Autumnwatch without taking a step

Sometimes it is necessary to simply sit back and wait for wildlife to come to you. To forsake the tendency to travel, far and wide, in search of wildlife, and simply wait in one place and allow nature to spring forth around you. This is what I have done on a number of occasions this week – choosing to test the “patience pays off” approach to things, and opting for some much more laid back birding around my local patch. My regular seat in the sand dunes that sprawl out along my small stretch of the Northumbrian coast, the perfect setting from which to enjoy the wonders of Autumn migration without taking a step. It really did work…

Perched amid the Marram fronds this week, coffee in hand, I found myself treated to a pleasant spell of migration watching. More of a trickle than a flood, by my own admission, but more than enough to keep me sated. The day beginning early with the familiar call of Meadow Pipits raining down from within the gloom. Innumerable birds passing overhead before the darkness finally lifted and a further 350 zipped over during the course of the day. Each and all heading South with some haste; in loose groups of ten or less at a time, often with another species secreted among their ranks. A Grey Wagtail, yellow tones and protruding tail standing out like a sore thumb amid the dulcet hue of the pipits; a few Pied Wagtail and, later, a small party of Siskin – all bound for more hospitable climes no doubt.

Waiting, the hours ticked by and the pipit passage gradually stilled, though other migrants soon took on their mantle. A dozen Skylarks, their melodic tones gradually fading as they too moved out of sight and next, a Great Spotted Woodpecker rising and falling above the beach. It’s undulating flight a clear giveaway, despite the distance between us. With these, a number of species I seldom see on passage. Species more often observed in my garden, within the local wood or patches of farmland. A Dunnock, four Bullfinch, a Reed Bunting and a Snipe: again, all heading South, followed promptly by the classic winter sight of a small flock of Mistle Thrush flying low about the waves – their machine gun rattle audible upon making landfall.

Speaking of the waves; with the passerine passage overhead soon wavering, my attentions inevitably turned to the sea. And, scope in hand, I soon set about observing the annual pilgrimage of some far larger characters. The first of which, a skein of fifty or so Pink-Footed Geese were quickly noted high above the surf. Followed, in quick succession, by yet more precursors to the forthcoming chill – ducks. Wigeon streamed south, some two-hundred of them to give a rough estimate. Most still looking somewhat drab, clearly moulting out of their less-appealing Summer garb. Later, a few dozen Teal, a female Pintail and two score Common Scoter, followed, finally, by ten Goosander trailing in their wake. Each and all resident species yes, but ones that increase tenfold during Winter. Visitors from Iceland, Scotland or the continent, though their origins matter not and all made for an interesting wait.

Gazing at the the white horses rolling, with some force, towards the beach, it was not just wildfowl on show, however. And species often associated with the more palatable climes of Summer and Autumn were also clear to see. Two Whimbrel headed South later in the day, as did a number of Sandwich Terns, and later, a large mixed flock of Hirundines – Swallows and House Martins – moving with purpose across the sea. Their numbers at the local roost sites – along the telephone lines of the nearby towns – having dwindled considerably in recent days. A pleasure to see, as always.

As the hours ticked by, my supply of coffee diminished and I began to fight the urge to depart, yet more migrants became apparent. Red-Throated Divers – not really a migrant, per say, yet a visitor to my patch nonetheless – came sporadically, one still bearing the vestiges of its crimson finery. Followed by a Great Crested Grebe and drawn-out string of Golden Plover – species which, like the divers, move on mass towards the coast in Winter. Though the real treat came in the dunes. A short stint admiring the local Stonechats – perched in somewhat stereotypical fashion on the yellowing stems of hog weed – revealing a less familiar character. A Whinchat, the first I have seen here no less, doing its best to blend it amid the aggregation of its commoner cousins. Not a sight that would set most birders hearts to racing, but good enough for me.

