The UK Biodiversity Partnership has published its approach to biodiversity conservation. The UK will take an Ecosystem Approach and put sustained effort into the following six priorities:

• protecting the best sites for wildlife;
• targeting action on priority species and habitats;
• embedding proper consideration of biodiversity and ecosystem services in all relevant sectors of policy and decision-making;
• engaging people, and encouraging behaviour change;
• developing and interpreting the evidence base;
• ensuring that the UK plays a proactive role in influencing the development of Multilateral Environmental Agreements, and contributes fully to their domestic delivery

The Environmental Research Funders‘ Forum has published a Strategic Analysis of UK Environmental Monitoring Activity. It found that the UK monitoring community is large and fragmented. Monitoring is undertaken for a variety of reasons with the most common being long-term research and informing policy development. About a third of the activities are meeting or contributing to statutory requirements. There appears to be a lack of baseline data and data on long-term trends in specific topic areas including climate change impacts. The cost of monitoring covered by the review has been very conservatively estimated at upwards of £88 million and could be up to £500m. The lack of secure funding was identified as the major risk to long-term datasets. Other risks include organisational and staffing changes and the reliance on the volunteer continuity who collect approximately one third of the terrestrial datasets. The principle recommendation of the review is that a clear vision, strategy and framework for long-term environmental monitoring are required.

The BES Ecological Engagement Award is an annual award to recognise an exceptional contribution to facilitating the use and understanding of ecology. The Award is an honorarium of £1,000 plus a certificate. The award is given annually at the BES Annual Meeting. This year’s winner was Dr Tim Sparks for his contribution to the UK Phenology Network. Who should get the award in 2008? Please send your nominations by the 1st December 2007.

Defra has published a Command Paper entitled ‘Taking Forward the UK Climate Change Bill.’ The Paper is a response to the Consultation and Parliamentary inquiries into its Draft Climate Change Bill. The Paper makes a number of changes to the Climate Change Bill, including:

• Asking the Committee on Climate Change to report on whether the Government’s target to reduce CO2 emissions by at least 60 percent by 2050 should be strengthened further;
• Asking the Committee to look at the implications of including other greenhouse gases;
• Strengthening the role and responsibilities of the Committee on Climate Change, including by requiring the Government to seek the Committee’s advice before amending the 2020 or 2050 targets in the Bill;
• Strengthening the Committee’s independence from Government, by confirming that it will appoint its own chief executive and staff, and increasing its analytical resources;
• Increased transparency, by requiring the Committee to publish its analysis and advice to Government on setting five-yearly carbon budgets, which are designed to provide clarity on the UK’s route towards its reduction targets;
• Strengthening Parliament’s ability to hold Government to account, by requiring the Government to explain its reasons to Parliament if it does not accept the Committee’s advice on the level of the carbon budget, or if it does not meet a budget or target;
• Strengthening the country’s preparedness for climate change by requiring the Government regularly to assess the risks of climate change to the UK, and to report to Parliament on its proposals and policies for sustainable adaptation to climate change.

Defra published the summary of responses to A Sea Change – a Marine Bill White Paper. Defra received a total of 8519 responses, 8085 “campaign” responses and 434 “non-campaign” responses. 82% of the responses were supportive of the Marine Bill. A number of the responses emphasised the importance of the Bill being included in the Queen’s speech and that their support was dependant on the implementation of all the proposals.

Natural England has published its draft science strategy ”integrated science to support integrated solutions” and action plan for consultation. To deliver an efficient and effective service the Science and Evidence Team will encourage integration in a number of ways:

• the science programme must deliver a service to all parts of the business supply chain, from strategy to delivery, and will be driven by this imperative;
• the science function will be visible and seen as part of the work of the whole organisation;
• the science team will assess the adequacy of existing information before proposing new research;
• science projects will always consider the need for interdisciplinary science;
• the science function will explicitly integrate with that of our key partners;
• the science team will be engaged with the wider science community.

Today at 3.00 pm the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee is taking evidence on “Badgers and cattle TB,” which can be watched live on the internet. The Committee will first take evidence from former members of the Independent Science Group who oversaw the Randomised Badger Culling Trial. The BES has published research from members of the group in its journals. The ISG final report recommended against a badger cull to control the incidence of bovine TB (bTB). The Committee will then take evidence from the Government’s Chief Science Adviser, Sir David King. Sir David has questioned the findings of the ISG and recommend that a badger cull would help to control the incidence of bTB in cattle.

Sir David King, the Government Chief Science Adviser, has published a report on bovine TB in Cattle and Badgers. His conclusion that badger culling is an effective strategy for controlling bTB differed from the Independent Science Groups. Sir David’s assessment is that:

• Badgers are a clear source of infection for cattle. Reducing the density of badgers in those areas of England where there is a significant level of TB in cattle reduces the incidence of TB in cattle in the same area;
• Removal of badgers is the best option available at the moment to reduce the reservoir of infection in wildlife. But in the longer term, alternative or additional means of controlling TB in badgers, such as vaccination, may become available. Research into these should continue;
• Removal of badgers should only take place in those areas of the country where there is a high and persistent incidence of TB in cattle. The minimum overall area within which badger removal should take place is 100 km2, although increasing the area would increase the overall benefit. Badger removal programmes should be sustained (unless replaced or supplemented by alternative means of control);
• There is some evidence of an adverse effect on the incidence of cattle TB in the area 0.5 – 1.0 km outside the removal area. This may or may not be totally related to the removal programme, and there should be monitoring outside the removal area to detect any such effect. Measures should be taken to limit the risk of such an effect;
• After four years, the badger removal programme should be reviewed.

The BBC Radio 4 programme The Science behind the Thrown examines the role of scientific advisers in government. The programme looks at the history of science policy in the UK and how it has changed since post-war period.

The European Environment Agency (EEA) has produced a report aimed at policymakers to help combat the the loss of biodiversity in Europe and reach the 2010 biodiversity loss target. The EEA proposes 26 biodiversity indicators, known as Streamlining European 2010 Biodiversity Indicators (SEBI 2010) and individual indicator methodology. The EEA has been collaborating with other institutions and organisations since 2005 to establish SEBI 2010.