It’s been said often enough, but many of us have never before appreciated or even noticed our natural environment as much as we have since the pandemic. Like a long lost friend, nature has helped to soften the blow of a tough few months peppered with restrictions after restrictions.
For me highlights have been scuffing leaves along my regular woodland path in autumn, watching the early bumblebees investigate flowering hellebores in my garden in January and now the sparrows squabbling over dropped seed. There are many ways in which for me nature has brought me peace and the wider realisation that we are all part of something much bigger.
For pretty much the first time ever, life at home has meant I watched the imperceptible changes of the seasons, with insects and birds using different spaces in my garden and the village to eat, sleep and play. Seeing all this life close up reminded me every day to keep the bird feeders stocked, to break the ice on the tiny pond and to ensure we have a sequence of flowering plants on show and in use by the bees and butterflies.
Small but important steps to giving back to nature, which is providing me with mutual pleasure. And I know, I am far from alone in this.
The irony is that despite us benefitting immensely from nature and being wholly dependent on it for our survival, our actions tell another story and render our relationship very one sided. Our industries and the consumer choices we make are wreaking havoc on nature and the climate as we continue to take what we want, without much thought or recompense. This is tipping our planet’s balance with increasing signs of perils that spell out huge repercussions for nature and our own wellbeing.
Since 1970, in Scotland alone, almost half (49%) of species have decreased in numbers and one in nine species, including plants, animals, fish and insects are at risk of extinction.
Unless we wake up to the gravity of what we are doing and take concrete steps to halt the loss of nature, this will only get worse. Our lack of care and recognition means that adults today are in grave danger of seriously harming our precious planet to the point of no return and paring it back to a much-diminished version for future generations.
Things are changing though, and people across the globe are pushing decision makers to put in place the steps that will put our natural world on the path to recovery. As we head to the poll, a survey conducted by the National Trust for Scotland shows that almost three quarters of people in Scotland (74%) would support the Scottish government introducing legally binding targets to halt and reverse the rapid decline in nature.
At this critical stage in our planet’s history, whoever gets to lead Scotland from 6 May must put the health and wellbeing of its people and with it the health and wellbeing of our natural world at the heart of all decision making. They must continue to pursue and uphold high environmental standards, supported by long-term funding for Scotland’s environment agencies, and take steps to ensure everyone has access to nature-rich greenspace.
They must also recognise the immediate and long-term danger our natural environment is facing and ensure that Scotland is proactive in reversing biodiversity declines, setting legally binding targets by 2022 to make sure that by 2030 Scotland’s nature is on track to recovery. Having pushed our natural world to its limits means that measures to safeguard and rebuild the health of our environment can no longer be kicked into the long grass.
Scotland’s government will need to put words into action and show clear leadership in the fight for Scotland’s nature, and our planet.
The month of May shows us nature’s lust for life. Nature can recover if we help it, says Fight for Scotland’s Nature campaign coordinator Miriam Ross.
The month of May, I contend, is one of Scotland’s best. Even when spring has been slow to show itself, suddenly in May it puts on a performance, full of bees and blossom and bright green leaves. Nature’s drive for renewal is evident all around us.
Added to that, May is Scotland’s sunniest month, and when the sun shines in May I can fool myself that it’s going to stay with us right through to September.
This May, as coronavirus restrictions are eased, the sense of possibility is even sharper than usual. We could take a boat trip on the Firth of Forth to see the puffins! We could go and visit friends 40 miles away!
This May, of course, there’s also the election. The result is going to please some and not others. But no matter where your political allegiance lies, the fact remains that a large cohort of keen new people will be joining the familiar faces at Holyrood this year. Each one of them will have the opportunity to push for action on the issues they care about.
Not least among the issues that should concern MSPs, new and returning, is the state of Scotland’s nature. A staggering 49 percent of species in Scotland have decreased in number since 1970, and one in nine species is at risk of extinction.
It’s far from certain whether future generations will be able to see puffins in the Firth of Forth in May.
But decline is not inevitable. As the month of May so amply demonstrates, nature has quite a lust for life. Just as people can recover, so can nature.
At Forsinard Flows in Caithness, globally important peatlands are being carefully restored, leading to the return of bog plants and wildlife.
At the Mar Lodge Estate in the Cairngorms, regeneration of ancient pinewood forests has allowed juniper, dwarf birch and willows to recover, and rare hen harriers to return.
In 2020, just four years after the seas around the south coast of Arran were protected from scallop dredging, divers discovered a large bed of flame shells – a beautiful shellfish that had almost disappeared from the Clyde region.
Lamlash Bay, Arran
Each small story of nature’s triumph shows us what is possible. To reverse the downward trend, to multiply these small successes and help Scotland’s nature recover on a big scale, we need action across society, driven by government.
This kind of drive is already underway for the climate. Scotland’s ambitious climate targets are vital in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and moving us towards the goal of ‘net zero’ emissions by 2045.
Now it’s time to do for nature what we’re doing for the climate. Three of Scotland’s five main parties – Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens – have already committed in their manifestoes to support legally binding targets for the recovery of Scotland’s nature.
As with climate change, we need to act fast. The new Scottish government must set legally binding targets by 2022 to make sure that by 2030 we stop the loss of Scotland’s nature and put it on track to recovery.
For the sake of all the months of May still to live – ours and our descendants’ – I hope MSPs of all parties will do everything they can to make this happen.
A guest blog by Guy Schanschieff, chair of the Nappy Alliance
As a society, we are slowly coming to terms with the fact that there are consequences to throwing something away. Every single bit of waste produced has to go somewhere.
The scale of single-use plastic waste is unmanageable. Globally, we produce approximately 300 million tonnes of plastics waste each year. Of this waste, only 9 percent is recycled, 12 percent incinerated whilst the rest accumulates in landfills, dumps or the natural environment.
There is a fundamental flaw in our approach to managing waste – and it starts with the fact that we need to look beyond recycling. The waste hierarchy has been around for years, and although prevention, material reduction and reuse are important and seen as the ‘gold standard’, too much effort has been dedicated to recycling unnecessary single-use plastics rather than tackling the heart of the issue.