Wheatear

Departing, around midday, the steady stream of fleeing summer visitors, and arriving winter ones having ground to a halt, a few more titbits lay in store as I moved. A pair of Wheatear (not the one pictured above, that was taken a few weeks back) fed on the nearby footpath during a pause in the human traffic, and a Blackcap “tacked” from the brambles along the railway lines. A quick pitstop here revealing no less than eight birds, tossing back the now overly-ripe berries with a clear sense of urgency. Building up their fat reserves I suspect. With these, a few Chiffchaff and Whitethroat, and a Willow Warbler – potentially my last of the year – singing a half-hearted autumnal song from a nearby Willow. Perhaps the first time I have actually seen this species warbling from a Willow?

All in all, this weekend provided a welcome break from the normal, and somewhat monotonous travelling so often associated with my chosen hobby. Slowing down has its perks, and it was nice to witness the joys of migration first hand. Nothing overly rare, and as such many may scoff at my excitement, but all in all, a very enjoyable morning. And a welcome slice of avian respite before beginning my Masters degree this week.

Time to take wading birds off of the menu

This week, Chris Packham, no doubt feeling rather chipper following his exoneration by the BBC Trust over claims of bias put forth by the Countryside Alliance, launched a new petition. One calling for a moratorium on the shooting of critically declining species of wading birds, such Snipe, Golden Plover and Woodcock, in the UK. Stopping short of calling for an all-out ban, favouring instead a halt to the killing, during which proper research into the species declines can be undertaken. I hope, by a non-bias, independent body – not one that stands to benefit directly from the shooting industry. Naming no names of course.

Writing on the government petitions site, Chris highlights the woeful trends at the heart of the campaign: with Woodcock declining by 76% over the past 25 years and Snipe by 89% during a similar time frame. Going on to draw attention to the similar crash in Britain’s population of Golden Plover – which between 1993 and 2013 declined by 17% and 25% in England and Scotland respectively.

This petition has been widely welcomed on social media by conservationists, myself included, and has already gained over 2900 signatures during its first 24 hours. Though not all have welcomed it, with the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust (GWCT) suggesting that a moratorium would result in the direct loss of suitable breeding habitat for Woodcock, with species-specific woodland management likely stalling with shooters unable to pursue their chosen quarry.

Personally, and this is just my opinion, nothing more – I agree in full with logic behind the aforementioned petition. I have signed it, and will encourage anyone else I come across to do the same. This issue has long been horribly underreported – doubtless overlooked amid the clamour regarding driven grouse shooting and hen harriers. Though, to me, it is of paramount importance and ultimately comes down to the need to reassess what counts as “fair game” for shooters in Great Britain. And why, in our day and age, we are still shooting wading birds in the first place.

Chris has already pointed out the downward population trends associated with the three quarry species listed above. They are all suffering, due, no doubt to a range of factors, with habitat management likely at the heart of the issue. Shooting, however, can no be ruled out as a factor. And even the GWCT who are, as their name suggests, altogether pro-shooting, have published findings suggesting that 17% of the Woodcock shot during the open season are indeed British breeding birds. As opposed to migrants, thus at odds with the commonly peddled line put forth by shooters. Who are we then to say that this is not having a detrimental impact on the overall breeding population of Woodcock? If anything, the lack of knowledge on the subject justifies the need for further, impartial research – which is exactly what the petition calls for. We cannot afford to keep killing without knowledge of the consequences, with this situation baring an all too familiar resemblance to the tale of the Grey Partridge. A species which, despite a prolonged and worrying decline, was still shot on mass until fairly recently.

The research undertaken during the proposed moratorium could go two ways, it could suggest that shooting is indeed a factor in the decline of said species, and thus highlight the need for a ban. Something I would support. We did, after all, stop shooting Capercaillie when we realised they were in serious trouble, with the same currently happening with Black Grouse. Why then are we ignoring the woeful decline of our wading birds?

