My passion for wildlife was stimulated in my teenage years, mainly thanks to my Mum (a biology teacher) who made me look at the world differently and being inspired by writers such as Paul Colinvaux. This early interest developed into biological research in my 20s, when I did practical conservation work in places such as the Comores and Mongolia.
Today, any free time I have I spend pottering around the flatlands of East Anglia or escaping to our hut on the Northumberland coast looking for wildlife and castles with my wife and children.
I studied Biological Sciences at Oxford and Conservation at UCL, and worked at Wildlife and Countryside Link before spending five years as Conservation Director at Plantlife.
I joined the RSPB as Head of Government Affairs in 2004, became Head of Sustainable Development in 2006, before becoming Conservation Director in 2011.
Earlier this year I pointed out to the UK Parliament’s Environmental Audit Committee that comprehensive international agreements for nature conservation and the environment, together with a robust and enforceable governance framework, are essential.
As the spring migration season demonstrates – nature does not respect borders. In fact, as you read this, I shall be up in the Cairngorms with the family hopefully showing my children one of our most charismatic migrants – the osprey.
Chris Gomersall's fabulous image of an osprey in flight (rspb-images.com)
The question of how the “Leave” and “Remain” campaigns would ensure an enforceable, international approach to nature conservation, whatever the result of the EU referendum vote, is a key element of the challenge we issued to both last month. You will be able to read the responses from both camps very soon.
The need for a coordinated international approach to nature conservation was a driving force behind the adoption of the 1979 EU Birds Directive and the 1992 EU Habitats Directive (the Nature Directives). The Nature Directives place a responsibility on all members of the EU, including the UK, to protect the most threatened species and the most important sites, and together they form the foundation of nature conservation across the EU.
Regular readers will know that the two Nature Directives are currently the subject of a Fitness Check, launched by the European Commission, intended to assess whether they are fit for purpose. We are currently awaiting the final results of the Fitness Check, and although the evidence gathering phase of this process is concluded, RSPB scientists have produced further evidence of the importance of these groundbreaking laws.
In July last year, I welcomed my colleague Dr Paul Donald (here), Principle Conservation Scientist at the RSPB, to talk about research he had done into how effective the Birds Directive is for nature conservation. His research confirmed that in the Birds Directive we have an international conservation policy that actually works for our more threatened species.
Well Paul is not a man to rest on his laurels. He has been doing further research to help answer one of the key questions posed by the Commission for the Fitness Check, “How coherent are the Directives with international and global commitments on nature and biodiversity?”
In a paper recently published in the journal Conservation Letters, by scientists from the RSPB Centre for Conservation Science, we have analysed the contributions of the Nature Directives to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and other Multilateral Environmental Agreements. You can read the paper here.
The findings demonstrate the importance of the Nature Directives for fulfilling the UK’s international obligations. For example the Natura 2000 network makes a very significant contribution to achieving the CBD target to protect 17% of terrestrial areas, while EU species protection rules help achieve the target to prevent the “extinction of known threatened species”, and ensure that their “conservation status... has been improved”, as well as contributing to wildlife conservation objectives under other international agreements.
The impacts of the Nature Directives extend beyond just nature conservation; as 65% of EU citizens live within 5 km of a Natura 2000 site, and 98% within 20 km, these sites have the potential to raise awareness of biodiversity and to deliver ecosystem services to a high proportion of the EU’s population.
Indeed evidence submitted to the Fitness Check confirms that Natura 2000 sites are estimated to receive between 1.2 and 2.2 billion visitor days each year, and offer the opportunity for greater engagement by the public and stakeholder groups (landowners, hunters, farmers etc.) in nature conservation, as well as supporting the growth of volunteer networks of site support groups and citizen scientists.
Some of RSPB’s most visited reserves, Titchwell and Minsmere, are part of the Natura 2000 network, as are many of our other reserves. Achievements like this are worth celebrating, and hot on the heels of the Natura 2000 award given to RSPB’s Dove Stones last week, RSPB’s Futurescapes project is in line to receive a LIFE Nature and Biodiversity award as part of the Green Week celebrations which take place this week in Brussels and across Europe.
You can read more about Futurescapes here and about Green Week 2016 here.
Paul Donald’s research also confirms that the Nature Directives are helping to achieve climate change mitigation targets by storing carbon. Estimated below and above ground carbon stocks per unit area in Natura 2000 sites are 43% higher than the average across the rest of the EU.
Of course, it is impossible to say what the EU would have been like without the Nature Directives, but there is ample evidence that they have yielded additional benefits over and above what would have been expected. For example, over 50% of Natura 2000 sites are not covered by any other form of protected area designation. Countries that have joined the EU show substantial increases in their coverage by protected areas around the time of accession, and increases in the populations of target species post-accession. Even in the UK, which has a longer history of conservation legislation than most countries, the Institute for European Environmental Policy has found that “[the] Directives have added a layer of protection for nature ... above and beyond that provided in previous national legislation”.