In recent years, steps have been taken to tackle single-use plastics, for example through the introduction of legislation restricting the supply of plastic straws, cotton buds and stirrers, as well as reducing the use of single-use carrier bags through a charge..
Government and local authorities must make it a priority to tackle sources of unnecessary single-use plastics waste, starting at the point of production and encouraging prevention and reusable alternatives wherever possible.
For example, although plastic bags and straws have been in the spotlight, single-use (or “disposable”) nappies also cause significant and widescale impact on the environment. Single-use nappies require huge quantities of raw materials and contribute to climate change. On average each nappy generates around 550kg of CO2 y throughout its lifecycle. From birth to potty, single-use nappies have been found to use the equivalent of 15,000 plastic bags and around half a tree in fluff pulp per child.
On the other hand, the environmental benefits of reusable nappies are becoming clearer. They use 98 percent fewer raw materials and generate 99 percent less waste, can help to save the equivalent of 17 plastic bags per day, or over 6,000 per year per child from being landfilled or incinerated. They also deliver significant financial savings of over £1,000 for parents which increases if they are used on subsequent children or purchased on the thriving second-hand market.
The 2021 UNEP report: Addressing single-use plastic products pollution; using a life cycle approach found that reusable nappies had lower environmental impacts across almost all trial scenarios when compared to single-use nappies. The UK Government’s Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will also be publishing a new Life Cycle Assessment of reusable versus single-use nappies in the coming weeks. We hope that the findings will further demonstrate the progress of reusables, and their environmental and health benefits in comparison to single-use nappies.
For these reasons, we believe the Scottish government should be considering new ways to reduce the reliance on single-use nappies by 2025 – building on the very welcome inclusion of a reusable nappy voucher in Scotland’s national baby box scheme. This would also support Scotland’s ambition to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2045 at the latest, carbon neutrality by 2040, and contribute to the 2045 NHS Scotland net zero pledge.
Attitudes towards the environment have shifted during the pandemic, with a YouGov survey in October 2020 demonstrating that almost four fifths of Scots are concerned about the volume of single-use items and packaging used across the country. In the run-up to COP26, promoting reusable nappies is a way for the Scottish government to show leadership on an important but often overlooked source of unnecessary single-use plastic waste.
One approach to promote reusable nappies would be to roll out a national reusable nappy incentive scheme that can be administered via local councils. Reusable nappy schemes can come in various forms, including trial packs, reimbursement schemes, voucher schemes, nappy libraries, and educational events/materials. They typically seek to provide information and reduce the upfront costs for families. There is a thriving second-hand market for reusables too, and many parents decide to use the reusable nappies for subsequent children.
Existing reusable nappy schemes, such as Edinburgh and North Ayrshire’s Real Nappies starter kits, have been successful in helping reduce single-use plastics waste in Scotland. By promoting reusable nappies through a nationally devised scheme, forming a joined-up approach across local authorities, and providing the resources they need to reach their potential, Scotland would be taking a substantial step towards meeting its ambitious environmental targets.
On 17th April 2021, LINK’s Chief Officer Deborah Long spoke to the 2050 Climate Group’s Zoom Out: taking action for the Green Recovery event, part of their Young Leaders Development Programme, which aims to engage, educate and inspire young leaders. This blog is based on the talk she gave.
So here we are: all living on planet earth. Scotland is a tiny geographical speck. But Scotland has a role much larger than its geography implies. In 1700s, Scotland was at the forefront of the Industrial Revolution, when today’s relentless rise in carbon dioxide levels began. In 1950s, the UK began a drive to become self sufficient in food we could produce here with the start of mechanised farming and large scale production methods and the acceleration in biodiversity loss that has reached crisis point today. Having played significant roles in both crises – one globally and one at home, it is only right that we are at the forefront of tackling both these crises.
It would be fair to say that Scotland has recognised that we have this role: there is recognition at highest level of Government in Scotland that both climate change and nature loss are existential crises for Scotland: The challenges facing biodiversity are as important as the challenge of climate change, and I want Scotland to be leading the way in our response. Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s First Minister, July 2019
We’re seeing political commitment and progress towards the 2045 target on climate change in Scotland, albeit with bumps in the road. What we’re not yet seeing is the same level of commitment to nature loss. We need to change that if we are to make progress on both these crises.
There are three world changing emergencies facing us:
We are suffering human disease on a scale not seen since 1918’s Spanish flu. We are in a climate emergency with global temperatures rising at unprecedented rates and severely impacting on communities and natural habitats on land and at sea. At the same time, we are in a nature emergency where the rate of species extinctions is rising exponentially and where global changes are for the first time being caused by human activity. While we can’t solve all three emergencies at once, one thing we mustn’t do is solve one while making the other two worse. We need to act: but to be effective we need to act together.
On the climate emergency, the Scottish Government is making the links between climate and nature: There is a global climate emergency. The evidence is irrefutable. The science is clear. People have been clear: they expect action……Another UN body, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, issued a warning about the damage human beings are causing to the planet…..Both these reports highlight that it’s not too late for us to turn things around, but to do so requires transformative change. This is not just about government action. And it is not something that only affects Scotland. All countries must act and must do so quickly and decisively…Roseanna Cunningham, Cabinet Secretary For Environment, Land Reform and Climate Change, May 2019.
The nature emergency is defined by the loss of species, which was reported in the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) global assessment published in 2019. This showed that 1 million species across the world are threatened by extinction. This is being driven by five direct drivers of change, which in descending order are:
(1) changes in land and sea use;
(2) direct exploitation of organisms;
(3) climate change;
(4) pollution
(5) invasive alien species
Some of the statistics in that report are bleak:
Three-quarters of the land-based environment and about 66% of the marine environment have been significantly altered by human actions.
More than a third of the world’s land surface and nearly 75% of freshwater resources are now devoted to crop or livestock production.
The value of agricultural crop production has increased by about 300% since 1970, raw timber harvest has risen by 45%.