Of course, it would also go the other way, and suggest that shooting is not, in fact, detrimental to wader populations. It would not hurt to know either way, and personally, I find the GWCT’s opposition to the idea completely ludicrous. Especially seeing as such a study could work in their favour and prove their prior assumptions correct. A doubtful prospect, but a possibility…

And then we come to the argument in favour of shooting wading birds, if in fact there is one – I am yet to see a convincing argument put forth to justify the killing. With tradition the only possible explanation for the continued actions of the shooting fraternity. Though tradition itself is, in my opinion, not sufficient to justify slaughter absent thought of the wider implications. And if the hunting act has taught us anything, it is that traditions, however firmly rooted in British culture, can be broken. But anyways…

 I cannot help but believe that the economic argument put forward in defence of Grouse shooting is somewhat void in the the case of waders. Shooting itself is a rather niche hobby, and among shooters it is only a minority which actively hunt wading birds. Making the killing of Woodcock and so forth a niche hobby within a niche hobby. Few, I suspect, pay huge sums to take part in the act, and as these are entirely wild birds, unlike Pheasants which require yearlong care, few people are employed to facilitate the hobby. It is economically insignificant. And does not, in any way, shape or form, bring in “huge” sums of money to rural communities.

These species are also, unlike other game birds, not particularly famed for their culinary uses. Sure, a few hunters doubtless consume their catch out of principal, but you rarely see Snipe for sale in Supermarkets, or indeed your local butchers. The shooting for food argument is similarly obsolete in this case.

Can shooters then argue, as the GWCT does, that shooting such species benefits there conservation status? Well, not in my opinion. As despite the best efforts of hunters to maintain enough suitable habitat to benefit their crop, the birds continue to decline. And if a future ban ever came to fruition, some species-specific legislation could make management for these species compulsory. Thus rendering the “conserve to kill” argument obsolete.

There is, of course, also the argument that centres on the moral side of things. And many doubtless would rather see their Golden Plover or Snipe alive, as opposed to dead. I, however, will leave this argument for someone else to tackle.

I firmly believe it is time to reassess what hunters can, and cannot kill in the British Isles. But in the absence of a complete ban, would settle for a moratorium that would allow the effects of shooting on our declining waders to be properly assessed. As such, could I ask anyone who happens across this blog to please consider signing the petition below:

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/167410

On the Ecological, Economical and Aesthetical Value of Species – Willemijn Heideman

As soon as I ride out of town on my bike, I am surrounded by meadows and canals. There are no elevations in the landscape, there are no forests near. As far as the eye can see, it is just meadows. This might seem a little boring and not very interesting to cycle through, but luckily we have 4 seasons that differ quite a lot.

Last time I was on the bike, was during the weekend; a small tour through the meadows and past some little hamlets. The meadows were almost empty; all cows are inside this time of the year. Apart from some hardy sheep, the only animal life to be spotted was avian. Most of the birds were not flying, but just merely sitting, foraging or waggling about on the meadows. The birds present were geese, gulls, swans and a variety of duck species.

As I continued my tour, I started thinking of how we perceive our wildlife.
There are a lot of ways of looking at wildlife; from an ecological view point, to an esthetical view point and an economic view point. Based on the three examples, I will look at wildlife in this more abstract or philosophical way. But first let me introduce the three main characters:

The Good (ecological view point)

Godwits (picture on top, left) and a number of other birds of the meadow have a nearly Saintly status in the Netherlands. Godwits are beautiful long-legged elegant birds, with a pretty beak and a remarkable call. They are easy to love and hard to dislike.

In spring they come all the way from Africa to nest in the meadows.  Around this time bird lovers trek into the meadows, equipped with binoculars and sticks. These tools are not meant to catch the birds, they are for marking the nests on the ground. We go all the way to protect the nests with little flagpoles so that farmers are aware of the presence of nests when they set to harvest grass for the first time of the season early in May. Because of multiple reasons the number of bird chicks that reach adulthood is in decline in our meadows.

Climate change is one reason, since spring comes earlier each year. As a result many insects are also having their peaks earlier in season when the birds are still sitting on their eggs. The insects are gone by the time the chicks need to be fed. Another reason is that farmers changed over to monoculture high yield grasslands. They can often get one or two extra harvest(s) per year nowadays because grass starts to grow earlier. Harvesting early in season is tricky for the birds since their chicks are still warm and cosy in an egg or they are too small to flee.

