Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Conservation Director of the RSPB Dr Mark Avery, described the troubling plight of the House Sparrow Passer domesticus.

According to a recent study in the journal Animal Conservation by scientists from the RSPB, Natural England and De Montford University, house sparrows have declined by up to 68% of their 1970 population.

Commenting on the BBC website, Dr Peach of the RSPB, said:

“The trend towards paving of front gardens and laying decking in the back, and the popularity of ornamental plants from other parts of the world, has made many gardens no-go areas for once common British birds.”

It has been proposed that an absence of aphids and other insects during summer – crucial for feeding chicks – may have a strong role to play.

Moreover, these insects inhabit vegetation frequently associated with a healthy front garden; honeysuckle wild roses and hawthorn. The current fashion of paving over front gardens in cities, particularly in large cities like London, is no doubt linked to their demise and should be cause for a serious re-think amongst policy-makers.

When questioned, Leader of North Herts District Council, Councillor John Smith, was reluctant to concede that the loss of brownfield sites could be a potential contributory factor, believing it to be a local phenomenon.

Environment Minister Micheal Meacher was “very worried, [given that] we may have lost nearly 15 million birds in the last thirty years.” In the case of starlings, the Rt. Hon Meacher cited, that the loss of first year juveniles was known to be a contributory factor to their decline, possibly linked to diminishing autumn food supplies because of heavy pesticide use in intensive agriculture. A body of research highlights intensive agriculture as the cause of declines in farmland birds, and perhaps the combination of uber-urbanisation of town gardens is creating a ‘double whammy’ for the house sparrows.

Dr Avery and colleagues hopes to follow-up this report up with more detailed research in the near future, pending sufficient funding.

Hear the report on Radio4 here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/reports/archive/science_nature/sparrows.shtml

Yesterday saw the launch of the initial results of the 2007 Countryside Survey, with a series of presentations and workshops in London. Opening the event, Hilary Benn, Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, praised the dedication of the ecologists and others behind the work and commented on the ‘fundamental’ importance of the report to Government. He also used the occasion as an opportunity to launch a new fund of over £1 million to improve the recording of wildlife in England. This money will be available from 2009 and will be channelled through the biological recording centres.

The results released yesterday signal just the start of the reporting period of the Survey, with further reports to be released in 2009 (reports for Wales, Scotland and England; raw data from the 500 study sites examined in the survey; land cover map; detailed analysis of soils and freshwater). 2010 will see the publication of an integrated assessment, bringing all these parameters together and examining the ecological impacts of different pressures on ecosystem services.

Some headline results from the Survey, in addition to those highlighted in yesterday’s Blog post, include:

- Species richness in all random plots examined by the survey has declined since 1978.
- There has been a decline too in the species richness of areas adjacent to linear features, such as hedges, streams and roads, which provide refuges for species which cannot survive in intensively managed land.
- Areas targeted by the survey for their particular botanical interest have seen a worrying decline in species over the same period.
- There has been a 6% decrease in the total length of managed hedgerows since 1998. There has been a corresponding increase in the length of lines of trees and relict hedges, indicating a lack of hedge management.
- The number of ponds in Great Britain increased by 11% between 1998 and 2007, but over 80% of ponds in England and Wales were found to be in poor condition. Questions should be asked about the quality of the habitats provided by the new ponds.

Visit the website of the Countryside Survey at http://www.countrysidesurvey.org.uk/

The results of the 2007 Countryside Survey have been released this morning, with the report published electronically on the Survey website. The report will be launched formally later today with a series of presentations and discussions, begun with a keynote speech by the Secretary of State for the environment, Hilary Benn.

In commenting on the results of the survey to the Times, Dr Peter Carey, the report’s lead author and a member of both the BES Council and Public and Policy Committee, said that; “The overriding message from the 2007 results is that previous intensive management of the countryside has relaxed over the past 30 years and particularly during the nine years since the last survey.”

A shift by farmers to less intensive management of their land, through set-aside schemes and the conversion of arable fields to grassland, has led to an increase in the abundance of brambles, nettles and hawthorn. This is good news for some bird and mammal species but less beneficial to low-lying plants which are crowded out by these weeds.

From 1998- 2007, the number of species of arable plant found on agricultural land increased by 30%, indicating farmers’ increased tolerance for weeds on their land. Conservationists are concerned that the recent decision by the EU to scrap the set-aside scheme could remove the incentive for farmers to encourage the growth of such species.

The BES Science Policy Team will attend the launch of the Survey results and will post further information about this on the Blog in due course.

The stereotypical image of the hard-working bumblebee has been shattered by new research published in the journal Behavioural Ecology and Social Biology.

Scientists from Queen Mary University London have found that bumblebees Bombus terrestris will only work if they absolutely have to – an evolved strategy to conserve energy in times of plenty.

