Conservationists have reacted angrily to plans by Defra to investigate possible measures to keep buzzards from targeting game birds.

According to the RSPB, Defra is considering options including taking buzzards into captivity and destroying nests in order to protect young pheasants and other game birds on shooting estates. A survey by the National Gamekeepers Organisation in 2011 found that 76% of gamekeepers believe buzzards have a harmful effect on pheasant shoots, and Natural England has received numerous requests to license killing of the birds, which are a protected species.

Although buzzard numbers have increased 146% between 1995 and 2009, the RSPB says that this growth is the recovery of buzzard populations from previous persecution which saw the species eradicated from large areas of the UK.

Both destroying nests and taking buzzards into captivity would be illegal under current wildlife laws as the bird is a protected species, and the RSPB have said that removing buzzards is ‘unlikely to reduce predation levels, as another buzzard would quickly take its place’.

The government report says that the impacts of buzzards on pheasant shoots had not been investigated in detail and the extent of the issues were unclear, although there are a number of sites where buzzards could be contributing to game-bird losses with significant economic impacts for shooting estates.

Defra has defended its plans in a series of Tweets, stressing that its research will consider options which ‘protect young pheasants whilst allowing buzzard populations to thrive’.

Original text from BBC news website. An RSPB press release is available on their website and there is plenty of discussion currently happening on Twitter, see @DefraGovUK.

Wildlife and Countryside Link (‘Link’) have produced a report entitled ‘Targeting Nature’s Recovery’ outlining the group’s analysis of the UK’s progress against its 2010 targets for the conservation of priority habitats and species.

These targets were agreed in 2006, based on a list of priority species identified under the original UK Biodiversity Action Plan from 1999, and gave desired outcomes for 2010, 2015 and longer timescales. Targets were either maintenance targets aimed at ‘holding the line’ – sustaining the size and distribution of existing populations – or expansion targets for ‘restoring lost nature’ – increasing numbers and/or range, restoring former status or making population more resilient to external threats.

Link states that measuring progress towards the 2010 aim of these targets should have been a key way for UK Government’s to assess its achievements against its international commitment under the Convention in Biological Diversity to halt biodiversity loss by 2010. However, the group has been disappointed with the Government’s lack of action on measuring the conservation progress on these individual species targets.

Consequently, Link members decided to carry out their own assessment of progress on targets for a selection of BAP species; looking at 150 targets covering 69 of the original 303 BAP priority species, the group concludes that progress has been patchy:
• Although populations and range are being maintained for 63% of the species assessed, 30% are still declining
• Expansion targets have been achieved for 21% of species assessed, and at least some progress had been made for a further 46% of species. However, for one quarter of species, there has been no progress against targets.

As Link acknowledges, this assessment is not based on a random sample and may not be fully representative of the overall state of all BAP priority species; the group compares its findings to species trend assessments made during a BAP reporting round in 2008, and suggests that their analysis may actually paint a more positive picture than is the true status of all BAP priority species.

Concluding the report, Link stresses the need for urgent implementation of recommendations it made in its response to the revised England Biodiversity Strategy – Biodiversity 2020 – published in 2011:
1. The Biodiversity 2020 implementation plan should include actions to improve the status of all UK priority species
2. Statutory agencies – including Natural England – must proactively adapt their programmes to integrate the needs of priority species into site and habitat conservation activity
3. Assessments should be undertaken for all landscape-scale conservation initiatives and Local Nature Partnerships to identify which priority species will benefit
4. A clear programme of species-specific action must be outlined for priority species most at risk of extinction and/or unlikely to be adequately conserved through a habitat-focused approach
5. Monitoring programmes should be modified or designed to measure progress on priority species.

Link are currently working on producing a list of actions required to achieve these recommendations. For more information on this and Link’s other work, see the website.

The rising level of atmospheric CO2 has led to several studies focussing on changes in terrestrial and water ecosystems that might occur as a consequence. Ocean acidification, which is caused mainly by the increasing amount of CO2 dissolved in sea water, is at the forefront of marine research topics. However, most of the studies focus on calcifying organisms (e.g. corals, crustaceans) and only a few looked at fish and changes in fish behaviour so far.

