Today the BES has published our report of the Conservation Ecology Special Interest Group’s meeting into ‘Making Space for Nature’, examining the ecological issues raised by the Lawton Review, and other current topics in nature conservation.

Main points raised by the lively discussion and presentations during the day include the need for academic and applied ecologists to communicate with one another in order to develop new tools which can inform conservation planning and practical delivery. Communication between ecologists, policy-makers and the public is also fundamentally important; communicating with decision-makers is an area in which the skills of ecologists is lacking, according to a recent report by the IEEM. The report also highlights discussion at the workshop around possible tensions between a landscape-scale approach to conservation and a species-focused approach. Whilst an emphasis on ecosystem services can engage policy-makers, the public’s interest in the natural world is motivated by species (hence the 8 million-plus members of Wildlife and Countryside Link organisations). Conservationists should not forget this if wishing to engage people beyond those already involved with NGOs, as volunteer recorders and in monitoring for example, and in aiming to empower further those who are engaged, so that they can influence decision-makers.

The report includes summaries of presentations by Prof. Sir John Lawton- discussing the main findings of the Lawton Review; Dr Pete Brotherton- discussing what the Lawton Review’s conclusions might mean for Natural England and others moving forwards; Prof. Chris Thomas – highlighting a new tool he and others have developed to identify those species most at risk, and most in need of direct conservation action, in the face of climate change; Dr Paul Dolman- discussing potential shortcomings in the Biodiversity Action Plan and the need to develop a new approach to conservation based on species’ common functional requirements (so-called ‘guilds’); and Debbie Tann – discussing the work of the Wildlife Trusts in the context of their ‘Living Landscape‘ Approach. All of these presentations are available to download from the BES website.

The meeting on which the report is based was held on the 19th April this year, at the BES’s headquarters, Charles Darwin House.

The Zoological Society of London is inviting responses from the public to a short online survey asking ‘how much of the world should we protect for nature?’ The results of the survey will be presented by the ZSL to policy-makers at the Rio +20 conference in June next year.

The survey takes under a minute to complete.

Scientists fear cuts to the EU budget could threaten the continued persistence of wildlife on agricultural landscapes. Up to £400 million worth of funding provided through the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) could be stopped as a result of government spending cuts. Conservation groups are warning such action could prove disastrous for some farmland species, and threaten the recovery of those already endangered such as the cirl bunting and turtle dove.

Under the current terms of the CAP, farmers are able to receive payments in return for developing projects on their land that are designed to encourage local biodiversity. Such incentives have seen great success, and played a vital role in the conservation of species sensitive to agricultural practices that may have otherwise experienced a population decline. However as part of the current CAP reform ‘Pillar 2’ funding – the money available to farmers who practice methods beneficial to the environment and biodiversity could be scrapped.

Martin Harper, Conservation Director of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) said he was “staggered” by the idea, fearing that wildlife corridors such as hedges and water ways could also be affected.

The government has however stated that the current biodiversity subsidies in place are ‘good value’ and that cuts should be targeted towards CAP subsidies assigned for food production instead. Proposals for the new EU budget will be announced later this month on 29th June.

A panel of scientists has today concluded that the planets oceans are in an even worse state that previously considered, with some referring to the results as “shocking”.

The report, written by experts on coral reefs, fisheries, climate and pollution that form the International Program on the State of the Ocean (IPSO) concludes that ocean life is “at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history”. The reason for this decline in marine life is human induced climate change, pollution and over-fishing.

“What we’re seeing at the moment is unprecedented in the fossil record” said Alex Rogers, Scientific Director of the IPSO and Professor of conservation biology at Oxford University. In the past, mass extinctions took place over millions of years, not overnight as often perceived. The rate of decline seen today exceeds the speed at which the previous 5 mass extinctions took place, which some say indicates that we are now moving into a 6th period of mass extinction. The report concludes that is too early to say definitively that this is the case, but warns that current trends indicate that such a situation is likely to occur in the future.

The report presented to government at the UN headquarters in New York later this week during discussions on the reform of ocean governance. The publication will recommend three main changes to marine policy:

1. Making swift reductions in green house gas emissions
2. Reducing the input of pollutants
3. Bringing a stop to exploitative fishing

Pressures to implement action are supported both economically and in terms of human welfare. At present, coral reefs are estimated to be worth millions through tourism and for sea-defense, but 75% are at risk of severe decline. While a huge 70% of the world’s population reply on fish as their main source of protein, yet 50% of fisheries still remain classified as unsustainable in the UK alone.

Report contributor Dan Laffoley, an advisor to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) however remained positive, saying that “unlike previous generations, we know what now needs to happen”.