Bees are known to respond to cues describing how full their food reserves are; successful foragers will reduce the number of runs to and from a nectar source, and fewer bees will engage in foraging trips. Molet and Raine, the lead authors of this study, investigated whether bees will respond to a third cue, that of recruitment pheromones.

To investigate this idea, the team attached minute radio transmitters (Radio Frequency Identification or RFIDs) to the bees, to determine the frequency of visits to pollen sites within the study area. The researchers created a concoction of chemicals that closely resembled bumblebees’ natural cue pheromone, and also used a single chemical cue, to examine recruitment response. The bouts were recorded in 30 minute intervals, and during each interval the researchers monitored how ‘full’ the honeypots were.

Although pheromones increased the number of foraging bouts and new recruits, the bees were far less likely to respond when food reserves were well stocked, effectively ignoring the invitation to forage for nectar.

Dr Raine described how the chemical cue given off by single foragers to collect more food was not always heeded:

“If there isn’t stuff to collect, a lot of them are pretty much on standby. They will be sitting around doing very little, or apparently so.”

In summary, the research shows that bees use a suite of complex cues, (recruitment pheromone, frequency of visits by other foraging bees, and food reserve fullness) to decide whether or not to bother going out and foraging for food. This is the first time bumblebees’ response to pheromones has been shown to be tempered by another cue, in this case – colony nutrition status.

The research has potential implications for commercial crop pollination. A healthy, well fed colony may be more reluctant to go out looking or food – and thus pollinating – if the incentive isn’t there. In the study the bumblebees were up to four times more responsive to the natural, 3-chemical pheromone mix than the single eucalyptus cue, therefore using the right chemical make-up when enticing bees is essential to motivating them.

However the bees reputation has not been completely tarnished. Dr Raine said that its not that the bumblebees are lazy, they have simply evolved an effective strategy to conserve energy when food is plentiful, and they are busy when there is work to be done.

Reference: Molet, M., Chittka, L., Stelzer, R.J., Streit, S., & Raine, N.E., 2008, Colony nutritional status modulates worker responses to foraging recruitment pheromone in the bumblebee Bombus terrestris, Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology, 62:1919–1926, DOI 10.1007/s00265-008-0623-3

The BES blog has recently been listed in the top fifty ‘green technology’ blogs, in a poll on a fellow green blog. The listing follows the continued rise in readership of the BES blog, having been recognised earlier in the year in The Times Top 10 eco-blogs.

The science policy team continues to try and inform readers of topical events and symposiums, upcoming enquiries, ecological issues of policy-relevance and topics of general interest to ecologists.

The science policy team would like to thank the readers for their continued support and recognising our efforts to promote the science of ecology.

The Stern report provided the economic case for global action to tackle climate change, but as with many evidence-issues linked to climate change, it wasn’t without criticism.

The bar has been raised again for critics of climate change, with the release of a new report by Dietz and Stern (2008) calling for even more urgent action to mitigate the effects of climate change. The report makes the case for the ethical implications of inaction too, and calls for a far-reaching global political agreement on green house gas targets.

Like the previous report, the new report emphasises how the cost of mitigating climate change is far less than having to cope with the effects. The authors predict temperatures could rise by up to five degrees centigrade if a ‘business as usual’ approach is taken. This could have extreme consequences such as the loss of the thermohaline circulation and the total collapse of the ice sheets.

In addition to the ethical case concerning the negative impacts on the developing world as a result of inaction by the developed world, it is unethical leaving future generations to cover the costs imposed by the present generation, say the authors.

450-550ppm CO2e (a measure that encompasses the effect of all known GHGs) is the recommended upper limit of greenhouse gas emissions the world should allow, the review says.
550ppm is the point at which the world could warm to four degrees centigrade, well worth avoiding since agricultural output would be severely affected, and major cities and international ports could become inundated.

So far, the USA under Republican leadership has been extremely reluctant to commit to binding GHG agreements. If the president elect, Barack Obama commits to pledges made to tackle climate change in the run-up to the US election, it might be easier to get the rest of the world on board. This may well require a bi-lateral agreement between the US and China, the world’s second biggest polluter, so that neither country is at an economic disadvantage as a result of measures taken to tackle climate change. Greater investment in low-emission technology can boost a nation’s economy whilst tackling climate change at the same time. However scientists must continue to make the case for mitigating climate change, in order to affect the necessary change at the policy level.

See the European Commission website for further details

To access the IPCC Fourth Assessment report – Climate Change 2007 www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg2.htm

Reference: Dietz, S. and Stern, N. (2008). Why Economic Analysis Supports Strong Action on Climate Change: A Response to the Stern Review’s Critics. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. Doi:10.1093/reep/ren001.

The biggest ever exhibition on the life and work of Charles Darwin has today opened at the Natural History Museum in London.