A recently published paper in Functional Ecology, a British Ecological Society journal, is aiming to fill in a knowledge gap by examining the links between ocean acidification and changes to coral reef fish behaviour based on visual effects. Behavioural studies have demonstrated already that elevated CO2 levels can cause chemosensory and auditory impairment.

Fish use various information to avoid predators. Coral reef fish use auditory and chemosensory cues to decide where to settle. Once settled, chemical and visual information become more important. The study by Ferrari et al. tested the changes in visual risk assessment by exposing juvenile damselfish to the sight of a predator, a spiny chromis. The chromis was put into a watertight bag to avoid the damselfish receiving chemosensory signals.

The researchers found that damselfish showed reduced antipredator behaviour when exposed to 850 µatm CO2 which is equivalent to the CO2 level projected by the end of this century. However, no difference in behaviour was detected for smaller amounts of CO2 (440, 550, 700 µatm) in this study; previous studies showed altered chemosensory and auditory responses at 700 and 600 µatm, respectively. This led to an interesting conclusion that visual risk assessment cannot entirely compensate for the loss of chemosensory or auditory assessment.

Current projections indicate that atmospheric CO2 will reach 500 µatm by mid-century and 850 µatm by the end of this century. This study shows therefore that the latter concentration can alter the behaviour of coral reef fish and may eventually change the dynamics of predator-prey interactions and biodiversity of coral reefs.

The researchers highlight the need for longer term experiments to answer questions about adaptation and selection. However, they proved an extra point on why we should act immediately on reducing CO2 emissions.

Ferrari, M.C.O., McCormick, M.I., Munday, P.L., Meekan, M.G., Dixson, D.L., Lonnstedt, O. & Chivers, D.P. 2012 Effects of ocean acidification on visual risk assessment of coral reef fishes. Functional Ecology. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2435.2011.01951.x

The original Open Access paper can be downloaded here.

A new project to develop a series of ‘Climate Change Impacts Report Cards’ for the terrestrial and freshwater environments has started under the Living With Environmental Change programme, supported by Defra and NERC.

These report cards will be accessible, high level summaries of the science, based on more detailed supporting papers, with thorough peer review of both the supporting papers and the report card itself. The audience includes policy makers, business and a wide range of other stakeholders, as well as the research community. The concept is based on the very successful report cards produced by the Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership for the marine environment.

Two cards are currently being developed, one on water issues and one on biodiversity. The development of the biodiversity card is being led by Mike Morecroft and Lydia Speakman at Natural England: if you are interested in getting involved, or would like to know more, please email Lydia.Speakman@naturalengland.org.uk.

Following the publication last month of new research showing a link between the use of common neonicotinoid insecticides and bee mortality, the European Ombundsman, P. Nikiforos Diamandouros has launched an investigation into whether the European Commission has taken sufficient account of new scientific evidence on insecticide use, and appropriate measures to combat bee population declines.

The review was requested by the Austrian Ombundsman Board which stated that the Commission has not followed regulations which require a review of the authorisation of substances in the event that new scientific evidence suggests that they no longer meet approval criteria.

The continued use of neonicotinoid insecticides was permitted by the Commission in 2011, when it stated that it was aware of the toxicity of the substances, but argued that their use should be possible if exposure is limited to non-harmful levels. However, new research – including a study published in Science last month by a team at the University of Stirling, and summarised in an earlier Blog post – suggests that even very low levels of the substances have signficant detrimental effects on bee colonies.

More information about the inquiry is available on the European Ombundsman website.

In an Efra Select Committee hearing on Wednesday (18th April), Richard Benyon MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for the Environment and Fisheries answered the panel’s queries into the measures outlined in the Government’s Natural Environment White Paper (NEWP), published last June.