This week Defra released the highly anticipated Natural Environment White Paper titled ‘The Natural Choice: Securing the Value of Nature’, outlining Government’s vision for the future of landscapes and ecosystem services. The paper emphasises that although we know the environment provides many irreplaceable and valuable services we have been unsustainably exploiting natural capital for many years, leading to biodiversity loss and degradation. Plans for action to halt and reverse the decline in biodiversity and ecosystem services are described.

In a Defra press release following the launch of the White Paper Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman said “The true value of nature should be built in to the decisions we make – as individuals, organisations, businesses and governments – so that we become the first generation to leave the environment in a better condition than we found it.”

One of the key plans is to create 12 new Nature Improvement Areas (NIAs), designed to fulfil many of the goals of Lawton’s ‘Ecological Restoration Zones’, and help wildlife adapt to climate change. A competition will be set up to determine the site of the 12 initial Nature Improvement Areas, and Local Nature Partnerships (LNPs) will be invited to enter their area. So far £7.5 million has been pledged to fund these Nature Improvement Areas. However the Lawton Review ‘Making Space For Nature’ estimated the cost of restoring damage already done to the natural environment at around £0.6 to £1.1 billion.

The Government also plan to use the imminent reforms of the planning system to achieve environmental objectives, and improve ecological networks. Planners will be encouraged to put the natural environment at the heart of all decision making. Reforms to the planning system will include introducing voluntary use of biodiversity offsets in some areas, with a view to broadening these pilot schemes over time.

Another key element of the paper is plans to reconnect local people, particularly children, with nature, by creating a new Local Green Area designation to protect green spaces of particular importance to communities, and removing barriers preventing teaching outdoors. Communities will be supported to volunteer to protect their local wildlife areas.

A new independent committee (The Natural Capital Committee) will be established to advise the Government on the state of natural capital in the UK. Following the release of the UK National Ecosystem Assessment natural capital will be included in the UK Environmental Accounts.

Businesses will be expected to take greater action to protect the environment, and the Government have proposed to investigate potential ways to expand markets in which ecosystem service providers are paid by the users of the service.

The government have also pledged to influence policy in the EU and internationally by showing leadership and ensuring that there are ambitious environmental commitments included in the reformed Common Agricultural Policy and Common Fisheries Policy. £25 million will be donated to the Darwin initiatives fund to help ecosystem and development projects, reducing poverty worldwide. Initiatives to reduce climate change will also continue to be supported through £2.9 billion of funds which will distributed to projects such as Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation.

In general the White Paper received a positive response from conservation organisations. The director of conservation at the RSPB Martin Harper said “Nature Improvement Areas are about looking at conservation on a joined up, landscape scale, instead of a series of patchwork measures dotted across our landscape. It’s fantastic to see the Government promoting this idea.” At the Wildlife Trusts Paul Wilkinson, Head of Living Landscapes said “How this White Paper is implemented and adopted by all Government departments will be critical. There is a vital need to ensure it influences the current policy reforms around planning, development and growth.” All emphasised that they would be willing to work with the government to ensure that the ambitious plans are carried out.

The UK National Ecosystem Assessment has been released today, and is the first independent, peer reviewed, in detail assessment of the state and value of the UK’s natural environment and ecosystem services. Both scientists and economists were involved in the assessment, which was funded by the governments of England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, and by the Natural Environment Research Council and the Economic and Social Science Research council.

The UK National Ecosystem Assessment strengthens the argument for protecting nature, and demonstrates that the costs of protecting the environment are shadowed by the cost of inaction. One of the key messages of the report was that we have focussed far too heavily on the market value of natural resources we can sell (e.g. timber and food), and not properly considered natural capital during decision making.

During the 20th Century population increases and initiatives to produce more food and timber led to serious damage and degradation of ecosystems and related services. Agricultural land, urban areas and woodlands have decline at the expense of other habitats such as semi-natural grasslands. Across all habitats the changes in land use and environmental pressures have led to declines in the number of species and quality of ecosystem services. 50% of fish stocks are being harvested unsustainably, and the UK has the lowest percentage forest cover of anywhere in Europe, with over two thirds being non-native plantation.

The report suggests that if the UK’s ecosystems were properly protected and enhanced then they could add an extra £30 billion to the UK economy. Neglect and loss of ecosystem services may cost as much as £20 billion to the economy per year.

