Memorandum submitted by Betty Lee
Biodiversity loss will continue for as long
as planners, the Environment Agency, CCW and agriculturists do
not work together, with commitment, to halt this problem. The
Forestry Commission/Forest Enterprise does good conservation work
but with insufficient manpower.
Efforts by conservationists tend to be restricted
mainly to training, survey work, leaflet production and management
of relatively small areas. This work is under resourced so that
the results of the training and surveys are not always capitalised
on, while in the real world farmers and developers continue relentlessly
to have far greater—but negative—impacts on the wildlife
in our countryside. While excellent work is being done by conservationists
and naturalists to help particular species and habitats, often
of very special importance and rarity, the danger is that they
are isolated.
Connectivity should not be just a theoretical
exercise while at this moment agricultural activities and development
continue to destroy wildlife corridors. There is an urgent need
to identify and protect these corridors. We could enforce waterway
bank protection with minimum width fenced 3m buffer zones, using
new legislation if necessary. This would be of enormous benefit
for water quality, fishing, soil preservation and wildlife. Crucial
hedge lines, woodland and other habitat strips must be identified
and protected and improved. Culverts are cheap to install when
building new roads but the cost is born by wildlife when their
safe passage along a valley is destroyed. Wildlife walkways and
tunnels are poor compensation for a bridge which really does minimise
damage to wildlife flow along the valley. Imagine butterflies
crossing the A55 while following a valley—Russian roulette!
Floods are the costly delayed response to cheap culverts getting
blocked—and to deforestation and soil compaction due to
over grazing.
I see continued deterioration in the fencing-off
of the little wooded dingles, which provide essential wildlife
corridors in NE Wales over the 27 years I have been monitoring
badger setts. These are often our last remnants of old woodland
yet sadly not only are they not regenerating, but I often see
them reduced in size, when I GPS the boundaries, to provide more
open farmland, even when the valley sides are very steep. Grants
could be used instead of farming subsidies to reward conservation
minded land owners, who in the past have been given insufficient
rewards for their efforts. This would counter the need to plough
every last inch in order to make a living.
Grants should be based on payment by results.
If a landowner can maintain rich biodiversity on his land he should
be rewarded accordingly. Too many landowners do not have enough
incentive to follow through best practice. For example, agents
of landowners are not often supervised adequately so they may
spray slurry into rivers and crush lapwing eggs, even when they
have been asked to be careful (real examples). If records were
kept of river purity, species, good habitat management there could
be a biodiversity grading which would be linked to grants.
Strong measures over Europe, land and sea, are
needed. Marine reserves will never work until they are totally
protected. It has been shown that total protection zones, on a
large enough scale—and implemented in time—can not
only recover but also act as reservoirs which export marine wildlife
and have a great financial benefit to the local economy. The EU
should reward landowners for ethical and sustainable farming.
We should not be taxed to provide subsidised food which, a recent
documentary showed, people waste since it is cheap. Yet it is
so costly to the environment.
Development is relentless; a battle may be won
to save a species rich site but the war is never won thanks to
the appeal system.
Brownfield sites, in my experience are far better
for wildlife than greenfield monoculture deserts. These sites
are often the last refuge and food supply for wildlife: they may
be unsightly but at least they are free from chemical spray.
RESOURCES
We do not need food with enormous air mile costs,
nor do we need four or five far flung holidays a year. Even though
this has a huge impact on biodiversity and climate change our
government is lemming-like in encouraging us to squander our resources
at an alarming rate!
REINTRODUCTIONS
We are behind our European partners in bringing
back the beaver. This harmless animal is a keystone species and
improves habitat for other wildlife, such as otters and water
voles. The web of wildlife is complex and interrelated so the
knock on effect of bad or good practice can have unexpected results.
Otters are coming back but are raiding fish farms because of the
decline in eels and the come back is also limited due to poor
habitat. Beavers' habitat improvements are good for fish and so
otters and fishermen benefit as well.
In conclusion, we need to continue to protect
our pockets of wildlife and continue to address their connectivity
to avoid more local extinctions. As soil erosion continues and
the cost of wheat rockets, our fuel supplies are running down.
Over population and the demand for bio fuels is putting wildlife
under risk as never before. Yet once that has degenerated, like
the sacrificial miner's canary, what hope is there for us? We
need urgent action! Not more elusive surveys—we know enough
to remedy the decline but do we have the will?
19 May 2008
| 