The Committee Chair started the session praising the White Paper but asking how such an ambitious strategy could now be put into practice, Mr Benyon stated that although the NEWP is a broad framework for environmental protection, it also comprises 92 very specific recommendations. Already, he said, 10 have been set-up – including the designation and funding of 12 Nature Improvement Areas (NIA) – whilst action is underway on 80 more. Defending Defra’s decision not to publicly publish an Action Plan on delivering the NEWP, the Minister said that the body felt that it would not be productive to be held to a rigid time-line for action. Instead, Defra is sending quarterly newsletters to all stakeholders detailing the progress made, such as the measurable milestones of establishing NIAs and Local Nature Partnerships (LNPs).

Turning words into action
Nevertheless, a number of the panel’s questions considered how the impressive rhetoric of the Paper would be converted into real action and results. The Minister said that Defra had recognised the challenge in this and that the ‘last thing [they] want is ‘talking shops’’. To address this, all working groups – such as the Ecosystem Service Market Task Force – have been provided with remits that provide a clear outline of the actions they should take, ensuring they will be well-led and ‘effective in bringing about the intended changes’. One of the areas identified as most at risk of remaining theoretical with little effective action was the intended creation of ecosystem service markets. However, Mr Benyon stated that the government has already taken real steps in this direction through work with the independent regulator Ofwat which has undertaken projects to engage land managers in the protection of upstream water sources, rewarding them for the effective prevention of pollution. The Minister stated that the Government intends to continue this route of indirect engagement through regulators and companies as, often, direct attempts by Governments to create markets can ‘cause issues’ and the immense complexity of market dynamics mean the expertise of businesses are invaluable. In order to help with the integration of the natural capital approach across all government departments, Defra is producing a ‘Green Book’ providing guidance on the necessary changes, and is due to publish an Action Plan to identify and address the various institutional and informational barriers to adopting this approach.

A funding shortfall?
A member of the panel quizzed the minister on the apparent mismatch between Sir John Lawton’s estimate of £1.1 billion needed for environmental protection (made in his paper, Making Space for Nature, published in 2010) and the £8 million total spend allocated in the NEWP. Mr Benyon pointed out that the lower limit of Sir John’s estimate is actually £600 million and that the £8 million sum referred only to direct Government funds. In reality, the minister noted, numerous other funding streams will feed into work under the NEWP, including roughly £450mn spent through agri-environment schemes, a sum of £92 million newly allocated by Defra to catchment management schemes, £7.5 million to be divided between the identified NIAs and a further £1mn designed to get LNPs up and running. When these are taken into account, the money allocated is approaching Sir John’s ballpark figure, the minister stated, and this is before the huge value of voluntary action through schemes such as the Campaign for the Farmed Environment, and by naturalist groups and NGOs, is included.

Mr Benyon expanded this point, stressing that in fact most of the recommendations in the NEWP are not just for government to carry out, but will instead be realised through the cooperation of a wide range of environmental bodies and the harnessing of the considerable enthusiasm of local groups and communities. The minister said he has observed enormous enthusiasm for the new approach of the NEWP from the very start of the process, as evidenced by the unprecedented response to consultations from all stakeholder groups. The degree of local enthusiasm shown in the applications for NIAs was felt by the minister to demonstrate an energy which can be harnessed to ensure the effective implementation of many of the NEWP’s proposed measures.

The role and place for Nature Improvement Areas
Answering a concern from the panel as to how the NIAs – 12 of which have been recently designated – will fit with existing nature protection sites such as SSSIs and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Mr Benyon stressed that Defra did not want to create a new tier of activity which ‘tramples all over existing designations’. Instead, he stressed, the idea is that NIAs will harness and coordinate the various protections and conservation activities already in an area. The minister said he had witnessed in the selection of the 12 initial NIAs, an ‘incredible degree of enthusiasm’ from land managers, naturalist groups and local communities which, he felt, means the administration and management of NIAs sits in a ‘different place’ to AONB Boards and National Park Authorities. The NIAs are not due to have a statutory status of their own, Mr Benyon clarified, but they will be visible in the local plans and the weight given to them will be decided by local communities, using the powers given to them in the Localism Act 2011, and the recently reviewed National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