Land degradation has reduced the productivity of 23% of the global land surface,
In 2015, 33% of marine fish stocks were being harvested at unsustainable levels; 60% were maximally sustainably fished, with just 7% harvested at levels lower than what can be sustainably fished.
Urban areas have more than doubled since 1992.
Plastic pollution has increased tenfold since 1980, 300-400 million tons of heavy metals, solvents, toxic sludge and other wastes from industrial facilities are dumped annually into the world’s waters, and fertilizers entering coastal ecosystems have produced more than 400 ocean ‘dead zones’, totalling a combined area greater than that of the United Kingdom.
Negative trends in nature will continue to 2050 and beyond in all of the policy scenarios explored in the Report, except those that include transformative change.
At the launch of the report, Robert Watson, IPBES Chair said: The health of ecosystems on which we and all other species depend is deteriorating more rapidly than ever. We are eroding the very foundations of our economies, livelihoods, food security, health and quality of life worldwide.”. He continues: “The Report also tells us that it is not too late to make a difference, but only if we start now at every level from local to global,” he said. “Through ‘transformative change’, nature can still be conserved, restored and used sustainably – this is also key to meeting most other global goals.
The nature crisis and the third emergency, the global pandemic, are very closely linked: the covid-19 pandemic has reached us as a result of close contact with wild species and is a direct outcome of today’s nature crisis. Changes in the way we use land; the expansion and intensification of agriculture; unsustainable trade, production and consumption are disrupting nature and increasing contact between wildlife, livestock, pathogens and people. Almost all known pandemics, including HIV/AIDS, SARS, and COVID-19, are caused by microbes from animals. The frequency of new diseases emerging in human population is now increasing and the reservoir of currently undiscovered viruses thought to exist in mammals and birds is massive, c1.7 million; 48% of which could have the ability to infect humans.
In 2020, IPBES ran a workshop on nature and pandemics. Dr. Peter Daszak, President of EcoHealth Alliance and Chair of IPBES workshop on pandemics said: Pandemic risk can be significantly lowered by reducing the human activities that drive the loss of biodiversity, by greater conservation of protected areas, and through measures that reduce unsustainable exploitation of high biodiversity regions. This will reduce wildlife-livestock-human contact and help prevent the spillover of new diseases….. “The overwhelming scientific evidence points to a very positive conclusion,”. “We have the increasing ability to prevent pandemics – but the way we are tackling them right now largely ignores that ability. Our approach has effectively stagnated – we still rely on attempts to contain and control diseases after they emerge, through vaccines and therapeutics. We can escape the era of pandemics, but this requires a much greater focus on prevention in addition to reaction.”
Even here in Scotland, studies show that since 2008 infection rates of Lyme’s Disease are rising across the UK but especially in Scotland. Scientists say that it is “highly likely” that the abundance of ticks in our outdoor environments is associated with the rise in deer numbers over the past 50 years, and that in turn may have contributed to increasing incidences of Lyme Disease, as more people and
So how do we build a green recovery that tackles all three emergencies?
We need to tackle both the climate and nature emergencies together. That means that solutions for one mustn’t make the other one worse. There is potential for this for this to happen with biofuel production replacing food production on good agricultural land or natural habitat in key areas or with trees planted in the wrong place, for example. Both are clearly potential solutions to climate change – but they also could make the nature crisis worse. We have other solutions though – nature based solutions that tackle both: nature friendly farming, protecting marine habitats, natural regeneration of woodland, peatland restoration, better soil management for example.
So how are we getting on?
If we look at some of our progress to date:
On climate action: we have updated the Climate Change Plan in Scotland – that’s good. And we are making progress towards the 2045 targets. Globally we’re not moving fast enough and there is of course the argument that we should and could be doing more in Scotland.
On nature action: we’ve missed most of the Aichii biodiversity targets in 2010 and in 2020 in Scotland and globally – we cannot afford to fail in 2030. But unlike climate, we don’t have yet any agreed targets for nature: we’re making it up as we go along, each doing our own little bit but the sum of the parts isn’t adding up to a whole. It is adding up to a hole, but not one with a w.
And finally on political and public will: there is a loud public voice calling for transformative change – but we’re not breaking through yet. And as a result, political will is lagging behind.
Both the nature and climate emergencies are really that; we have a decade to change direction: to meet net zero and to build a nature rich world. That is not long: it is two parliaments and it is within the current decade, declared by the UN as the Decade for Ecosystem Restoration. Bringing about this level and scale of change needed is not easy: halting and reversing ongoing biodiversity loss has no easy solutions and compromises will have to be made. However, the need for change is incontrovertible.
A green recovery to these 3 emergencies relies on 3 tactics: all around diversity. We need diversity in strength; diversity in cooperation and diversity of action in time and space:
Diversity in strength:
Numbers matter: the more people talking about this, the louder the voice for the environment.
Targets matter. We need to have something to aim for – we need something to measure progress against. Targets are hard though. They are hard to define in the first place, especially for nature and they give ordinary people, a measure of progress so we can see when governments, industry and society is not doing enough. We can and should use targets to monitor progress and point out when it falls short.
Cooperation matters too:
This is all too big for government, too big for business, too big for society: we need to work together. Today it can feel like there are too many silos all shouting at each other, while nature breaks and climate warms. There are 2 barriers facing those who are trying to make progress:
The first barrier is shifting baselines and nature deficit disorder. The change in nature loss is largely incremental: which means that as we lose things, we don’t notice.
Nature, as a general rule, has astonishing powers of recovery. It is pretty good at bouncing back from things that kill it, if the killing stops before it’s too late, or is reduced to sustainable levels. What it’s not so good at is recovering when the very ground beneath it is altered….Sometime these changes are visible, but often they are not. …If we have our wits about us we may notice. If not, we don’t notice. It can be hard to see something that isn’t there, impossible to hear nothing.Conor Mark Jameson, Silent Spring revisited 2012
Also, we all start to suffer from shifting baseline syndrome exacerbated by Nature deficit disorder, where fewer children are coming into regular contact with nature and the outdoors across the UK. Even by the 1970s, which is when we started to collect decent data on nature trends, the changes had set in. And since then they’ve accelerated.
