallen to 1.05 percent a year, the growth rate of 
the livestock population has risen to 2.4 percent 
a year . . . The biggest population crisis is not 
the growth in human numbers but the growth in livestock numbers.”

The biggest numerical increase in recent years no 
doubt; but it is a bit rich to vilify cows, pigs, 
sheep and poultry when they do little other than 
eat, sleep, procreate and defecate, while human 
occupants of the sprawling metropolis demand 
cooked food, clothes, hot showers, central 
heating, computers, motor-cars, hospitals, 
shopping, foreign holidays and who knows what 
else. The built environment may only occupy 11 
percent of the UK land area, but it sucks up far 
more energy and resources from ghost acres than the countryside does.
Yield-Blindness

Let us unpack this figure of 2.4 percent annual 
growth in livestock numbers. Virtually all of 
this increase is in the intensive chicken and 
pork industries; very little is caused by cattle 
or sheep. Monbiot cites USDA figures 
showing  that the number of cattle in the world 
has increased by 15 per cent over the last 50 
years, but all of this increase occurred between 
the years 1971 and 1975. According to United 
Nations data, this figure severely underestimates 
the number of cows in Africa.  But both sources 
agree that in USA, Russia, East Asia, and Europe 
the number of cattle is falling. The UK cattle 
population has declined by 25 per cent since the early 1980s.2

What then of the factory farmed pigs and chickens 
that account for nearly all of the annual 2.4 
percent increase in livestock numbers? They are 
mostly fed on cereals and soya beans, grown on 
arable land. Sixty percent of the UK’s arable 
land is used to grow feed crops for animals and 
on top of that we import large quantities of soy 
and maize from ‘ghost acres’ in the Americas.

The surest way to reduce the impact of farming 
upon the natural environment would be to stop 
using vast areas of arable land to grow 
monocultural crops to feed to pigs and chickens 
at inefficient conversion rates. Monbiot’s 
enthusiasm for doing away with this inefficient 
way of producing protein, and releasing several 
million acres of UK land for other uses is shared 
by large numbers of people within the 
agro-ecology and regenerative farming movements. 
But that is where agreement ends. Monbiot would 
like to rewild any land so spared, whereas many 
in agro-ecological circles would prefer to see 
some of it used to enable a return to mixed 
organic farms where ruminant livestock are part 
of the fertility building cycle, and the protein 
from factory farmed animals is replaced by pulses.

A month after the publication of Regenesis, the 
Sustainable Food Trust (SFT) released its report 
Feeding Britain from the Ground Up, which 
advocates halving grain production, encouraging 
mixed organic farming, growing more peas and 
beans and ensuring waste food and by-products are 
fed to livestock. The SFT calculates that in this 
manner the UK could maintain or even increase 
existing levels of food self-sufficiency, while 
allowing an extra 2.5 million hectares for tree 
planting and nature recovery (see page 12 of this issue).

A major weakness of Regenesis is that it doesn’t 
give a fair hearing to this approach. There is no 
analysis of what it might achieve or require in 
the way of land-use reallocation, or what carbon 
and environmental benefits it might bring. The 
one case study Monbiot provides of such a farm is 
an experimental project on poor land with an 
absurdly low level of productivity. I agree with 
him that too many agro-ecological farmers are 
“yield blind . . . [using] large areas of land to 
produce small amounts of food ” But he too is 
blind to examples of far more productive organic 
mixed farms, such as those which provide case studies for the SFT report.

Nor does he make any mention of default livestock 
— farm animals that can be fed off crop residues, 
food waste, or grass maintained for other 
purposes, such as nature conservation, fertility 
building or open spaces. This was an approach he endorsed back in 2010.3

Since then, much research has been carried out 
showing that these “ecological leftovers” are 
substantial – notably Hannah van Zanten’s 
calculation that the processing and food wastes 
generated by the sort of vegan diet that George 
advocates, when fed to livestock, produce meat 
sufficient to meet more than a quarter of all 
human protein requirements.4 If this was one of 
the 5,000 academic papers that Monbiot claims to 
have read during the research for this book, he 
apparently thought it was of no significance. 
(See also the recent report from WWF, covered on page 12  of this issue.)
Homo High-Rise

Monbiot’s strongest argument for the development 
and propagation of bacterial studge is founded on 
environmental justice. While his favourite food 
is a “green peppercorn and lemongrass coconut 
broth”, and he has a horror of lardy cake, most 
people like to eat animal protein and fat, not 
least manual workers. There is growing demand 
from the poor of the world to consume it at the 
rate that people in industrial countries enjoy, 
or indeed at the rate that we enjoyed it in the 
pre-agricultural Pleistocene past in which the 
metabolism of homo sapiens evolved.