The National Planning Policy Framework and the NEWP
This mention of the NPPF sparked further discussion. Mr Benyon said he felt the drafting process had been very thorough and inclusive, involving very close working between ministers across all government departments. He welcomed what he saw as strong commitments to biodiversity in the wording of the final document, including consideration given to ‘future proofing’ i.e. accounting for the intensifying challenges to nature protection resulting from factors including climate change. A member of the committee inquired as to why the renewed NPPF does not mirror the emphasis on biodiversity offsetting (creation of compensatory nature areas by developers when projects involve landscape destruction) made in the NEWP. Mr Benyon stressed that biodiversity offsetting is still in its infancy and is a very complex concept to put into practice, so at the moment, Defra is trialling six pilot studies to see how successful different approaches are in achieving net gain for the environment. Asked how it will be monitored, the minister emphasised that the process must be transparent and clear so that developers know exactly what they are required to provide and the public know that it is not a ‘licence to trash’ but is a process that provides real net gain for the natural environment. At the moment, he said, there was misunderstanding, perpetuated by the media, of how ‘offsetting’ will be measured – it will not be a case of ‘comparing the value of an otter against the value of a hedgehog’, but a much more holistic and comprehensive process, the details of which will become clear over the course of the pilot studies.

Peat and peatlands
In the final question, the panel challenged the minister on the NEWP’s objective to phase out the use of peat by 2030, suggesting the target shows an ‘extraordinary lack of ambition’. Mr Benyon stated that he had also received criticism to the opposite effect – that 2030 is too soon to achieve a complete phasing out of peat. He pointed out that this target is just one aspect of a step-approach; by 2015, the government will have ‘got their own house in order’ and public sector’s direct procurement of peat will have ended. By 2020, Defra wants to see the phasing out of peat use by amateur gardeners, which will rely on a significant degree of voluntary engagement. The ultimate 2030 target is aimed at professional growers who, Mr Benyon recognised, want a clear direction from government, after which, business tends to be a fast responder. The minister stated that Defra recognises the significant importance of peat in sequestering carbon and as a valuable habitat, and is due to report soon with suggestions for action to put work towards these targets in motion. Already, he said, there are ‘huge advances’ taking place in terms of technologies and methods for reducing peat use through recycling and the creation of other growing media, and he is confident that business will cope within the given timetable. However, although Defra is providing support for this research, it is also aware that many of the largest peat users are commercial food producers, who must be able to continue producing food in the current climate of food insecurity and global competition.

Watch the evidence session and find more information about the Efra Committee’s inquiry into the NEWP at the Parliament website.

Last week saw the joint meeting of the all party parliamentary groups on Biodiversity, UK’s Overseas Territories and Zoos and Aquariums, at which the BES Policy team was fortunate enough to attend. The meeting was chaired by Andrew Rosindell MP who began proceedings by highlighting his pleasure at the well attended event before introducing Eric Blencowe, chair of the Inter-Departmental Group on Biodiversity in the Overseas Territories. Eric Blencowe spoke of the importance of the UK’s overseas territories and highlighted their high priority status for the UK Government in the form of the UK Overseas Territories Biodiversity Strategy. Defra is to lead on an implementation plan on the biodiversity strategy which, among other things, will seek to reduce the impact of invasive species, with the Lionfish (Pterois volitans) problem in Anguilla cited as an example.

Janice Panton of the UK Overseas Territory Association and UK representative of Montserrat then spoke of her delight at a wonderful morning attending the 20 year anniversary of the Darwin Initiative event held at London Zoo, where £8.5M of funding for 33 new Darwin Projects was announced. Mrs Panton went on to state how important the overseas territories were with regards to biodiversity and how “each territory has a unique ecosystem that is often vital to their economy and a loss of biodiversity to an overseas territory is a loss to us all and help and support from the UK Government is hugely welcome”.

Dr Tim Stowe, Director of international operations at the RSPB, highlighted that although some threatened biodiversity has been recovered, the most recent extinction was only eights years previous with the loss of the last remaining individual cultivation of the Saint Helena Olive (Nesiota elliptica). Dr Stowe went on to suggest that “action is required and that action unfortunately requires money, but in the grand scheme of things, the spending on UK’s Overseas Territories is a fraction of the spend on UK biodiversity”.