How many of our parents and grandparents went fishing for sticklebacks or shrimps? How many collected bunches of wild flowers? How many collected wild berries to make jams or pies? The Natural Childhood report 2012, National Trust found that:
Fewer than a quarter of children regularly use their local ‘patch of nature’, compared to over half of all adults when they were children.
Fewer than one in ten children regularly play in wild places; compared to almost half a generation ago.
Children spend so little time outdoors that they are unfamiliar with some of our commonest wild creatures. According to a 2008 National Trust survey, one in three could not identify a magpie; half could not tell the difference between a bee and a wasp; yet nine out of ten could recognise a Dalek.
Competing priorities are the second barrier. Climate change and nature loss are both important and urgent and they both suffer from the Eisenhower principle: “I have two kinds of problems: the urgent and the important. The urgent are not important, and the important are never urgent.“ President Eisenhower, 1954
This means they never reach the top of the To Do list. There is always something more urgent: a financial crash, a referendum, a global pandemic. The irony of the latest urgency is that it is the direct result of the fact we have ignored the needs of our environment for too long and it’s starting to impact us directly. And while the ecological certainty continues to degrade, political solutions keep taking up time and effort that should be spent taking these ecological crises. That bring me onto the final diversity tactic:
Diversity in time and space:
These are planetary emergencies but the solutions lie locally. The pressure for change to incremental problems is not going to come from politicians – it’s going to come from communities:
But though our knowledge is immense, our collective political will is not strong. The energy for change – and thus our preservation – will have to come from grass-roots networks, which is where it’s most often come from. Margaret Atwood, 2012
A Parliamentary term of 5 years is too short and there are too many dependencies and consequences for politicians to be able to act on a longer term basis. Today’s nature and climate emergencies need to be solved in the next 10 years. If politicians start to act 10 years from now, it will arguably be too late. And that’s why change for these type of emergencies comes from grass root communities: they see beyond the next 5 years.
Here’s an example: the kelp industry meets global demand for alginates, used in foods, textiles, pharmaceuticals (bulking, gelling, stabilising). In 2018, Ullapool seasavers started #Nokelpdredge campaign to halt mechanical kelp dredging along the west coast of Scotland. They worked with Parliamentarians, celebrities and eNGOs and watched the Crown Estate Bill voted through the Scottish Parliament to prevent mechanical kelp extraction. This is just one example of saving today’s nature for tomorrow’s future.
What sort of thing do we need?
So before we look at what we can do, I just want to explore some of the things we need. This is not an exhaustive list: it relates back to the key issues of the environment, the economy and our health:
Nature targets: so we can measure progress. In 2019, we published the State of Nature Scotland It showed that 1 in 9 of Scotland’s species are in danger of extinction: 49% of Scottish species have decreased since the 1970s. Nature is changing rapidly, with 62% of species showing strong changes. Drivers of change in Scotland include land management, pollution, invasive non native species, and marine climate change and fisheries.
But while we need targets here in Scotland, we need global ones too. This is where we are looking to the Biodiversity Cop15 in Kunming in October. We’re working with our sister LINKS in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and we’re calling for commitment to halt the loss of biodiversity by 2030 and recovery by 2050.
Resilient ecosystems on land and at sea: we need protected areas because they are the refuge for many of our rare and not so rare species. It is from these refuges that they can spread when conditions are right or when their current habitat changes so they can’t stay. Protected areas need to be flexible enough to build resilience in habitats and amongst species populations; they need to be protected against fragmentation; and they need to be properly protected from damaging activities.
Nature networks are a key way to link up our landscapes so species can move, habitat can expand and contract and ecosystems become more resilient to changes from climate for example. Nature networks are not necessarily contiguous but they build in ecological connectivity so that ecosystems become resilient to change. This short film explains what they are and why we need them.
Circular economy: a circular economy enables us to live within planetary limits: it extracts less from the planet, re-uses what we’ve already taken and reduces our waste. A circular economy bill would lay the foundation for this. Our Circular Scotland project explains more.
Access to a healthy environment: everyone living in Scotland needs to have easy access to a healthy environment. 20 minute neighbourhoods should include ecologically functional greenspace within 20 minutes active travel from everyone’s home. Active travel itself needs infrastructure right across Scotland from urban cycle ways to long distance cycle routes and footpaths. And everyone in Scotland needs the skills and confidence to access the outdoors: the conid-19 pandemic clearly underlined how important being outside is for physical and mental health. The Out there Award at Ramblers Scotland is one example of doing that.
What can we do?
As individuals, we can add our voice to campaigns to demonstrate our support on key issues.
For example, LINK is running a campaign for people to sign up to demonstrate their support for more action for nature, championing nature. In parallel we have a Nature pledge for all candidates standing for election in May 2021. #oorfootprint is a wider social media initiative that demonstrates our connectedness with the planet and each other.
The importance of talking to other and spreading the word cannot be overstated. Again, Ullapool seasavers are showing a way forward by working together, highlighting local and global issues and bringing others on board by inspiring, and sometimes, shaming, them to act.
Obviously Government can do a lot through legislation to protect and enhance the environment and to build in, guide and enforce change. Over the last 20 years, we ‘ve seen some great examples of ambitious and world leading legislation in Scotland, our access laws for example. But we’ve also seen how ambitious world leading legislation doesn’t always lead to effective, timely action. LINK’s Rhetoric to Reality report, published 10 years ago remains valid today.
If you’re looking for more inspiration, watch This is Scotland here, commissioned from Maramedia, who are responsible for Stormbound. This is about Scotland’s nature and why we need to do more, as funders, as people living in Scotland and as visitors. This film is for anyone who supports Scotland’s nature today and wants future generations to enjoy it too.
There is something infinitely healing in the repeated refrains of Nature – the assurance that dawn comes after night, and spring after winter….. Rachel Carson, Silent Spring 1964.
