Memorandum submitted by Butterfly Conservation
(DAR 04)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. Butterfly Conservation has been asked
by the EFRA Committee to provide evidence on "the impact
of Defra's 2006-07 budget cuts on your organisation's work".
We are pleased to have this opportunity and have limited our reply
to the impacts of the cuts as far as they affect our primary charitable
aim: the conservation of butterflies, moths and their habitats.
2. Butterflies and moths are declining rapidly
due to pressure of habitat degradation and climate change. Overall
seven out of 10 species are declining and they are important indicators
of government policy on the environment, especially the target
of halting biodiversity loss by 2010.
3. We have divided our reply into two parts:
direct effects and indirect effects.
4. Direct effects
Delays in processing applications
for key sites to be entered into the Higher Level Stewardship
Scheme (HLS).
Staff shortages leading to stricter
SSSI targeting under HLS, at the expense of non-SSSI sites. The
latter are vital to the maintenance of biodiversity in the wider
countryside and to meet BAP targets, as well as providing links
between SSSIs to allow species to respond to climate change.
Virtual cessation of care and maintenance
visits to Stewardship sites by NE staff, thereby making it difficult
to ensure compliance and success on the ground.
Reduction in funds to ensure vital
management of key habitats. Five examples are given concerning
lack of funds or reduction in funding to bring key sites into
favourable condition for BAP Priority Species and Habitats, including
SSSIs.
5. INDIRECT
EFFECTS
Negative effect on the attitude of
the farming community. Our field officers are finding that there
is very little confidence in Environmental Stewardship amongst
landowners and a great deal of scepticism when NE makes commitments
(often attributable to mistakes originally made by the RPA).
Uncertainty about future grant-aid
and continuation of projects beyond March 2007, has created uncertainty
and caution about planning projects during the next financial
year. This has an inordinate impact on crucial NGO partners such
as Butterfly Conservation and their expert staff and volunteers
who are crucial to help deliver BAP targets.
MAIN SUBMISSION
1. Butterfly Conservation has been asked
by the EFRA Committee to provide evidence on "the impact
of Defra's 2006-07 budget cuts on your organisation's work".
We are pleased to have this opportunity and have limited our reply
to the impacts of the cuts as far as they affect our primary charitable
aim: the conservation of butterflies, moths and their habitats.
We are not able to respond in detail on wider impacts in the time
available, though many of our points have wider implications.
2. We have divided our response into Direct
Effects and Indirect Effects.
Direct effects:
3. Delays in processing applications
for key sites to be entered into the Higher Level Stewardship
Scheme (HLS). Butterfly Conservation has several specialist
advisers working with farmers to enter key breeding sites for
BAP Priority Species into HLS, but many applications have been
put on hold and we have not been told when or whether they will
be processed. It is unclear whether this is directly due to Defra
cut-backs, but it is clear that there is insufficient staff time
to process applications. However, the end result is that it will
be very difficult to bring sites into favourable condition and
meet the 2010 and BAP targets.
4. Stricter SSSI targeting under HLS
at expense of non-SSSI sites that are crucial to wildlife.
Another impact of staff shortages is that SSSI's are being prioritised
under HLS, at the expense of non-SSSI sites, many of which do
not now qualify, even if they are key sites for BAP Priority Species.
While this is clearly desirable to achieve the target of bringing
SSSI's into favourable condition, it means that it will be more
difficult to hit BAP species and Habitat targets, and achieve
the 2010 target of halting biodiversity loss. In a climate change
world it is vital that such non-SSSI habitats are brought into
favourable condition to link up SSSIs, reduce habitat fragmentation,
and allow species to respond to climate change. If this situation
continues for long, SSSI will increasingly become islands that
steadily leak biodiversity.
5. Virtual cessation of care and maintenance
visits to Stewardship sites by NE staff because cut-backs
have resulted in them having to focus on claims. Such visits are
crucial to ensure compliance and the success of agreements, and
ensure they lead to benefits for wildlife on the ground. The impact
on BAP species with special requirements is most acute and our
regional staff have often stepped in to help where our interests
overlap.
6. Reduction in funds to ensure vital
management of key habitats.
Five examples:
(a) Lack of funds to fence at least two important
wildlife sites in Devon (Great Tree Farm and Waye Cross Farm)
which are habitats for BAP Priority butterflies such as Marsh
Fritillary. The result is that grazing in these sites cannot be
controlled, and one site has been undergrazed, and the other overgrazed
as a result, leading to very unfavourable conditions for wildlife.
(b) Disruption to planned management of a
key block of common land (West Down) on Dartmoor, one of the last
remaining habitats for the High Brown Fritillary butterfly. A
WES agreement has been set up and scrub is planned to be cleared
over a five year period. However, because of the cut-backs, it
is unclear whether the money will be available for this financial
year. (Although we have heard that some may become available at
the last minute).
(c) Lack of funds to pay for essential management
and scrub control on Braithwaite Moss SSSI, Cumbria, to bring
into favourable condition and restore habitats for the Marsh Fritillary.
(d) Reduction in funds for coppicing that
is essential to maintain favourable condition on woodland NNRs
in Cumbria and maintain breeding habitat for BAP Priority Species
such as the High Brown Fritillary and Pearl-bordered Fritillary.
(e) Major reduction in planned management
to ensure favourable condition of a major heathland block in Bournemouth,
Town Common, a reserve managed by the Herpetological Conservation
Trust. Originally £70K had been budgeted to clear scrub and
restore heathland under Natural England Wildlife Enhancement Scheme
but this has been reduced to £10K.
Indirect Effects
7. Negative effect on the attitude of
the farming community. This is a highly significant indirect
effect of the cuts from our perspective. Our field officers are
finding that there is very little confidence in Environmental
Stewardship amongst landowners and a great deal of scepticism
when NE makes commitments (often attributable to RPA mistakes).
This can be countered to some degree by the work of our field
staff but a huge amount of damage has been done. When (or if)
the budgetary problems are resolved a positive publicity campaign
must be launched to restore some confidence. It is our experience
that BAP priority habitats in the wider countryside are not protected
by cross compliance or EIA so what is their future if renewals
from CS to HLS are low and are set to remain so (we understand
the national average is less than 20%).
8. Uncertainty about future grant-aid
and continuation of projects beyond March 2007. Although the
cut-backs announced so far only affect the current financial year,
they have created uncertainty and caution about planning projects
during the next financial year. Consequently it has become far
more difficult to plan ahead and ensure the continuity of effort
that is so vital to maintain progress with conserving biodiversity.
This has an especially significant impact on NGOs such as Butterfly
Conservation who have had long term Memoranda of Understanding
with English Nature (inherited by Natural England), and rely on
long term grant aid, for example under the Species Recovery Programme.
All the existing MOUs and grants cease at the end of March 2007
(including our own) and it is unclear whether they will be renewed.
In January we will have to issue statutory redundancy notices
to the staff working under these projects. It will also be impossible
to ensure the continuity of large numbers of expert volunteer
who are vital in adding enormous value to the grant aid and to
meeting the BAP targets. Similarly the Reserves Enhancement Scheme
is being wound up even though this has been a crucial mechanism
to bring many hundreds of nature reserves owned by NGOs into favourable
condition. The intention is to replace with HLS agreements, but
because of the points made under sections 1 and 2, this is often
impossible and will reduce our ability to reach biodiversity targets
within our reserves. In conclusion, the current climate of uncertainty
is thus prejudicing achievement of biodiversity targets by creating
a climate of uncertainty and delay.
Butterfly Conservation
November 2006
|