Highlights of the exhibition, which is on until 19 April 2009, include rare specimens of Galapagos mockingbirds, never before displayed, which were instrumental in the development of Darwin’s thinking on the theory of evolution whilst on the HMS Beagle. Other exhibits include live specimens and a recreation of Darwin’s study at Down House in Kent.

2009 marks the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of ‘On the Origin of Species’, and this is the first of a number of events which will run over the course of the next year marking these important milestones. Find out more about these at the ‘Darwin 200′ website.

Pavan Sukhdev, leader of the TEEB review (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity), yesterday delivered the 9th annual Darwin Initiative Lecture in London.

The central theme of Mr Sukhdev’s presentation was the need for a ‘new economics’ to take into account measures of human progress traditionally excluded from nations’ GDP figures. He gave the example of India, with newspaper headlines currently proclaiming 9% GDP growth, despite the global economic downturn. Mr Sukhdev challenged this figure: did this equate to a 9% increase in the quality of healthcare delivered for the population, for example? A quote from a leading economist, taken in 1968, stressed that “GDP is unfit for purpose”; Mr Sukhdev argued that nothing had changed in this respect.

The example of Yasuni National Park, Ecuador, ilustrated the possibilities offered by removing ‘public goods’ from the public domain and so avoiding the so-called ‘Tragedy of the Commons’. Ecuador has pledged not to exploit the 20% of its proven oil field found within the national park, calculating a £1.6 billion opportunity cost for not doing so, and pricing the carbon it will have ‘locked in’ the oil field at £1.7 billion, based on the market rate for carbon. Ecuador is currently seeking investors under this REDD (Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation) initiative. The investment will allow the country to spend on renewable technologies, shifting away from oil dependence, and be channelled into communities for an improvement in the population’s quality of life.

Breakout groups followed the lecture, considering the next stages of the TEEB review. It was clear from discussion that, in order to mainstream valuation of ecosystem services and ‘natural capital’ into decision making, the results of the review must be considered not just by countries’ environment ministries but by their treasuries, and by the World Bank. Over the next few months the TEEB team will be seeking input into their review, in the form of evidence, and further suggestions for influencing policy-makers.

For more information see: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/economics/

The Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Select Committee has announced a new inquiry into ‘Putting Science and Engineering at the Heart of Government Policy’. The Committee is seeking evidence on, amongst other things:

• whether there should be a Department for Science
• strengths and weaknesses of how Government currently formulates science policy
• whether the views of the science and engineering community are, or should be, central to the formulation of government policy
• engaging the public and increasing public confidence in science and engineering policy
• the role of GO-Science, DIUS and other Government departments, charities, learned societies, Regional Development Agencies, industry and other stakeholders in determining UK science and engineering policy
• how government science and engineering policy should be scrutinised.

The BES is planning to respond to this consultation, by the deadline of Monday 12 January. If you would like to contribute to this response, e-mail Policy@BritishEcologicalSociety.org, by, at the latest, Friday 12 December.

Yesterday evening the Royal Society played host to the Institute of Environmental Sciences’ Burntwood Lecture, presented by former Friends of the Earth Director and Special Adviser to the Prince of Wales’ Rainforest Project: Tony Juniper.

All the major environmental issues of the last fifty years or so were mentioned: the effects of DDT accumulation in raptors; sulphur and nitrogen deposition creating acid rain, impacting on people, forests and livestock; CFC particulates causing ozone depletion; and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting in global climate change.

Tony emphasised the critical role that science played in firstly, the identification of these issues as serious problems for the environment and society, but also in making the case for effective policy change.

Policy change came in the form of the Montreal Protocol in order to end CFC use in domestic products and allow stratospheric ozone layer to recover. None of these issues have been ’solved’ completely – although DDT was eventually banned in Britain and Europe, it is still used widely in malaria hotspots across Africa to reduce mosquito abundance and disease incidence. However effective steps have been taken around the world to reduce the relative impacts of these pollutants.

The emphasis of the talk was on the biggest challenge the world faces currently: climate change. With the previous environmental problems, the compounds requiring bans had effective alternatives (i.e. less harmful pesticides) or were an unimportant by-product of an important process, (e.g. CFCs from refrigerator coolants and nitrogen and sulphuric oxides from power stations). Unlike the aforementioned issues, tackling climate change requires massively reducing the output of GHGs; gases inextricably linked to the everyday lives of everyone on the planet in terms of food, transport and energy.

In summary, Tony’s talk covered well-trodden ground and seemed to lack any refreshing or challenging ideas. The message that the scientist’s role, is and will continue to be instrumental in tackling climate change and emerging threats, is an important one. It is imperative however that innovative ways continue to be sought to engage government, policy-makers and justify the case for change to the wider public.

Check out the Royal Society website here, and the Institute of Environment Sciences website here