A guest blog by Butterfly Conservation Scotland‘s senior conservation officer Tom Prescott and policy officer Chris Corrigan
The Holyrood elections in May come at a crucial time. Although they are likely to be dominated by the independence debate, we must not forget that this is also a pivotal year for nature and the climate. There will be make-or-break UN Conferences on Biodiversity (COP15) and Climate Change (COP26), the latter hosted here in Scotland. All of this is occurring at the same time as we desperately need a Green Recovery to drive a more sustainable and resilient economy for the future.
Scotland is a beautiful country! In normal times, tourists flock to our shores to experience the wonderful landscapes and wildlife. However, these are no longer normal times and we already know the wildlife which makes this country so special cannot be taken for granted. If the Covid-19 pandemic has taught us anything, it is the danger of complacency.
The wealth of Scottish biodiversity is no different. It may be magical, but we know it is also in trouble. The recent State of Britain’s Larger Moths report showed that Scottish moths have declined by 22% in the last 50 years. This is consistent with the last State of Nature report for Scotland which recorded a 24% decline in the abundance of all species since 1994, and revealed that about half of all Scottish wildlife species had declined during the same time period.
Garden Tiger moth
There is a danger that these shocking statistics simply wash over us and don’t sink in. They become meaningless. As a society we have been numbed to the scale of decline. After all, we see big statistics but not thousands of dead and dying birds, insects and animals. Species are slipping away unnoticed as we slide into an almost invisible and growing biodiversity crisis.
The elections are a chance to create a better future. Butterflies and moths won’t have a say in the election but you do!
To inform the debate and ensure prospective MSPs recognise the scale of the challenge, Butterfly Conservation Scotland has signed up to an important Scottish Environment Link manifesto. This covers all the key issues requiring political leadership and action, with the ideas and policy proposals that would transform the fortunes of our wildlife. They will also make a meaningful contribution to tackling climate change.
Large Heath butterfly
Everyone in Scotland can help give butterflies and moths a voice. Set out below are three key issues where you can ask prospective candidates to back measures which will bring about real change.
1/ The need for a new and ambitious Environment Actwith legally binding targets for nature’s recovery. Targets will not save biodiversity in themselves, but when they become legally binding they focus political minds and drive the policy changes needed to make a difference.
2/ A commitment to a new future for farming with nature at its heart and the funding to support it. All farmers, crofters and land managers should be rewarded for helping protect, restore and enhance biodiversity and reduce carbon emissions. There should be an end to direct subsidies and instead, the money used to support farming for food, wildlife and the climate.Complacency can lead to a belief that all is well with nature in Scotland. However, we know that agricultural change has been one of the biggest drivers of wildlife decline and the statistics tell a different story. It is time for change if politicians are serious about reversing long term wildlife decline! Profitable farming which supports more wildlife and reduces carbon emissions is possible. These are not incompatible goals.
3/ A commitment to a Nature Network for Scotland delivering bigger, better, more joined up sites for nature and creating links for wildlife and habitats. Wildlife is being squeezed into smaller, fragmented habitat patches. A new Nature Network is an ambitious approach to restore and enhance landscapes by joining up and expanding areas protected for nature while delivering benefits for people, particularly by developing green corridors and greenspaces in our towns and cities.
Future generations need a safe and stable climate together with Scottish landscapes full of the amazing wildlife we have all been able to enjoy. But such a future cannot be taken for granted. All the evidence shows that without transformational change, this is not the future which our children and grandchildren will enjoy. An impoverished landscape is not inevitable, and we know that with the right political priorities and choices a much more optimistic future is possible.
This is the chance to ask your candidates what they will do to make a difference, especially on the issues we have covered here. If you would like to get involved, the Who Can I Vote For? website is a useful way to find out more.
So please give butterflies, moths and future generations a voice and when it comes to election day and cast your vote for nature and the climate!
Scotland’s salmon farming industry has been the focus of much attention over the last few years, and most recent developments have focused around its impact on marine mammals.
In 2020, LINK welcomed the introduction of the Animals and Wildlife (Scotland) Act, which included a ban on licensed shooting of seals to protect farmed salmon within aquaculture facilities.
Also included within the Act (Section 15) was a requirement on the Scottish Parliament to report on the aquaculture sectors use of Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADDs). ADDs emit sound with the intention of scaring away seals, but they also impact non-target species, specifically cetaceans (i.e. porpoises, dolphins and whales).
Widespread use of ADDs has increased in Scotland in recent decades. The lack of oversight or regulation of ADD use throughout this period is concerning. Additionally, due to the recent ban on seal shooting, there are concerns that the reliance on ADDs to control seal predation will increase.
There is clear evidence that ADDs can cause injury, disturbance and displacement of harbour porpoise and minke whales, which was confirmed by the Scottish Parliament report. The report suggests that further research on ADD use is required, and highlights the need for further investigation into non-lethal alternatives.
Subsequently, the Scottish Government published a second report on non-lethal seal control options, which provides a comprehensive review of alternative, non-acoustic methods. The report recommends that the use of anti-predator nets and/or new netting material should be prioritised.
Indeed, some members of the aquaculture industry have already taken the step away from ADDs (e.g. Scottish Sea Farms) and adopted tensioned nets, anti-predator nets and more robust netting materials. This move has led to a reduction in seal predation in some areas.
We are very much in the midst of discussions around the use of ADDs in salmon farming. Recently the Scottish Salmon Producers Organisation (who represent all salmon farming companies in Scotland) announced that they would no longer use ADDs that “may have been considered to cause disturbance to European Protected Species” (i.e. cetaceans). LINK very much welcome this development.
However, it remains unclear whether this means some types of ADD will be continue to be used. ADD technology is advancing rapidly and newer ‘acoustic startle devices’ operate at a lower frequency than traditional ADDs. This may lessen impacts on harbour porpoise but result in greater impacts on minke whales. Clarity around the industry’s intention to use any acoustic devices is paramount.
Both the recent decisions on banning seal shooting and stopping the use of ADDs have largely been influenced by the upcoming US Marine Mammal Protection Act. The US MMPA requires all countries that import seafood to the US (including farmed salmon) apply the same standards placed upon US fishermen, including those regarding the incidental killing or incidental serious injury of marine mammals for fisheries purposes.
