Biodiversity: A Fundamental Change in Our Approach if Urgently
Needed Dr Mark Johnston, Ecology & Biodiversity Services Manager at Mott MacDonald, Cambridge
Each year £millions in the UK alone is spent by developers undertaking protected species surveys and mitigations to meet legislative and planning requirements. In many instances this may be justifiable. Yet the Wildlife & Countryside Act which has been in place for over 30 years has failed to deliver: we continue to see significant declines in biodiversity.
The UK government has failed to meet its targets to halt the loss of biodiversity (except for perhaps the few key species), and the EU is now setting targets “to halt the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU by 2020 and to support efforts to avert global biodiversity loss”. Is there not a need for a fundamental change in wildlife legislation? A fundamental change in our approach to conserving biodiversity? If we continue as we are, can we realistically achieve a balance between development, growth and biodiversity conservation?
Similarly, is there not a real danger that ecologists are seen to be “crying wolf”? Perhaps that the mis- conception that wildlife needs are put before the needs of people (Rob Yorke article “Putting the needs of wildlife before people is just bats” The Times August 10 2010) is not surprising given the large costs and significant restriction placed on local developments just to accommodate the needs of selective species protected under UK and EU legislation. There is a real risk of a backlash on nature conservation unless this balance is addressed.
The recent Defra consultation on a Natural Environment White Paper at last provides us with an opportunity to address these issues. We can conserve wildlife and halt the decline in biodiversity, without significant restriction to development projects. But it will take a lot more than just joined-up thinking.
How can we make a difference? Embedding the true value of natural resource management and conservation at all levels is absolutely
|124| ENVIRONMENT INDUSTRY MAGAZINE
fundamental in achieving a real difference and making sure that the UK (and the EU) meets its priority to enhance the environment and biodiversity to improve quality of life. For this to happen there needs to be a fundamental change in • Legislation, • Policies, • Attitudes and • Awareness about how sensitive our natural resources are to change imposed by man.
Embedding different values and attitudes required to achieve such wide sweeping changes takes time, and there is no quick fix. Education and enhanced awareness is the first step but we will need to challenge conventional thinking to get substantive changes to current polices. All this needs to be done in the context of the coalition Government’s “Big Society” agenda and the significant financial constraints that the UK is currently operating within.
We’re all aware of the problems! Many developments, large or small, need to implement appropriate mitigations to reduce or minimise ecological impacts. Ecological consultancy reports are often littered with lists of seasonal constraints or pre and post-construction mitigation, compensation, monitoring and enhancement requirements, and then regulators request seemingly unjustifiable mitigations based on the ‘precautionary principle’. What’s going wrong?
Species translocation is the typical culprit. Yes translocation does save species populations, but does it actually benefit biodiversity, does it benefit development? Translocation has become a very expensive part of many development schemes yielding poor value for money compared to habitat creation. Great crested newts in particular are high maintenance in terms of professional manpower moving them around and in plastic fencing to contain them. When translocation is attempted they are frequently found in very small numbers or not at all and re-establishment can be uncertain, and the long-term
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152