The assessment looked at eight different types of ecosystems (Mountains, Moorlands and Heaths, Semi-natural Grasslands, Enclosed Farmland, Woodlands, Freshwaters – Openwaters, Wetlands and Floodplains, Urban, Coastal Margins, and Marine), the services that they provide, how the levels of service provisioning have changed over the past sixty years, and the main drivers of environmental change. The report considered both the monetary and non-monetary value of our natural environment, and the economic value of the observed changes in the way that ecosystems function and provide services, demonstrating that individuals, society and the economy can benefit financially from protecting ecosystems. Finally the report focuses on the potential effects of decisions that are made now, by examining the ecosystem effects of several different scenarios.

The synthesis report of the National Ecosystem Assessment outlines six key findings:

1. Nature is consistently undervalued in a wide range of decision making processes, even though we are fully aware that it is highly important.
2. Ecosystems have changed over the past 60 years, as have the services that they provide, and the ways in which people benefit from them. Population growth, technology, and globalisation have had major effects on the way in which we behave and consume ecosystem services.
3. Some ecosystem services are in long term decline, although other services are being provided well, or improving. Approximately 30% of services are currently declining, with some services already in a degraded state
4. The UK’s population is growing, as are our demands on the natural environment. This, with the added pressure of climate change, will accelerate the rate at which we impact the environment both in the UK and worldwide. Increasing the production of food whilst safeguarding ecosystem services will be the main challenge in this area.
5. Actions taken now will impact the future of the UK’s ecosystems, ecosystems services and human wellbeing. It is important that we make the right decisions now, using the National Ecosystem Assessment to inform decision making, which would allow us to pursue a better future where the benefits of ecosystem services are better realised and more evenly distributed.
6. Regulations, technology, finance, education and changes in individual and societal behaviour are all needed to ensure that we move towards sustainable development. We also will also need a more integrated, collaborative approach to managing ecosystems, between different government departments, business local authorities, and civil society.

In response to the release of the National Ecosystem Assessment Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman said “The UK National Ecosystem Assessment is a vital step forward in our ability to understand the true value of nature and how to sustain the benefits it gives us. I want our children to be the first generation to leave the natural environment in a better state than it was left to them. The findings of this assessment have played a big part in shaping our forthcoming Natural Environment White Paper that will help us revitalise our towns and countryside.”

The report presents a real opportunity to start changing the way we think about the natural environment, and will be vital in shaping many areas of policy in the coming months. An effective strategy to ensure preservation of the UK’s ecosystems needs to be developed. Bob Watson, Chief Scientist at Defra Chief and co-chair of the UK NEA, said “Until now there has been no clear way of valuing the full range of benefits they provide beyond what we can buy and sell. The UK NEA introduces groundbreaking approaches to measure the value of these services and how they will be affected in future if we do not make the right choices now. The NEA shows that we need a more integrated approach to ecosystem management, involving Government, the private sector, voluntary groups and the public working together to protect the services nature provides.”

The Defra White Paper, which should be released later this month, is expected to include actions on some of the key findings of the national ecosystem assessment. Planning policy is also expected to be affected by the release of this report, which currently puts little value on green spaces, and does not ensure adequate protection of ecosystem services or biodiversity.

The BES policy team tweeted from the launch event.
@BESpolicy

The Defra press release can be seen here.

The European commission yesterday proposed a new strategy to achieve the 2020 biodiversity targets by incorporating the valuation of natural capital. The new strategy, which is based on a report by The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB), states that the economic value of ecosystems in Europe must be factored into decision making at all levels.

This announcement follows the failure of the European Union to achieve the 2010 biodiversity target to halt and reverse the loss of biodiversity within Europe. It has become clear that current legislation is ineffective with only 11% of protected ecosystems in a favourable status despite the wide range of efforts deployed to protect nature, and the establishment of an extensive network of protected areas (Natura 2000). The new strategy blames, among other causes, lack of consideration for the economic value of biodiversity for the failure to meet past targets.

TEEB has estimated that the economic cost of loosing biodiversity dwarfs the cost of adequate protection. For example over fishing costs the fisheries industry over $50 billion annually. Janez Potočnik the EU environment commissioner stated that “It is a much smarter economic investment to protect the diversity of life and healthy ecosystems than face tragedy once diversity has been lost,”

The 2020 target to halt the loss of biodiversity and degradation of ecosystem services has been divided into six main goals covering the protection of biodiversity and ecosystem services, improving the contribution of agriculture forestry and fisheries to conservation, and addressing the worldwide biodiversity crisis.

Europe plans to achieve these goals by:
• Building on the biodiversity knowledge base by identifying research gaps, contributing to the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services, and establishing a monitoring and review procedure for the strategy.
• Setting up market based mechanisms to attract funding for the protection of ecosystem services, and to encourage projects that deliver multiple benefits.
• Establish a coherent message about biodiversity in the common agricultural policy, fisheries policy and water framework directive.
• Interacting with a wide variety of stakeholders through the EU business and biodiversity platform to help share successful initiatives and best practice.
• Engaging civil society in the hope they will become actively involved in achieving the targets.

