A couple of years ago, just before he retired, Alistair Gammell shared his perspectives on the development of the most effective, and progressive, wildlife legislation in the world. Alistair’s long career with the RSPB took him to the post of Director of International Operations, but he was there in the thick of it when negotiations were underway back in the 1970s.
The storm unleashed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s Autumn Statement, with it’s dismissive approach to the need to safeguard our natural heritage, prompted me to re-read Alistair’s forward to a document we published a couple of years ago – and I thought I would share some of them with you (you can find the pdf of the original document here).
The European Unions Birds Directive arrived at a time when the conservation movement was struggling to fight on a level playing field and victories for nature were all too rare. In the 1970’s the RSPB was much smaller and it was a significant commitment to enter the world of lobbying in Brussels.
Saving special sites was an important objective, as there were threats to wetlands and coastal habitats all over Europe; but the primary concern, then, was the killing of birds around the Mediterranean. The threats to habitats and special places that birds depend upon have, sadly, increased.
The Birds Directive has changed the way sites are protected. Before the Directive, the only sure was to protect a site was to buy it. The UK’s signatory to the Directive, Dennis Howell, had first-hand experience of the role the new Directive could play. The previous year, the international wildlife importance of the Ribble Estuary in Lancashire had been recognised, yet this world-class wetland was saved from a development threat only by compulsory purchase by the Nature Conservancy Council.
The Ribble estuary with lapwings - a special place at the heart of nature conservation in England. (Picture Andy Hay, RSPB Images)
A great and enduring strengths is the underlying legislative model that allows a Directive enacted when the ‘Common Market’ consisted of 10 Member States to remain effective and relevant 30 years later when the EU has grown to 27. The Birds Directive is strong yet flexible; its clear, scientifically robust framework relies on implementation by member states. Coupled with 30 years of case law, these characteristics ensure that the Birds Directive continues to be central to the conservation of Europe’s birds and wild places.
Those of us who love nature want to be sure that the Birds Directive has worked. The RSPB and BirdLife International have done the research to show that it is doing its job. Those birds of special conservation concern in Europe and listed on Annex 1 of the Directive have fared better inside the EU than outside.
The future is one in which protecting our best sites is an essential first step in the face of climate change. Member States must ensure that designations are in place and funding is available to ensure these sites are managed properly. Governments need to invest in management practices that support livelihoods and communities in protected areas.
I sincerely believe that now is the time to be bold. The next few years will define the world’s response to the twin challenges of climate change and biodiversity loss. The Birds Directive, and its sister Habitats Directive, give the EU a world-leading opportunity to ensure we don’t just ‘protect the best’ but ensure that protected sites are set in a landscape that is capable of sustaining our incredible heritage of wildlife and wild places, a goal that should stand as a mark of our own civilisation.
Over the next few days, I will post a series of short articles looking at the issues that have been catapulted into prominence by the Autumn Statement.
If you would like to take action to remind the coalition Government that the environment doesn't need to be sacrificed for growth - here's how.
Follow me on twitter.
Many thanks for this, Andre - very useful to have such a comprehensive background to underpin actions and lobbying in the coming months