Other International agreements the Nature Directives help the UK and other EU Member States fulfil include the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Bern Convention; 1979), the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS, or Bonn Convention; 1979) and the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar Convention; 1971).
This research shows that the Nature Directives provide a regulatory framework that, with fuller implementation, will help EU Member States to meet their obligations under the CBD and other international agreements, and lends further weight to calls from RSPB through the #DefendNature campaign, from the BirdLife Europe partnership and other NGO networks involved in the #NatureAlert campaign, as well as from the European Parliament and EU Member States for these Directives to be better implemented.
Of course, the result of the EU referendum could have a significant impact on how international protection for UK birds is delivered in future which is why I encourage you to keep an eye on this blog to find out what both campaigns have to say.
One of the most enjoyable aspects of my role as Conservation Director of the RSPB is that I get the chance to share in some of the most inspiring and life-affirming conservation projects. Regularly I have to highlight the damage and threats that nature faces but today I want to celebrate a project that is living our dream of restoring our countryside and making it, once again, rich in nature.
In the heart of the Peak District lies our Dove Stone reserve and at a recent ceremony in Brussels our work to restore nature’s home in this dramatic landscape has won the conservation category of the 2016 Natura 2000 awards.
RSPB Dove Stone - good place to sit (Ben Hall: rspb-images.com)
This is the third year of an award that was set up to recognise the excellence in the management of the network of protected sites across the European Union – the network is called ‘Natura 2000’. This network was established by and is protected under the Nature Directives that we’ve been campaigning so hard to save. The network is made up of our finest wildlife sites including the Peak District Moors of which our Dove Stone reserve is a significant part.
This major European award highlights something else that is very close to our heart – the power of partnerships. Our award for the project ‘Demonstrating the success in blanket bog restoration’ is shared with our partners United Utilities. Together we have been working with tenant farmers to restore the tattered moorland degraded by decades of damage.
‘Blanket bog’ is one of those terms beloved by ecologists but with less resonance amongst the millions of people who love our hills and moors. The peat that cloaks our highest land forms a blanket of life that supports characteristic plants and animals. The peat has taken thousands of years to form, built up from the preserved remains of plants, once this is exposed through overgrazing, drainage and burning the peat oxidizes and is prone to be washed away in time of heavy rain, all this on top of decades of industrial pollution which has taken its toll on the landscape.
The resulting scarred landscape is a disaster for wildlife and bad news for us too. The peat-staining in our water is costly to remove and the peat that disappears through chemical oxidation ends up pumping carbon into our atmosphere, directly contributing to the risks of climate change.
Blanket bog is also a very rare habitat globally emphasising the UK’s vital role its protection.
Our work with United Utilities at Dove Stone started in 2010 and has involved planting up the bare areas of peat, repairing eroded gullies and sowing the peat-forming sphagnum mosses. It’s a work in progress but already we’re seeing dunlins, golden plovers, curlews and red grouse recovering.
Action to block drains to restore the peat of Dove Stone (Ben Hall: rspb-images.com)
We’re proud of our Natura 2000 award but our progress is measured, as well, by the knowledge that the moors and hills of the Peak District are coming back to life. As the peat gradually recovers it will, in time, help to tackle climate change by locking up carbon and by improving the quality of our drinking water .
At Dove Stone we’re putting our principles into practice and seeing great results. As I wrote, here, all is far from well across much of England’s moors. We are challenging the style of land management (designed to support driven grouse shooting) and have welcomed the legal challenge that the European Commission has launched into the widespread failure by the Westminster Government and its agencies to challenge the lack of conservation of the upland Natura 2000 sites in England.
Dove Stone shows that there is another way.
I’ll leave the last word to Dave O’Hara, our site manager at Dove Stone, ‘We are delighted to have won the Natura 2000 Conservation Award and would like to say a big thanks to all our dedicated volunteers who have played a massive role in making this habitat restoration work a success. Although this is an international award, this is a very local project, which has depended on the dedication of local people who have braved the elements week in, week out to help start to return this part of the Peak District to its former glory.’
Tonight, I am helping to launch The RSPB’s 2050 Energy Vision - a new report showing how the UK could transform its energy system and meet its 2050 climate targets in harmony with nature whilst remaining affordable and secure.
I’m excited by this research as it helps us work out if we can have our cake and eat it ie a low carbon future that avoids harming the natural environment.
We were motivated to do this research for three reasons.