The only way that this demand could currently be 
satisfied is by feeding yet more cereals and soya 
to pigs and chickens in factory farms, which 
would be an environmental and animal welfare 
disaster. However unappealing the prospect may be 
of having the majority of our digestible protein 
produced in a laboratory by white-coated geeks, 
it is surely better than ploughing up increasing 
tracts of virgin forest to feed animals 
incarcerated in a prison from which the only exit is death.
Or perhaps not? The production of studge requires 
large amounts of hydrogen, produced by 
electricity. As noted in issue 30 of The Land, 
almost every industry currently reliant on fossil 
fuels is looking to hydrogen to reduce its carbon 
emissions.5 A recent paper by AH MacDougal et al 
warned that if limited supplies of renewable 
energy are used to manufacture edible biomass 
instead of replacing fossil fuels, the long term 
result would be increased global warming: 
“maximum warming reduction from bacilliculture 
would require deploying the technology only after 
decarbonisation has reached its limits.”6

However, suppose within a few decades there is a 
flowering of the hydrogen economy, and sufficient 
renewable energy is available to produce 
bacterial protein cheaper than soy protein, 
lab-grown fat cheaper than palm oil, and cultured 
carbs cheaper than wheat or barley. Given the 
smorgasbord of fake steaks, sham hams and other 
skeuomorphic delicacies which Monbiot anticipates 
could be fabricated using studge as a raw 
material, it is not hard to imagine the new diet 
being accepted by inhabitants of the vertical 
metropolitan sprawl that already thrives in 
countries such as China and South Korea.7

But what of the two billion peasants worldwide 
who currently make their living from farming? Are 
they to be dispossessed of their lands and herded 
into high-rise buildings to peer at the natural 
world through a computer screen, and occasionally 
troop down to the gymnasium for exercise, while 
their former fields are invaded by scrub? With 
everybody eating the same substance, will the 
demise of agriculture herald the final 
convergence of tribal, regional and national 
cultures into one banal global monoculture? This 
is a scenario that captains of industry, whether 
of capitalist or Sino-communist persuasion, aided 
and abetted by their techno-vegan 
eco-consultants, will no doubt be happy to accelerate.
An Agricultural Revolution

There is, however, an alternative application for 
the studge, which is to feed it to animals. That 
after all is what the soya protein that it is 
destined to replace is used for – and it is what 
scientists originally thought their studge would be used for.

If it ends up fed to pigs and chickens in factory 
farms on the periphery of megacities, that would 
be a disaster both for the incarcerated animals 
and for peasant farmers unable to compete with 
this scale of industrial production. It would 
result in vast surpluses of nitrogenous 
phosphate-rich slurry concentrated in places where they served no purpose.

On the other hand if – and it is a big “if” – 
factory farms fell out of favour, and instead the 
studge were distributed to smallholders and 
family farms scattered across the land mass, it 
could provide a boost to organic agriculture, 
especially in less developed countries.

As Monbiot points out, countries in the global 
south are blessed with ample amounts of solar 
energy with which to manufacture the stuff. If it 
were made available cheaply to peasant farmers, 
then they might choose to eat it if times were 
hard; but otherwise they would probably find it 
more advantageous to feed it to their livestock 
and sell the resulting milk and meat to 
town-dwellers who were bored with eating studge.

The result would be an increase in the volume of 
manure available to farmers, and a corresponding 
improvement in the fertility, health and yield of 
their soils. In the clover-fuelled agricultural 
revolution of early modern times, European crop 
yields rose spectacularly through the expedient 
of being able to keep more livestock, a double bonus.

A hydrogen-fuelled agricultural revolution could 
do the same for farmers in the tropics. It would 
render the chemical fertilisers of the 
fossil-fuelled Green Revolution redundant, 
replacing them with manure that would increase 
soil organic matter and carbon, and improve 
moisture retention. Increases in yields could 
help to stem further incursions into tropical forest and savannah.
Priorities

Is this a science fiction fantasy? Perhaps, but 
no more so than Monbiot’s farm-free dystopia. 
However much one may disagree with his 
conclusions, one may thank him for raising 
important questions and intriguing possibilities 
in a highly readable book. Perhaps he is making 
extreme proposals simply in order to shift the 
boundaries of the debate, and hence the 
perception of what is mainstream, a tactic known as the radical flank effect.

The main worry is his repeated characterisation 
of farming as “the most destructive human 
activity ever to have blighted the earth”. 
Agriculture has a lot to answer for; but does it 
really bear comparison with the threat to life on 
Earth as we know it from the oil and coal industry?

Farming and livestock husbandry have been with us 
for around 12,000 years. The curves that describe 
human population growth, global atmospheric CO2 
levels and the extraction of fossil fuels all 
share the same exponential rise over the last 
century, and that is no coincidence. The 
imperative is not to stop farming, but to phase 
out fossil fuels very quickly. Cavalier polemics 
that cast primary responsibility for our 
predicament elsewhere are a dangerous diversion.



The Great Reshaft: Prince Charles Klaus Schwab's Great Reset

Problem Reaction Solution
Royal seal of approval for return to Davos: 
Prince Charles unveils theme of 2021 event named 'The Great Reset'
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-8385161/Prince-Charles-unveils-theme-Davos-2021-event-Great-Reset.html

Royal seal of approval for return to Davos: 
Prince Charles unveils theme of 2021 event named 'The Great Reset'
By LUCY WHITE FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 21:51, 3 June 2020 | UPDATED: 22:36, 3 June 2020

The meeting of the world's self-styled elite in 
the Swiss town of Davos will go ahead next January despite the pandemic.

