The Scottish Government this morning launched a Marine Bill for Scotland’s seas, setting out measures to restrict damaging activities in the interests of marine conservation and preserving ecosystem services in Scotland’s inshore waters.

The measures, which conservationists view as more stringent than those set out in the UK Marine Bill, currently progressing through the House of Lords, include potential restrictions on fishing, salmon farming, dregding and the development of oil pipelines up to 12 nautical miles from Scotland’s costs. This area accounts for 60% of the UK’s inshore waters, and includes rich fishing grounds.

Launching the Bill, the Scottish Environment Secretary, Richard Lochead, said: “Scotland holds a quarter of Europe’s total tidal and offshore wind resource and 10 per cent of its potential in wave power. Our seas generate more than £2.2 billion for the Scottish economy. We have huge potential to increase economic growth from our seas but need to do so in a sustainable way.” A network of Marine Protected Areas will be created in Scotland’s seas.

Under the proposals, damaging activities would be permitted within Marine Protected Areas only if two or more MPAs consist of identical habitats. This differs from the UK legislation, which focuses on finding a balance between nature conservation and socioeconomic concerns within Marine Conservation Zones. This difference raises the prospect of clashes between the Scottish and UK Governments over the legislation and over enforcement.

See the full press release on the Scottish Government website

The inaugural meeting of the Natural Capital Initiative began in London yesterday with influential speakers setting out their vision for a truly holistic ecosystem approach to managing our natural resources. Speakers including the Rt Hon Eliot Morley MP, Lord May of Oxford and Professor John Beddington, Government Chief Scientific Advisor, took to the stage to urge policy-makers, natural and social scientists to work far more closely together to tackle climate change and biodiversity loss.

Over the course of yesterday’s key note speeches and today’s targeted workshops several themes have emerged. The need for greater inter and multi-disciplinary working has been picked up strongly by speakers and participants, as has the need for greater communication with the public over the concept of ecosystem services. Empowering and enabling communities to take action to secure the services they want from their environment has been a key message, possibly involving innovative new models of taxation. Another theme has been the need for far greater evidence regarding the role of biodiversity in providing ecosystem services, and the need to understand which ecosystem services are being provided in particular areas: something it is hoped that the forthcoming National Ecosystem Assessment can deliver.

Presentations yesterday from Tesco and Eurostar highlighted that the private sector is taking action towards improving its impact on the environment, with Tesco leading pilot trials at two supermarkets to reduce consumer packaging and a firm commitment to reducing carbon emissions across its stores. Business responds of course to consumer demand, but Richard Brown, CEO of Eurostar, stressed that business should also be leading the way and not waiting for legislation to force companies to take action.

Following expertly facilitated workshops today focusing on ecosystem services in relation to rural land use and urban planning, a final session tomorrow (Friday) will examine the challenges posed by the need to integrate the demand for food, recreation and energy in the marine environment, looking specifically at offshore wind energy generation.

The Natural Capital Initiative is a partnership between the Institute of Biology, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology and the British Ecological Society. Together we aim to better link sectors with a stake in the environment and policy-makers, to tackle the gaps in research and implementation with respect to an ecosystem approach, and find solutions. You can find out more about this week’s symposium, and future events we have planned, at www.naturalcapitalinitiative.org.uk.

Mentions by other bloggers: http://itsvivid.wordpress.com/2009/05/07/telling-it-like-it-is-news-from-the-dead-centre-3/

A panel of experts, led by Professor William Sutherland at the University of Cambridge, has formulated a list of the top 100 questions which, if answered, could help to conserve global biodiversity.

Published online in the journal, Conservation Biology, the questions are designed to address the gaps which can emerge between the topics studied by academics and the areas which conservationists need studied in order to make a real difference on the ground to species conservation. By examining the list of questions, academics can make sure that they are addressing the questions which really need to be answered.

761 conservationists and 12 academics generated a list of 2291 questions initially, with a more selective shortlist then generated through email voting. Over the course of a two day meeting in Cambridge, a select group of 44 met to decide on the final list of 100.