Peter Convey, of the British Antarctic Survey, was the next to highlight the unique ecosystems of the UK’s overseas territories, specifically those of the two southern polar regions, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands, and the British Antarctic Territory. Both territories have a high level of marine biodiversity, comparable with many temperate and even tropical areas. And although the terrestrial diversity is low there are high levels of endemism creating an overall unique ecosystem. Mr Convey went on to stress that although human impacts on these ecosystems are low at present, there is a high level of vulnerability, in particular to biological invasions, such as has been highlighted previously on this blog.

Alistair Gammell, the UK director for the PEW environment group then spoke of the need to put pressure “on the street” to put pressure on the Government with regards to the fate of the UK overseas territories biodiversity as the situation is “unknown and unheard by the general public”. Mr Gammell stressed that the UK biodiversity of global importance came from its overseas territories which are all unique, specifically citing Pitcairn as an example where there were more endemic species than people. Mr Gammell ended by suggesting that the UK Government should “look upon the overseas territories as an opportunity and not as a burden as the total investment required would be miniscule”.

Dr Colin Clubbe spoke of the long association between the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew and the overseas territories. Dr Clubbe described how recently a new species of daisy had been found on the Falkland Islands and he predicted many more new species would be described in the coming years. Dr Clubbe went on to point out that there was “no technical reason why a plant species should go extinct”. He gave the example of the St. Helena Boxwood, which was considered to be effectively extinct in the wild, has been “brought back” by growing individuals and harvesting seeds in greenhouses at Kew.

Rob Thomas of the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland then spoke to reiterate much of what had been said before and went on to suggest that the three groups present that day had “not three hats but one with many overlapping issues” and that “biodiversity should be woven into everything related to the forthcoming FCO white paper”. Finally, Rachel Jones of the Zoological Society of London described the “astonishing state of the Chagos Marine Reserve where the ecosystem is operating in a near natural state” and that the biodiversity is “off the scale”. 10 endemic species have so far been identified but only 3 per cent of the area has actually been visited and so there are likely to be many more.

The event on an extremely positive networking note with business cards being thrown around like confetti with many promises of future action.

Invasive alien species are considered one of the most significant threats to the unique biodiversity of Antarctica and these aliens are hitching a ride on us! Steven Chown, from the Centre for Invasion Biology at Stellenbosch University and his research team estimated that 70,000 seeds are brought into the continent by tourists and scientists each year. In fact, Chown’s findings indicate that scientists are more to blame than the tourists, even though they should be most aware of the problems caused by invasive species.

Chown and his team collected the clothing, footwear, walking poles, day packs and even camera bags from 853 people, approximately 2% of the annual total number of visitors. Using vacuum cleaners the team collected material from the visitor’s belongings and counted, sorted and identified all plant seeds hitchhikers. Over the course of one year, 7,000 scientists inadvertently brought in around 39,000 seed hitchhikers, whilst over the same period 33,000 tourists imported are far more conservative 32,000 alien seeds.

“Scientists tend to have gear they use more than once and tend also to visit many natural sites” Chown explains. “Often tourists are issued with new outer gear for a visit or make only a single visit to Antarctica and have special gear for the trip”.

The seed hitchhikers were predominantly identified as known invasive species of other cold areas like the Arctic and the islands around Antarctica. By mapping the entry points for these seeds, and comparing this with the localised climates, Chown and his team produced a map of Antarctica that shows the Western Antarctica Peninsula is most at risk from these alien hitchhikers.

Chown does suggest some simple ways of reducing the numbers of future unwanted guests. “Take gear that’s new, and if this is not possible, then clean gear thoroughly. Vacuum clean the pockets, check Velcro very closely and remove seeds. Remove inner linings from camera bags and clean everything out. Wash walking poles, tripods and boots. Easy and very effective”.

