In life, nature conservation or even politics it is sometimes sensible to look back and learn from the past before focussing on the future.
Twenty one wildlife charities in Wildlife and Countryside Link (including RSPB) have just published a joint assessment of the Government’s progress on the 2010 biodiversity target. Guess what? We didn’t halt biodiversity loss by the end of 2010!
This was always going to be a tough challenge. What WCL did back in 2006 was set out what we thought the Government should do to stand the best chance of doing so and set out clearly how we would measure progress. This was under the three headings of: stop the rot, protect the best and restore the rest. At the end of each year, Link has fed back to government our assessment of progress on a number of issues from the status of birds, bats and butterflies to the encouragement for out of classroom learning for school children. This used a simple traffic light indicator with Red being poor progress and Green meaning good performance.
This assessment is the last one and covers the period from 2006 to the end of 2010. It makes fairly stark but, we think, fair reading. We are clearly in the Red for protecting the marine environment and stemming the loss of important species and special habitats. The only signs of Green were for improvements in the management of protected sites on land and for bat populations. But of course this was mainly an assessment of the previous Government and not the self proclaimed ‘greenest government ever’.
At the start of 2010, it was clear that we weren’t going to meet the 2010 biodiversity target. In the spirit of looking forward, WCL set out 8 challenges for the year, from resources, support for local authorities through to green farming schemes. These were aimed at ensuring we were in the best shape to redouble our efforts for the new global 2020 targets that were in the pipeline. They cover partly the former government but also the first six months of the coalition Government’s tenure. Progress assessments for these areas are also included in the report and they are if anything less favourable than the longer term view with only Red and Amber assessments.
So enough of all this critical reflection let’s look forward. Despite what has sometimes been said of us we are an optimistic bunch and we are always looking for things to get better. The potentially key initiative from the new(ish) Government is the commitment to produce a ‘bold and ambitious’ Natural Environment White Paper alongside a review of the England Biodiversity Strategy.
This represents a great opportunity for Caroline Spelman and her team to set out their green credentials. Although to get this right it has to go well beyond Defra. It needs commitment from across government, with David Cameron and all his Ministers playing their part. For example, the Treasury, the Department of Health and Department of Communities and Local Government must take their chance properly to value wildlife, build it into their work and plan for a healthy and vibrant future.
The Natural Environment White Paper is due out in May, this has been put back by the ‘forest flog-off furore’, but it is being discussed within government now. We won’t mind the delay if the final white paper and revised strategy are effective as well as bold and ambitious. Looking forward, this is what I think they need to include:
These will be our tests of whether the government has seized its ‘big, big opportunity’.
A love of the natural world demonstrates that a person is a cultured inhabitant of planet Earth.
I think someone, with his comment above, has his large tongue in his very large cheek. But certainely the general public need to be brought much more in touch with nature and to appreciate its importance, for everyone's good, as we all depend on it, even those operating computers at the top of skyscrapers in Canary Warf. Maybe the White Paper will address this isaue as well as the others highlighted.
Of course the RSPB has, and is achieving a huge amount. For example,I see two red kites as I look out the window. Without the RSPB and its brilliant staff I shudder to think what the state of our wildlife would be like. The coalition government can do no better for itself than to work closely with the RSPB on all the issues highlighted in this blog.
redkite
Mark I think those are excellent points, and I think Red kite has really nailed by pointing out the need for lateral government support. I would like to see the RSPB and organisations like it making much more of an effort to voice their opinions in calling for this unity. Unlike others with special subjects like ranting, I do support and believe in the work the RSPB does, but I would like to see a stronger line on how they advocate and lobby conservation.
Surley there is still a strong need for the RSPB to engage more aggresively in public forums (not like this one) which revolve around issues to do with public understanding.
I also still see a deficit in a gret deal of agricultural attitude which is unhelpful to conservation biology.
Thanks
redkite - good points
trimbush - how can I write such 'long-winded holier-than-thou nonsense'? It justs comes naturally. No, I do myself an injustice - I've worked hard at it. Thank you for your comment.
“stop the rot, protect the best and restore the rest”
Surely mark is having a laugh here – at everyone’s expense?
Does he really mean it? It’s almost laughable!
How can he write this long-winded, ‘holier than thou’ nonsense?
Demanding a cleaner environment?
Fellow regular bloggers will be aware of my ‘specialist subject’ in which all – without exception – of mark’s key criteria – repeated below – are totally ignored as they have been for over 10+ years!
Why should anyone – and land owners and farmers in particular – participate in such a process?
Until organisations such as WCL and the rspb recognise ‘reality’ the Coalition should not commit to anything ‘greener’!
Mark – as Conservation Director – should ask himself why is it that the rspb has been in existence for so many years and so little has been achieved.
The UK resident has moved so far from Nature that he allows - and is encourages to allow - un-natural things to persist (eg fatal wildlife diseases to let rip through the countryside) through sheer self-interest, ignorance and / or wholesale institutional / corporate irresponsibility of the likes of the WCL, rspb, etc...
Very little ‘immediate’ effect – no (long-lasting) legacy whatsoever!
Just look at these criteria - a joke - surely?
• Tracking progress against clear measurable outcomes for the sites, species and habitats that are our natural capital.
• Recognition that a healthy environment should be valued by more than money
• Clear leadership and mechanisms to resolve problems
• Making the most of existing legislation
• Transparent demonstration of delivery across government
• A convincing funding strategy
• And last but not least measures to help the Big Society deliver for the natural environment.
Absolutely right Mark; however forward looking and positive the White Paper is, if other Government Departments do not "buy into it" and support it with their own actions it will fail. I think some examples of "buying into it" by Departments would certainly include the following,
* saving and expanding carbon rich habitats which "lock up carbon" such as the rain forests and peatlands, and making sure renewable energy facilities are sensitively located both on land and sea so that biodiversity and landscape impacts are minimal.
* ensuring th UK's trade does not support environmentally damaging activities abroad such as the destruction of carbon rich and wildlife habitats to grow biofuel. This would be totally self defeating,
* ensuring that impending changes to the planning system do not conflict with the White Paper and strongly support the natural environment.