Questions include: “are there critical thresholds at which loss of biodiversity disrupts ecosystem functions and services?” and “how effective are different methods for assessing ecosystem services?”
The full paper, including all questions, can be accessed at Conservation Biology

The Natural Environment Research Council and Defra will jointly fund an £11m study to examine the effect of ocean acidification on marine ecosystems, it has been announced. The focus of the study will be the Atlantic, Antarctic and Arctic oceans. The likely impacts of ocean acidification; resulting in loss of coral reefs due to the breakdown of the shells of calciferous organisms such as coral polyps, on humans and the economy will also be studied.

Ocean acidification has increased by 30% since the industrial revolution, resulting in a pH decrease of 0.1 units since pre-industrial times. The Independent Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that pH will fall further, by between 0.14 – 0.35 units, over the course of the 21st Century.

See full story at BBC News Website

Recent research has shown that the decline in yellow wagtail (Motacilla flava flavissima) populations may be partly attributed to reduced soil penetrability.

Yellow wagtail populations declined by 65% between 1972 and 2006, resulting in the species being placed on the red list of birds of conservation concern in the UK. Research was conducted examining the relationship between the distribution of these birds and a variety of habitat features across 14 intensively cultivated farms in the UK.

The results found that yellow wagtail numbers were most strongly linked to the penetrability of the soil in fields planted with crops. Fields with more penetrable soils supported a greater number of nesting colonies of the birds.

Interestingly, yellow wagtails themselves do not feed by probing the ground for food, instead catching food in flight or picking insects off the surface. However, it is thought that hard soil may reduce the food source of the yellow wagtail’s prey, and therefore have a knock-on effect on yellow wagtail populations.

Another possible reason for the correlation is that yellow wagtails construct their nests by scraping a hollow out of the ground, a practice which could be more difficult in less penetrable soils. Compacted soils may also have worse drainage qualities, decreasing offspring survival rates.

Modern, intensive-farming practices are largely responsible for this degradation of soil quality, with heavy machinery in particular compacting soils and reducing their penetrability. The researchers recommend that soils be protected from further degradation. Key measures include reducing the intensive use of heavy machinery, autumn sowing and irrigation, all of which would lead to benefits for both biodiversity and agriculture. Further research on the relationship between soil permeability and other farmland bird populations is also required.

The European Commission today launched its next attempt to reform the much-maligned Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The last round of reform was only completed in 2002, but as the EU itself acknowledges in today’s Green Paper, many of Europe’s fish stocks remain in a parlous state- 88% of stocks are over-fished (against a global average of 25%) and 30% are ‘outside safe biological limits’, i.e. they cannot reproduce at normal rate because the parenting population is too depleted.

The Commission’s analysis places the blame for over-fishing firmly on the problem of fleet overcapacity, arguing that ‘a number of fishing fleets are two-three times the size needed to catch the available fish’. Fleet capacity across the EU has been falling at an annual rate of around 2-3%, but any capacity reductions have been lost due to the fact that technological improvements make fishing boats 2-3% more efficient every year.

The Commission is also frank in its recognition of the political pressure which sees its scientifically-derived quota proposals overruled by EU Environment Ministers every year.

The scale of the problem is now such that the Commission has decided to bring forward the reform process. It is only legally bound to review some parts of the CFP by 2012, but in the face of falling stock numbers and chronic overcapacity, it feels compelled to launch the full reform process now.

The green paper therefore also includes various proposals on how to achieve sustainable European fisheries. Most notable is the proposal to increase the use of transferable quotas. This system, used with some success abroad, would see fishermen ‘own’ the right to fish for a number of years, thereby encouraging them to fish in a more sustainable manner to protect their own long-term economic interests.

The Commission is now actively seeking views and submissions on its reform proposals. The consultation documents can be viewed here. Submissions will be accepted until 31 December 2009.

British ecological controversy has suddenly found itself in the media glare, as wildlife charities publicly dispute the role of magpies in limiting songbird populations.

The Songbird Survival Trust has urged people to trap and kill magpies over the next three months in order to conserve populations of song thrushes, blackbirds and house sparrows. They blame the birds for contributing to recent population declines by raiding nests and eating eggs and young. Nick Forde, a trustee of the SST, said “I don’t like the idea of harming animals but if they are destroying our biodiversity, then we have to take action. Unless the population of some predators is controlled, there is little, if any, hope that the small bird populations can recover.”