Source paper: Chown et al., (2012) Continent-wide risk assessment for the establishment on nonindigenous species in Antarctica. PNAS

Quotes taken from the Not Exactly Rocket Science acrticle

Presentation slides, audio and video recordings, photos and links from the joint WWF-UK and Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) event ‘Navigating the Perfect Storm’ last month have been made available online.

The evening was chaired by Professor John Beddington, Chief Scientific Advisor to the Government and involved interesting presentations by Ivan Lewis, Shadow Secretary of State for International Development, Professor Bill Adams of University of Cambridge, and Dr Sejal Worah, Programmes Director for WWF India, who all gave perspectives on the action and approaches needed to navigate the ‘perfect storm’ of energy, food and water insecurity facing the world in the near future.

A previous BES Policy blog post gives a digest of the evening.

The Environment Secretary, Caroline Spelman, today announced the creation of 12 new Nature Improvement Areas (NIA) across England. NIAs were a flagship policy contained in last year’s Natural Environment White Paper “The Natural Choice”, which set out aims to improve the quality of the natural environment across England, halt the decline in habitats and species, and strengthen the connection between people and nature. Defra launched a competition to fund an initial 12 NIAs in July 2011, judged by a panel led by Professor Sir John Lawton. 76 applications were received and 15 applicants were invited to give presentations to the panel before 12 were selected to receive Government funding. The successful partnerships will begin work in April 2012 each receiving a share of the £7.5 million fund over 2012-2015, provided by the Defra family.

At the announcement of the new wildlife havens, Mrs Spelman said: “Each of these projects has something different to offer – from the urban areas of Birmingham and the Black Country to the rivers and woods of North Devon; from marshes, coalfields and wetlands to woodland and arable chalkland and grassland. The exciting wildlife projects are the result of different organisations all working together with a common purpose – to safeguard our wildlife for generations to come”.

The 12 NIAs will be:
•Birmingham and the Black Country Living Landscape: includes urban, wetland, river and heath habitats. It will create heathland on brownfield sites and 40 hectares of new native woodland;
•Dark Peak: includes moorland and woodland in the Peak District National Park. It will restore habitats such as upland heathland and create 210 hectares of native woodland;
•Dearne Valley Green Heart: is mostly on farmland and former mining settlements with woodland and wetland. It will restore the River Don floodplain and create new wetlands and woodlands
•Greater Thames Marshes: includes agricultural marsh and urban habitats. It will create and enhance grazing marsh, salt marsh and mudflat habitats;
•Humberhead Levels: straddling Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire, it is mainly wetland, lowland and peat habitats. It will create or restore at least 1,427 hectares of wetland habitat;
•Marlborough Downs: this is predominantly a farmer-led partnership looking to restore chalk and grassland habitats and increase the numbers of farmland birds as well as creating a network of traditional clay-lined dewponds to act as wildlife havens;
•Meres and Mosses of the Marches: incorporates wetlands, peat bogs and ponds in Cheshire. It will aim to reduce diffuse pollution by working with farmers, improve peatlands and restore wildlife areas around the River Perry;
•Morecambe Bay Limestones and Wetlands: the most northerly NIA, this consists of limestone, wetland and grassland habitats. It will restore coast and freshwater wetlands and create 200 hectares of woodland, planting 10,000 native trees and develop habitat for six species;
•Nene Valley: within the River Nene regional park, this project will work with farmers to restore habitats and restore tributaries and reaches of the River Nene;
•Northern Devon: this incorporates river, woodland and grassland. The project will recreate and restore 1,000 hectares of priority habitat and restore the River Torridge so that it can support the critically endangered freshwater pearl mussel;
•South Downs Way Ahead: encompasses key chalk sites of the South Downs National Park. The NIA will restore 1,000 hectares of chalk grassland and encourage the return of the Duke of Burgundy butterfly and several species of farmland birds; and
•Wild Purbeck: is a variety of river, wetland, heath and woodland habitat as well as the largest onshore oil field in Western Europe. This NIA will introduce livestock to manage heathland , restore wetland and create or restore 15 ponds as well as creating 120 hectares of new woodland and a new seven hectare saline lagoon.

Full story available on the Defra website.