First, climate change poses the greatest long term threat to wildlife: one in six species worldwide could go extinct by the end of the century if we carry on business as usual. This is why the RSPB has campaigned with others both domestically and internationally for high targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and wean our economies off fossil fuels.
Second, we support the transition to a renewable energy future yet our experience is that poorly planned renewable projects can cause needless harm to wildlife. In debates about wind farms, barrages and bioenergy, we have over the past twenty years had to fight hard to ensure wildlife impacts are taken into account in both design and deployment of schemes.
As a consequence, we have huge experience of how to do things well and what to avoid. For example, between 2010-2015, we responded to c1,000 wind farm applications and sustained objections 5% of these (recent examples include Strathy South, Forth and Tay, and Hornsea). Yet, through dialogue with developers we can reduce impacts and even enhance the natural environment (for example at Blacklaw wind farm in Scotland where we’ve worked with the developer to restore habitat to benefit breeding waders and farmland birds).
Third, alongside individual site conversations, we have long argued for a more strategic approach for planning the renewables revolution. As well as keeping energy supplies secure and affordable with fewer greenhouse gas emissions (the so-called energy trilemma) we want natural environment considerations to be respected and taken into account earlier in the decision-making process.
Using data provided by a range of organisations including the Crown Estate, the BTO and Ecotricity, we’ve been able to map parts of the UK where technologies which harness the power of the wind, sun, wave and tides could be located with low levels of risk for sensitive species and habitats. We’ve mapped these alongside physical constraints (such as housing, roads, railways, shipping lanes and other important infrastructure) and policy restrictions (for example protected landscapes or Ministry of Defence land). An example, for solar, is shown in the maps below.
We then worked out the potential generating capacity of this ‘low ecological risk’ package of renewables, taken other land use needs (such as for food production) into account and, using the DECC energy calculator, constructed three scenarios about what our energy mix could look like in the future.
The good news is that the UK has the potential to generate up to four times the UK’s current energy consumption through low ecological risk renewables: up to 6,277 TWh/yr* (the total final energy consumption in 2014 was 1661 TWh/yr). In particular, our results show key opportunities further out to sea, where ecological sensitivities are likely to be lower. This would require the commercialisation of deep-water technologies such as floating wind turbines. We also found that there is significant scope for the continued deployment of onshore wind and solar farms with low risk for wildlife – which together could produce a quarter of the UK’s current total energy consumption with low ecological risk.
The three different scenarios (shown on pages 18-22 of the report and shown below) for the UK’s energy future we developed were:
The scenarios forecast 56-88% of energy supply in the UK would come from renewable sources compared to 7% today (well, when the the latest annual figures were made available), which means that we'd be providing 89-91% low carbon energy by 2050 when energy using CCS technology is taken into account. Moreover, a common feature across the three scenarios is the strong focus on energy efficiency and reducing overall energy demand, which reduces the overall need for new energy infrastructure which can pose risks to wildlife.
But how much will this all cost? The good news is that the cost estimates are similar to other pathways which are designed to tackle climate change. The Decc calculator estimates that an energy system that doesn’t tackle climate change would cost £4,615 per person per year in 2050. Other pathways that seeks to meet climate change targets would increase costs by an average of 9.3%. Our scenarios have costs of 8.2%-9.5% above the scenario that doesn’t tackle climate change. It’s worth remembering of course that there is a severe cost to climate inaction and a cost to damaging the natural environment. The figures we’ve used ignore both these hidden costs.
Knot flock by Ben Hall (rspb-images.com)
The maps are not meant to be prescriptive and the scenarios are certainly not meant to provide a certain picture of the future. We want, instead, to initiate a debate about what we need to do now to put us on the right path towards a low carbon future which avoids trading away the natural environment.
With this in mind, we have offered ten recommendations for governments across the UK to adopt including better use of spatial planning to avoid conflicts with nature conservation, major progress in key areas such as energy efficiency and low carbon innovation, and investment in better ecological data to guide decisions about where renewable energy developments can safely be deployed.
As a society we have choices, we can either take action today to reduce the risk of climate change or wait to deal with the consequences. By establishing the Climate Change Act 2008, the UK has chosen to take action to deliver a low carbon economy. There is then a choice as to whether this low carbon pathway takes nature into account or not.
We think it is possible to have a UK energy system that is affordable, secure, low carbon and respects nature. We want and need governments across the UK to share this ambition. The first opportunity to take this forward will be the plan that the UK Government will develop to deliver the UK’s Fifth Carbon Budget due next month.
I think that the team behind this report have done a great job and I congratulate them. Its success, however, will be judged by the conversations it triggers and ultimately the responses by governments.
Please do have a read and let me know what you think.
It would be great to hear your views.
*TWHr/yr refers to terawatt hours (1012 watt-hours) of electrical energy per year.