LINK is concerned that industries operating in Scotland are looking to welfare and conservation standards of other nations to guide best practice in Scotland. It is now three years since two parliamentary inquiries into salmon farming in Scotland took place. Concerns around ADD use were raised and to date little action on the issue has taken place. LINK would like to see the Scottish Government take a leading role and show strong commitment to preventing further use of any acoustic devices around salmon farms.
It is LINK’s view that all acoustic devices designed for scaring seals should be urgently phased out in favour of benign alternatives. Some salmon farmers in Scotland have already proven that non-acoustic and non-lethal alternatives can be effective in deterring predators. Therefore, LINK believe that the Scottish Government should, in line with its own report, prioritise the wide-scale deployment of these alternative methods.
A blog by Julia Pix, WDC communications manager and Goodbye Bycatch campaign manager
Thank you to everyone who’s got involved with our campaign to stop dolphins, porpoises and whales dying in fishing gear in UK seas to put fish and shellfish on our plates. We’ve loved seeing all your support on social media and appreciated every single person who took action by emailing the fisheries minister or contacting their MP, MSP, AM or MLA. We are so grateful to have such brilliant supporters and, even though they don’t know it, dolphins, porpoises and whales are lucky have you on their side!
More than 10,000 of you sent a message to your fisheries minister and so we know that your voices have been heard, although we wait to see what action will be taken. We’ve received responses from Rebecca Pow, UK Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Environment, the Northern Irish fisheries minister’s office and the Welsh Fisheries Minister, Lesley Griffiths. At the time I’m writing this, we have not yet received a response from the Scottish fisheries minister.
Ian Findlay has been a part of the LINK family for a long time. He served on LINK Board from 2002, but was involved in the network as the LINK member rep for Scottish Wildlife Trust before then. As a LINK Board member between 2002 – 2017, Ian was also part of the Board’s Employment Sub Group. In 2017, Ian was elected as an Honorary Fellow to LINK. His support for the LINK staff and the wider network was not limited to his formal roles however: he was instrumental in setting up and reviewing LINK’s internal policies on employment and salaries and he contributed hugely to developing our early systems for work planning and evaluating impact, working closely with both Chief Officers, Jen and then Deborah.
His calm and steady presence, his wise advice and his unstinting support for LINK and the work it does with its member bodies will all be remembered by everyone who knew and worked with Ian. We have gathered some memories and stories of Ian that illustrate the immensely positive influence he brought to us all and the huge affection in which he was held.
Ian was a Board member of Scottish Environment LINK when I joined in 2003. He was very welcoming, knowledgeable, calm and encouraging and I took inspiration from that. I enjoyed talking to him about conservation, biking and his involvement with the community acquisition of Cultybraggan camp. When he moved to Paths for All we worked together on a couple of projects to encourage more people to enjoy the outdoors and plant trees. He stayed connected with Scottish Environment LINK after finishing as a Trustee and always remained willing to share his sage advice. He was just an all-round good guy and the world is much worse off without him.
Andy Fairbairn, LINK Board member 2003 – 2011
Ian was an inspirational colleague. We benefited hugely from his calm and collegiate approach, his insight and wise counsel in helping us pick our way through some pretty challenging and sensitive issues and the humility with which he did this. I remember a collective sigh of relief each time Ian confirmed his willingness to continue his engagement with the LINK board. My memory of Ian is of someone so genuine and thoughtful in how he engaged, listened and contributed and the warmth of his smile.
Dan Barlow, LINK Board member 2004 – 2011
Through the mists of time I can’t recall whether or not Ian was already on the Board when I joined as Treasurer, but I do remember how helpful and supportive he was with many of the internal issues we worked on together. His approach was considered and patient, regularly taking time to step back to view the bigger picture – and challenge the status quo or established view when required.
He also had great people skills, taking time to consider the impact of Board and management decisions on LINK staff, and seek their input wherever appropriate, ensuring that conversations were well informed and inclusive of stakeholders.
We established a number of sub groups on the Board around that time to look at specific topics and unsurprisingly Ian was in high demand for many of these, and typically generous with his time and contributions.
I hadn’t worked with Ian in a long time, but the experience stayed with me, and I was shocked and saddened to hear of his death. I know he’ll be greatly missed by many.
David Downie, LINK Board Treasurer 2002 – 2010
I joined LINK Board in 2004 and always looked to Ian as a source of expert advice. He influenced the way I look at things now. Much more recently, when I joined the LINK staff team in 2019, I asked Ian if he wouldn’t mind mentoring me for a bit while I found my feet. He agreed, of course, and I was lucky enough to be able to draw on his guidance and advice whenever I needed it. It was hugely reassuring to me knowing Ian was there ready with a wise word or two, and continually lifting my thinking to higher levels to identify and work towards working out how LINK as a network could deliver a top notch service for its members and Scotland’s environment. We never finished that piece of work of course, but I will continue it and remember Ian’s advice to keep looking up, keeping looking for inspiration across sectors and most of all, keep drawing inspiration and energy from being outdoors. His mantra of work is not where you are, it’s what you do will always remain with me and is how I now use my surroundings whether outside or in, to tussle with challenges and explore solutions wherever I am.
Deborah Long, LINK Board 2004 – 2014; LINK Chief Officer 2019 onwards.
My main experience with Ian was on the Board of LINK for many years. He was charming, considered, unflappable, fair, positive, never brash or arrogant, always calm and effective in his advice and decision making. An absolute pleasure to be in a room with and spend time with.
Jonny Hughes, LINK Board member 2007 – 2012
Having grown up in Comrie, I had the privilege of knowing Ian for almost all my life. He was an important and popular member of our village community. My earliest memories of Ian are learning to horse ride on the Shetland ponies he and his wife Andrea owned. Andrea and Ian were incredibly patient and kind to my sister and I as we struggled to stay on board the very small (but strong) ponies! I was excited to find out Ian was an Honorary Fellow of LINK when I started working here over a year ago. He was always interested in what I was up to at LINK whenever I bumped into him out for a walk or cycle in Comrie. Ian walked the walk by sharing his passion for the environment with many and cared deeply for the place people have within it. He will be greatly missed. My thoughts are with Andrea and his lovely family, his friends and his Paths for All colleagues.