The Bad (economical view point)

The presence of the geese (picture, middle) in autumn and winter is quite a different story. There are more and more geese in the Dutch meadows. Most of them come here in autumn, when temperatures in their Siberian breeding grounds plummet. The meadows are like heaven on earth for them. The same grass that is causing the problems for the Godwits, is a feast for the geese thanks to the protein-rich monoculture grass. The geese land on a very well laid table, food is everywhere. At the same time our agricultural landscape is low in predators. There is an occasional fox but other than that all other predators such as falcons or buzzards are too small to catch geese.

Some geese like the meadows so much that they don’t even bother to fly to Siberia to breed anymore. They have started breeding in the meadows, and by doing so their numbers are increasing even more. All these geese are a threat in the supply chain of grass (or hay) for our cattle, because a single goose eats up to a kilo grass a day. Their insatiable appetite is a farmer’s nightmare.

We want to cull the geese, because of the economic damage they cause. We want to cull them, because they thrive on the changes we made….
(or we try to get protection laws changed in order to be able to cull).

The Ugly (aesthetical view point)

Gulls? Ugly, noisy and aggressive birds if you are to believe the general opinion. I personally have a weak spot for them. They are incredibly smart and I like every species that is able to withstand humans (well, apart from mosquitoes).

The herring gull (picture, right)is a protected species in the Netherlands. The number of gulls in their natural habitat is declining somewhat, but this gull is adapting nicely to the changed environment it lives in: it is becoming a city dweller. Herring gulls are remarkably intelligent, they learn exactly where and when garbage is collected in cities. We know of one female gull that was nesting on the island of Texel but flew 75 km to Amsterdam every day, to the exact same bridge to collect food. She left her young on the island and commuted to the city: how humanlike of her!

So we try to cull the gulls. In this case, we cannot claim financial losses, but the fact that they are bloody nuisance is considered a good enough reason….

 The good, the bad and the ugly

Now dear reader, remember our key players; the Good Godwit, the Bad Goose and the Ugly Gull. I am going to shuffle their cards a little.

The Ugly Godwit?

What if our beautiful Godwit migrated from Africa in equally small numbers every year to nest in our meadows. But now it would not feed on tiny insects any longer, instead it would forage on our garbage in the cities. It would tear up garbage bags with it’s pretty beak and toss the waste around while looking for food.

What would we do? Would we still want to deter this Godwit like the Ugly Gull?
My guess is that we don’t. Instead of culling the trouble maker, we’d all go to garden centres to buy feeding stations for these lovely Godwits. A pretty bird like that shouldn’t eat waste.

The Good Goose?

What if our goose would still fly over from Siberia in huge numbers every autumn, but instead of devouring ‘our’ grass it would now feed on mosquito larvae that it gathers from ponds or canals…

Would we still want to cull this Goose?
Again, I don’t think we would. I think we would welcome them on our fields, because they keep mosquito numbers in control. For that, we would like them.

The Bad Gull?

Now, our gull has drawn the unlucky card. Their numbers would remain more or less equal, but instead of feeding on garbage they would feed on grass…
What would we do?

In this case I am afraid the verdict will remain the same. We would want to cull the gull for the economic damage it does.

Now, sit back and rethink the whole situation. Is it possible that in our judgements we are just a little bit biased? Could it be that we value species on superficial criteria. Is it even our place to make such judgements?

Evolutionary science tells us that ALL species present on earth today have evolved from a common ancestor 2 billion years ago. This means that each species has been adapting to life on earth just as long as we have. More over, each species has a role in the earths ecosystem.

I think we should be very, very cautious giving species a negative label. There is more about them than we know. We shouldn’t judge them solely by our economical or aesthetical standards. Instead we can only use ecological standards and if we do, all species are equal (to paraphrase George Orwell).

I still love gulls. They are neither bad nor ugly.