TEEB estimates that this strategy could create new jobs and business opportunities worth 2 to 6 trillion dollars by 2050.

The full communication can be seen here.

The announcement of a badger TB vaccination trial on the National Trust’s Killerton Estate has been welcomed by both farmers and local environmental groups. The four year programme which will commence this May aims to show that vaccination is a viable alternative to culling programmes, particularly in places where Defra’s culling criteria cannot currently be met.

Bovine tuberculosis is a major burden for both farmers and taxpayers in the UK. Last year the cost of the disease to the taxpayer was almost £63 million, mainly paid out in compensation to farmers who had cattle destroyed as a result of the disease. However farmers say that this sum does not cover the cost of replacing lost animals, and more needs to be done to prevent the spread of the disease.

Badger culling, the current recommended strategy for control of bovine TB, has been shown to be effective within culling sites but can have detrimental knock on effects for surrounding areas, which often see an increased incidence of the disease. As a consequence of the Randomised Badger Culling Trial (RBCT) which showed these effects Defra introduced stringent criteria to set the conditions under which badger culling can take place, which require farmers to demonstrate that they can minimize any potential edge effects, and cull within a minimum area size of 150km2. There are very few instances when these criteria can be met. When these criteria cannot be fulfilled it seems that vaccination may be the only viable option but so far there is little evidence to show how effective it might be.

The new programme funded by the National Trust aims to demonstrate to the government and farmers that vaccination is a viable alternative to culling. It also aims to stimulate research into an oral vaccine, such as the type which has been used with great success to treat rabies, which would be a cheap and easy to administer option for carrying vaccination out on a larger scale. Mark Harold from the national trust said that he hopes that this project can “pave the way for more widespread use of vaccination as an effective alternative to culling”, and also noted that “the National Trust is in a unique position as a major landowner in rural areas” allowing them to pioneer the scheme.

The vaccination programme will involve 18 tenant farmers on 20 km2 farmland in the Killerton estate, a prime example of a site that cannot meet current DEFRA criteria for badger culls. It is expected to cost around £80,000 per year and run until 2015. Badgers will be trapped, vaccinated and marked by licensed experts.

All 278 of Britain’s green laws, originally put in place to safeguard the natural environment, have been included on the list of red tape regulations to be considered for the axe by the public as part of the ‘Red Tape Challenge’. The proposed deregulation is a corwdsourcing exercise launched by government to assess which of the current regulations restrict growth of the economy and scrap unnecessary red tape.

Environmental laws including; the Wildlife and Countryside Act, National Park Act, Clean Air Act and the Climate Change Act could now all be scrapped by government as they fall under ‘general regulations’ outraging environmental campaigners.

If green laws such as the Wildlife and Countryside Act – which governs the protection of animals and plants in Britain – were axed as a result of the ‘Red Tape Challenge’ national parks, marine reserves and sites of special scientific interest (SSSI’s) would no longer be protected by law.

Additionally, the retraction of the Climate Change Act – which was the first of its kind – would mean the release the secretary of state from duties to reach climate change targets such as to reduce the UK’s carbon emissions by at least 80% below 1990 levels by the year 2050.

The Government’s ‘Red Tape Challenge’ website invites comments either as an individual or as an organisation about red tape regulations, with Ministers facing the presumption that laws and regulations listed in the ‘Red Tape Challenge’ should be scrapped unless argued otherwise. You can comment on environmental regulations threatened to be axed by the scheme over a number of subject areas including:

• Air quality
• Biodiversity, wildlife management, landscape, countryside and recreation
• Energy labelling and sustainable products
• Industrial emissions and carbon reductions
• Noise and nuisance
• Waste
• Environmental permits, information and damage

After receiving public comments Ministers will then have three months to work out which regulations they want to keep and why.

Last week the University of Cambridge hosted the BES Annual Symposium, this year titled ‘Forests and Global Change’. The event was a huge success with 370 delegates attending the three day symposium which was called “the best symposium yet” by one of the speakers, Adrian Newton.

A number of experts gave presentations on the latest research into the effect a changing climate has on forest ecosystems, and what this might mean in the future. The talks covered a range of subjects from carbon storage to biodiversity conservation, and expanded on how we can implement action through the development of new strategies such as ‘Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation’ (REDD).

By bringing together so many experts to showcase this information it is hoped progress can be made towards the creation of an informed approach to climate change and its impact of forest ecosystems, and further help to bridge the gap between science and policy.