The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 specifically provides for the culling of magpies, as long as it is done humanely and for a specific purpose, such as bird conservation.

However, groups including the RSPB have spoken out against the cull. A spokesman said: “We do not think that trapping and killing of magpies is justified in most situations. In certain circumstances on reserves to protect ground-nesting birds such as lapwings it may be necessary to reduce magpie numbers. But we do not think there is any case for people to do it in their own gardens and it will make absolutely no difference to arrest the decline of songbirds throughout the country.”

Chris Packham, the naturalist and TV presenter, responded even more forcefully in the Guardian, accusing the Trust of “kneejerk ornithological racism” and “outdated views built on a foundation of medieval superstition”.

Whilst acknowledging the role magpies play as predators, opponents of the cull point instead to the intensification of farming practices, pollution and habitat loss as the main reasons for declining songbird populations. They argue that the limited research that has been done does not single out magpies as the cause, and that anecdotal observational evidence may be overly influencing opinions.

To read more, visit the Times.

The University of Oxford is holding an International Climate Conference together with the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and the UK Met Office entitled “4 Degrees and Beyond: Implications for people, ecosystems and the earth system,” from 28-30 September 2009.

The conference aims to (1) assess the consequences of a change in global temperature above 4°C for a range of systems and sectors and (2) explore the options that are open for avoiding climate changes of this magnitude. The results will form an important background to the COP 15 United Nations Climate Change Conference, in Copenhagen, December 2009, and the inevitable negotiations that will follow COP 15.

The conference is open to anyone with expertise to share, and aims to bring together the best range of experts with the widest expertise from around the world. Registration is open now and abstracts for presentations and posters can be submitted under the themes of: i) Agriculture, Water and Food Security ii) Vulnerable People and Places iii) Ecosystems and Ecosystem Services iv) Earth System Feedbacks and Thresholds, and v) Emissions Reductions. Places are limited and the closing date for abstract submission is 1 May.

Further information at www.eci.ox.ac.uk/4degrees

British Waterways has today launched its sixth annual wildlife survey, encouraging members of the public to visit canals, rivers and streams and record the wildlife found there.

This year’s survey will focus particularly on the bumblebee and is supported by the Bumblebee Conservation Trust. The survey also has the support of the British Dragonfly Society.

British Waterways plan to use the data from the survey to inform its management of the 2,200 miles of waterway it maintains, along with associated banks and verges.

Visit Waterscape.com for more information and to download a sheet to record your sightings.

New research published in Science Communication proposes that significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions can only be achieved through understanding the emotional aspects of the public’s responses to climate change. Simply providing the public with information, and hoping this will cause them to drive or fly less, for example, is not enough.

Whilst three-quarters of the UK’s population recognise that changing their travel habits, flying or driving less, will have a medium or major impact on carbon emissions, only one third are willing to make these changes, possibly due to a feeling that such measures are ‘pointless’ when undertaken individually and without a commitment from others to do the same.

Similarly, Governments may not be willing to impose tough sanctions to prevent environmentally damaging behaviours as they stand to lose out at the polls through unpopular policies.

The researchers claim that a combination of ‘top-down’, intelligently formulated Government policy, combined with ‘bottom up’ facilitation of public acceptance of the measures needed to tackle climate change, is key. There is a need to engage effectively with the public, stimulating grassroots demand for tougher legislation. One technique which the researchers propose as effective is to appeal to the public on the basis of the local and personal benefits to be felt from climate change mitigation measures: better air quality and the health benefits this brings, and the financial benefits to be had through energy efficiency measures.

Changing the behaviour of the public in relation to climate change requires a sophisticated understanding of individuals’ emotional responses to climate change, which may cause irrational behaviour even in the face of scientific evidence and the ready availability of information in the public domain.

Ockwell, D., Whitmarsh, L. and O’Neill, S. (2009). Reorienting Climate Change Communication for Effective Mitigation. Science Communication. 30(3): 305-323.