For more from the author you can check out her LinkedIN profile here: willemijn heideman

Catgate: Some Personal Reflections

Cats have featured heavily in the media this week, though not for the usual reasons. Indeed, following the publication of Cat Wars, a new book by American author Peter P. Marra, our feline friends have found themselves at the epicentre of a heated debate regarding their supposed ecological impact. With British conservationists downplaying the authors comments that “all free-ranging cats should be removed from the landscape by any means necessary” due to their impact on native fauna.

In his book, Marra highlights the negative impact of free-ranging cats the world over, from New Zealand and Australia – where they are responsible for the near extinction of a number of endemic species – to his native America, and has since gone on to criticise the inactivity of British conservation bodies when it comes facing the problem in our own back yard. Echoing the earlier views of popular naturalist Chris Packham in calling for cats to be kept indoors, neutered or, in some cases, euthanised.

These views appear directly at odds with the popular line that despite being fairly numerous (7.4 million), and killing upwards of 55 million birds a year, that cats are a relatively harmless figment of the British landscape. With both the RSPB and John Bradshaw, director of the anthrozoology institute at the University of Bristol, claiming that cats are not a problem. Instead championing habitat loss as the main cause of bird decline in the UK.

By Niels Hartvig – Flickr: You even scare me, Psycho!, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=31074921

As a cat owner, a cat-lover and also a naturalist, this is a debate which greatly interests me. And has done for a long time. Despite my cats being relatively housebound, and kitted out with enough bells to rival Santa’s sleigh, I have been unlucky enough to witness the effect of cats first hand on many occasions. Not often from my own, mercifully, yet only last week I pulled a moribund juvenile Greenfinch (a declining species in the UK) from my neighbours cat, and this summer witnessed a cat toying with the corpse of a Tree Sparrow – a ‘red list’ species of conservation concern. Such things have caused me to give considerable thought to the issue at hand.

In terms of the very public bickering going on between both sides, I actually find myself agreeing with both. I agree that cats are a terribly destructive force around the globe and, despite my fondness for them, find myself agreeing with control measures implemented by countries such as Australia, aiming to protect native wildlife from what is, above all else, an alien predator. I also agree with the RSPB that habitat loss is the number one cause of bird declines in the UK, that cannot be disputed. I am, however, a little dubious of their decision to dismiss the issue outright. Fifty-five million birds is, after all, a somewhat staggering number.

The RSPB are quick to point out that cats tend to prey on sick or injured birds. This may well be true, on occasion, but what about their tendency to raid the nests? Juvenile birds are neither sick nor injured, merely defenceless. Remember the nest of Wood Warblers on Springwatch a few years ago? Such behaviour is likely hugely under-recorded but who is to say it is not a problem? While most predators show a preference for easier targets, one must remember that cats, despite their appeal, are a superbly adapted killer, and like any other predator, have the potential to prey on healthy animals when the need be. Particularly in gardens where food is placed out absent consideration, as is often the case.

The other commonly voiced opinion with regards to cat predation is that they tend to predate, majoritively, common and widespread species. A statement recently echoed by Dr Mark Avery, who later went on to state that “cat control is far from a top level priority” insisting that we should work to combat issues such as climate change and raptor persecution first. Well, I agree with Mark on the second point, but as for the first, I remain sceptical, to say the least at least. The Springwatch Wood Warblers very publically showed that cats do indeed predate rare birds. Something brought home by my own encounter with the Tree Sparrow. Of course, it makes sense to believe that cats would consume common species – these are, after all, those most likely to be encountered within the ecosystem, though it is clear that this is not always the case. An important thing to remember given the depleted, often fragmented state of some rare bird populations. Could cats tip them over the edge? I suspect so.

The RSPB state on their website that the species suffering most from cat predation are likely (and in order): House Sparrows, Blue Tits, Blackbirds and Starlings. These species are indeed some of our most plentiful birds, but three of them are currently suffering declines in the UK. And in the case of the House Sparrow (red listed) and Starling (red listed) declining catastrophically. With House Sparrows, in particular, shown to be particularly prone to cat predation (Churcher & Lawton, 1987).