Juliet Caldwell, LINK staff
Ian’s engagement with LINK covered decades of the network’s development. Where I particularly became aware of the value of his contribution was post-Parliament establishment, when it felt as though the heat was really on at LINK, in terms of amount to be done vs. tiny size of staff and huge aspiration of network in advocacy terms. Ian was among the people I could go to for advice.
Ian was a key contributor to advising on appropriate handling of and support for ‘pressure at the centre’ process. For a period, there was no available line manager for me and that led to a few interesting dilemmas, which Ian and others helped me through. It was Ian mainly who advised us on a salaries process that was shared, fair, amendable, projectable, including scales, expectations around progress through increments, etc. Not many people’s pigeon but oh boy did it feel good to have something professional in place, at last!
Ian made time if asked for help, was never too busy to advise and input; where he undertook to help in a steering group or advisory capacity, as a trustee, Fellow, he delivered. And he was present, could be approached as needed, personally supportive, compassionate. He understood that the CO role is a challenging and sometimes lonely place to be and I appreciated that he reached out – to me, but also to other staff, to offer his support with the ‘tough aspects of the jobs’ and make sure we knew we could seek and expect support and mentoring when we needed it. This mattered to LINK’s arrangements and relationships. It was that humanness of Ian’s which I feel really stood out. A lovely, and fine man.
Jen Anderson, LINK Chief Officer, 1987 – 2019.
I always found Ian to be so enthusiastic about LINK work and the environment in general, he always had time for us and was very approachable, really just a lovely man.
Karen Paterson, LINK staff
I don’t have any specific stories about Ian, simply that I was always struck by how friendly he was and how kind he seemed, always with a smile and time to chat.
Lisa Webb, LINK staff
Ian and I were at University together and, working in similar fields, our professional paths have crossed many times over the last 40 years. Throughout his career, at SNH, HIE, SWT and PfA, Ian demonstrated outstanding knowledge and enthusiasm for protecting Scotland’s environment and encouraging us all to enjoy and benefit from it. He was always self-effacing and keen to engage and mentor others to pass on his expertise and nurture his enthusiasm in others. As a fellow Board member of Scottish Environment LINK, where we overlapped for 10+ years, he was always strategically-minded and focused on maximising the benefits of the organisation (to the environment and its members), but also calm, reassuring and inspirational. He will be much missed, especially by the environmental sector. My sincere condolences to his family.
Lloyd Austin; LINK Board member 2000 – 2013; LINK Chair 2003 – 2006
I first met Ian when he joined the Scottish Wildlife Trust which would have been around 2000. Ian had joined us from Scottish Natural Heritage as our Director of Conservation and was my boss at the time. I’ve been thinking about the work we did together then and how some of the ideas and initiatives continue in some form or another to this day. Red squirrels, peatland campaigns, reintroduction of beavers all had their origins at SWT around that time. But these important contributions to Scotland’s nature conservation history aren’t what I think about when I think of Ian. It is the man himself, his humanity, kindness and empathy above all else which I will remember. I car shared with Ian and Steve Sankey on our daily commute to Cramond and the conversation would more often than not be focused on our families and how we were spending our time outdoors. Selfless as ever Ian organised to have my baby daughter have her first horse ride – on a feisty wee Shetland pony called Chuckie. Imogen has kept up her passion for horses and has Ian to thank for her first experiences. I stepped into Ian’s shoes as the Director of Conservation when he moved on to lead Path’s for All – which we all felt was such a natural fit for Ian. We kept in touch and would often bump into each other on the train and our conversations would more often than not revert to our families, Ian now a proud grandfather. He gave so much to Scotland’s active travel and nature conservation sectors and he will leave a big gap but my memories of Ian are of our quiet conversations and the care, kindness and support he showed me. It is why I will forever think of Ian as one of the most decent human beings I ever had the privilege of calling a friend.
Stuart Brooks, Scottish Wildlife Trust
Our work, in LINK, is to protect and restore Scotland’s environment and enable and support everyone to access and enjoy it wherever they are. This is why Ian supported us: we will continue in honour of his legacy and all the help he gave us over many years.
Ian’s family have set up a memorial grove for Ian to continue his passion and support for Scotland’s native woodland. Details are here: https://treesforlife.org.uk/groves/307813/
Along with everyone else, Scottish Environment LINK member organisations have been adjusting to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. Member surveys in April and November 2020 identified key challenges and the solutions our members were implementing as lockdowns came and went, and returned. Assessing the ongoing and near future financial difficulties caused by the coronavirus crisis for environmental and conservation charities is vital for our members, funders and supporters, and helps identify what support and assistance would help the sector survive and contribute to Scotland’s green recovery.
There have been two major impacts: the immediate impact on front line functions in conservation, access and sustainable living, as practical projects and participation programmes were halted during lockdown and limited by social distancing requirements. At the same time, members experienced a massive drop in income. Most members, before Covid, generated income from as many different sources as possible, using events and activities to generate income over spring and summer. In 2020, these could not take place. In addition, memberships and retail revenue, another important source, also plummeted. With continuing uncertainties impacting on household budgets, memberships and donations are not expected to return to pre Covid levels for a long time.
Our members have adopted different ways to manage these impacts: in the short term, members applied for government support schemes where available and cut costs wherever possible. Looking forward, organisations are now planning for costs to rise again. Revenue generation options remain limited, given ongoing limits to events and activities uptake because of social distancing and social changes for example. Members anticipate a slow return back to former membership and donation levels and there are few sources of replacement funding available from government and funders.
Environmental funding has been in long decline in Scotland. This, with the loss of access to EU LIFE funding, mean sources of grants remain very limited. 45% of our members are now eating into financial reserves, never high as the sector always reinvested income directly into action on the ground. As a result, the sector has become less resilient, at a time when the need for Scotland as a whole to come together and deliver for nature and climate has never been greater.