Prince Charles, a long-time supporter of 
organiser the World Economic Forum (WEF), 
yesterday unveiled the lofty theme of the summit – 'The Great Reset'.

However, Standard Life Aberdeen, which usually 
spends around £3million on sending executives to 
Davos each year, and hosts a cafe renowned among 
delegates for its malt whisky – has ruled out attending.

Prince Charles, a long-time supporter of 
organiser the World Economic Forum, yesterday 
unveiled the lofty theme of the 2021 Davos summit – 'The Great Reset'

Chief executive, Keith Skeoch, told the Mail in 
April that it was 'divisive' at a time when the 
world was being ravaged by the coronavirus, and 
that the money could be better-spent.

Founder Klaus Schwab said 'a great reset' was 
needed, and insisted the meeting could 'build a 
new social contract that honours the dignity of every human being'.

He added: 'The global health crisis has laid bare 
the unsustainability of our old system in terms 
of social cohesion, the lack of equal 
opportunities and inclusiveness. Nor can we turn 
our backs on the evils of racism and discrimination.'

Davos has gained a reputation for missing some of 
the most important issues of the day.

The 2021 Davos summit will be held both in-person 
and online, and will focus on reducing humans' 
impact on the planet and how to move past the pandemic +2
The 2021 Davos summit will be held both in-person 
and online, and will focus on reducing humans' 
impact on the planet and how to move past the pandemic

This year's summit at the end of January, when 
coronavirus was beginning to spread, saw very 
little time dedicated to discussing the possible ramifications.

Teenage environmental activist Greta Thunberg was 
the star guest. In February, as the world began 
to pay more attention to virus, JP Morgan boss 
Jamie Dimon joked it may have spread the virus.

He said: 'The only good news from that is that it 
might just have killed the elite.'

The 2021 summit will be held both in-person and 
online, and will focus on reducing humans' impact 
on the planet and how to move past the pandemic.
NB please reply with any unsubscribe request in 
the email body, leaving the subject line intact, 
if you do not wish to recieve further emails - thanks
https://www.youtube.com/user/PublicEnquiry/videos

"And I think, in the end, that is the best 
definition of journalism I have heard; to 
challenge authority - all authority - especially 
so when governments and politicians take us to 
war, when they have decided that they will kill 
and others will die. " --Robert Fisk
'Capitalism is institutionalised bribery' TG

Download, donation only, Tony's three watermarked 
books http://www.bilderberg.org - My books https://payhip.com/TonyGosling
Or buy Tony's three ebooks for £10-£15 here 
https://payhip.com/TonyGosling or paperback here 
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/254963338161

'From South America, where payment must be made 
with subtlety, the Bormann organization has made 
a substantial contribution. It has drawn many of 
the brightest Jewish businessmen into a 
participatory role in the development of many of 
its corporations, and many of these Jews share 
their prosperity most generously with Israel. If 
their proposals are sound, they are even provided 
with a specially dispensed venture capital fund. 
I spoke with one Jewish businessmen in Hartford, 
Connecticut. He had arrived there quite unknown 
several years before our conversation, but with 
Bormann money as his leverage. Today he is more 
than a millionaire, a quiet leader in the 
community with a certain share of his profits 
earmarked as always for his venture capital 
benefactors. This has taken place in many other 
instances across America and demonstrates how 
Bormann’s people operate in the contemporary 
commercial world, in contrast to the fanciful 
nonsense with which Nazis are described in so much “literature.”

So much emphasis is placed on select Jewish 
participation in Bormann companies that when 
Adolf Eichmann was seized and taken to Tel Aviv 
to stand trial, it produced a shock wave in the 
Jewish and German communities of Buenos Aires. 
Jewish leaders informed the Israeli authorities 
in no uncertain terms that this must never happen 
again because a repetition would permanently 
rupture relations with the Germans of Latin 
America, as well as with the Bormann 
organization, and cut off the flow of Jewish 
money to Israel. It never happened again, and the 
pursuit of Bormann quieted down at the request of 
these Jewish leaders. He is residing in an 
Argentinian safe haven, protected by the most 
efficient German infrastructure in history as 
well as by all those whose prosperity depends on his well-being.'
<http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fspitfirelist.com%2Fbooks%2Fmartin-bormann-nazi-in-exile%2F&h=eAQErj17O>http<http://l.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fspitfirelist.com%2Fbooks%2Fmartin-bormann-nazi-in-exile%2F&h=eAQErj17O>://spitfirelist.com/books/martin-bormann-nazi-in-exile/ 


http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://www.thisweek.org.uk
http://www.911forum.org.uk
http://www.bilderberg.org
http://www.tlio.org.uk
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvPbHiqhLtpNWA_cg_1NULw
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMn9GM4atN3t7AHJBbHMR0Q
https://www.twitter.com/TonyGosling
https://www.facebook.com/tony.gosling.16

You can donate to support Tony's work here http://www.bilderberg.org/bcfm.htm
TG mobile +44 7786 952037  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.gn.apc.org/pipermail/diggers350/attachments/20230107/20bd53cc/attachment-0001.html>