This sector is important for Scotland. More than half a million people support LINK members. The reason they give their support is because they want to help our members conserve nature, increase access to the outdoors, enable sustainable living and help develop government policy to make everyone’s life in Scotland greener, fairer and more enjoyable.
Going into the UN’s Decade of Ecosystem Restoration, now is not the time for Scotland to lose its vibrant and innovative environmental voluntary sector. Member bodies are doing everything they can to shore up organisational resilience through cutting costs and identifying new sources of income, but the way forward is not clear or guaranteed.
As we go into 2021, LINK and our members will continue to work together to help each other through the crisis, to keep policy and practical action for climate and nature on track and to motivate others to experience nature and benefit from that connection and work with us to conserve it for future generations. Working in partnership brings many more resources, and where underpinned by commitment and effective financial support from Government and funders, we can maintain the vital momentum and progress we were making together towards solving the nature and climate emergencies.
A green recovery for Scotland from the pandemic that works to tackle the climate and nature emergencies is vital. We are ready to play our part. This pandemic is a short-term emergency that must not exacerbate the long-term climate and nature crises and recovery towards a nature rich, more resilient world.
Dr Deborah Long, Chief Officer, Scottish Environment LINK
A version of this blog was published in The Scotsman on 23 March 2021
Scotland is known worldwide for its rich and diverse landscapes and nature. This richness is often lauded – it is used to promote our tourism industry, our food and drink products, our national identity.
However, despite these positives, not all is well – our wildlife has suffered and declined considerably over the years through climate change, habitat loss and fragmentation, marine pollution and the impact of invasive species. It remains in danger, as the State of Nature Scotland 2019 report details in full. Without significant intervention, today’s children cannot hope to experience what their parents, yet alone their grandparents were able to discover and enjoy in nature.
The State of Nature Scotland 2019 report shows that 1 in 9 species is threatened with extinction. More than half of our globally important national seabird populations, for example, have been in long-term decline for more than 30 years, with some – including kittiwakes and Arctic terns – down by more than 70%. The declines illustrated in this report are part of a much longer term trend. The data only take us back to the 1970s at which point, Scotland’s wildlife was already in significant change. For example, Scotland’s woodlands have been in decline for much longer. Our native Caledonian pinewoods, so rich in their unique wildlife community, making up c. 28% of Scotland’s native woodland, are severely impacted by herbivores, are at risk of Dothistroma Needle Blight disease and remain fragmented into vulnerable habitat islands.
Fortunately there are significant interventions that have seen strong successes, where people have protected and enhanced the wildlife that shares our planet and our country. Perhaps one of the most effective, yet least appreciated, driving forces behind those successes has been the impact of EU wildlife legislation – the ‘Nature Directives’ – and, in particular, the funding mechanism established to help countries implement it: the EU LIFE Nature fund.
Scotland has benefited enormously from that fund: since its inception, LIFE has funded over 25 projects benefiting Scotland, bringing in well over £25 million for conservation delivery in the country, a massive 21% of the UK total. And this money, of course, freed additional funds from elsewhere.
Among the beneficiaries are Atlantic salmon, freshwater pearl mussel, corncrake, hen harrier, red squirrel, porpoise, upland invertebrates, seabirds on Canna and the Shiants, machair grasslands, the Flow Country peatlands, Caledonian pinewoods and Scotland’s rainforest.
There are two key factors in the success of initiatives supporting these species and ecosystems, and they both relate to scale: geographic and temporal. LIFE funding supports projects at a landscape scale, each typically lasting 3-5 years, costing between €1-10 million.
Biodiversity projects by their nature often require sustained investment until a clear tipping point has been reached: invasive species eradication is a clear case where unless eradication is achieved and maintained, the situation very quickly deteriorates again. Equally, the factors driving nature loss and biodiversity decline are pervasive: tackling small and scattered sites is not an economic way of finding an ecological solution. Large- scale action, able to bring a suite of habitats and entire ecosystems back to health, is a demonstrably effective mechanism to restore biodiversity at a scale where it is more likely to survive into the future.
Action at this scale is best delivered through partnership and LIFE supported projects have enabled wide partnerships to operate at scale. The principle of additionality also enabled LIFE funding to be used to match against other funds and thus offers a mechanism to drive investment at levels far beyond the reach of individual funding sources.
MSPs have noted the benefits of LIFE funding: ‘The EU LIFE programme…has provided £42 million in matched funding to support peatland restoration over the past 20 years. Where will that support come from now, when we need healthy peatlands more than ever for both their conservation value and their vast carbon sinks?’(Mark Ruskell MSP 2016)
On leaving the EU, Scotland and the rest of the UK are no longer eligible to apply for LIFE funding and there are currently no proposals on how LIFE funding will be replaced. The UK Government’s Shared Prosperity Fund will replace Structural Funding from the EU: this does not include replacing the competitive funds such as LIFE and Horizon 2020.
‘It definitely makes you wonder if such landscape scale ‘game changing’ projects for biodiversity will ever get off the ground again without a LIFE programme to support them.’ (Alison Connelly RSPB 2021)
So what are the options going forward? The significant benefits that LIFE supported projects have brought to Scotland and right across the UK cannot be ignored. It is possible that the UK Government will work with the devolved governments to find a way to put in place a replacement fund that can replicate the benefits gained from LIFE funding. However, this is far from guaranteed and allocating such future replacement funding according to the Barnett formula would see much lower levels of funding coming to Scotland.
It is clear that building wide and diverse partnerships is an effective way to deliver at scale and in an ecologically successful and sustainable way. Networks such as LINK and EFN can help to foster and build partnerships. Key to success however is finding investment that operates over at least 3 years. Anything less than this is unlikely to yield clear and sustainable results. Ecological restoration is an endurance race, not a sprint.
The main element that is required is vision: vision in those able to deliver change on the ground and vision in those with resources to support and drive that change forward. Where funders and recipients can come together behind clear visions of change towards a better future, then we might see life after LIFE.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