Of all of our birds, it is our embattled sparrows I fear for the most in regards to cats, with and a number of studies hinting at the potential role of cats in their decline. Indeed, Baker et al (2005) suggest the need for future research due to their own observations, and Crick et al (2002) highlight the fact “that cats (both domestic and feral) accounted for 26 million dead House Sparrows in Britain during 1997, of a total population of 49 million”. Does it not then stand to reason that cats could, at least in part, be blamed for the decline of this once common bird? I suspect it does, especially given the often shared habitat of both. Obviously many other factors pose a threat to House Sparrows – food supply, harsh winters, window strike, take your pick – but the deaths of 26 million that may otherwise have lived to “chirp” another day surely gives cause for concern? There is, however, a distinct lack of scientific evidence for those wishing to answer this question definitively.

I, personally, would like to see this issue given much greater consideration, particularly from the scientific community. It may only be an opinion, but with fifty-five million birds a year falling victim to cats (not counting for those undiscovered), it does raise alarm bells. As Mark Avery says, many factors have contributed to the declines of British birds and these are often of more pressing concern. It does, however, seem rather preposterous not to consider the impact of cats, especially given the woeful declines of some of their favoured prey species. And, of course, the trends observed elsewhere in the world. Yes, House Sparrows and their like are not endemic, nor on the verge of extinction, yet. But surely alleviating one source of pressure would be a good thing? It would not be easy, but it could be done.

As for the reluctance of conservation bodies to even broach the issue of cat predation, in my opinion, this relates directly to one thing. Membership. Many paying members of conservation bodies such as the RSPB likely own cats, a great many no doubt. These people directly fund the amazing work done by such organisations and would be peeved, let’s say, should said bodies demand their beloved tiddles be confined to the house. Many would likely pull their support for that organisation as a result of this, removing a substantial amount of income in the process. Just a thought, but if this is true, which to an extent I suspect it is, it is both understandable, yet entirely shameful at the same time.

I, personally, find myself agreeing most with Chris Packham on the matter. Cats should be kept indoors, much as my own are, and owners should be liable for the damage done by their marauding moggies when they are not. I would need to see a lot more evidence before I condoned lethal control of cats, but would like to see efforts to educate owners ramped up by those who claim custodianship of our environment.

Just some thoughts.

Further reading

Impact of predation by domestic cats Felis catus in an urban area, PHILIP J. BAKER, AMY J. BENTLEY, RACHEL J. ANSELL, STEPHEN HARRIS Published Date July 2005

The decline of the House Sparrow: a review J. Denis Summers-Smith 2003

Predation of wildlife by domestic cats Felis catus in Great Britain, MICHAEL WOODS*, ROBBIE A. MCDONALD†‡ and STEPHEN HARRIS, 2003.

Nature Blogging: Why Bother?

One of the most common questions raised whenever someone stumbles across this blog, particularly from those of a non-environmental background is: why bother? Surely it takes up too much time, provides very little in the way of a reward and is generally rather tedious. A good question, actually, though one I struggle to answer on a regular basis, the issue broached equally as often by nature-lovers, many of whom appear baffled by the notion of writing about wildlife, as opposed to watching it in the field 24/7. Well, I do, in fact, spent a great deal of time watching wildlife. As well as writing about it. Though such conversations have indeed caused me to ponder, let’s say, just why I dedicate so much time to blogging about nature. And, for that matter, aspire to one day make a living from amalgamating words and wildlife.

Nature blogging, for me, is a mode of learning. And, more the case in recent years, my mind now scrambles to make mental notes of every aspect of an animal or place, in order to write about it in detail later. Where once I merely watched wildlife, appreciative yet not learning overly much, I now find myself scrutinising many many aspects of species and habitats in detail. From the behaviour of a Willow Tit at the nest to the variance in bill sizes of the innumerable Dunlin pottering around my local estuary. Such observations, more often than not, raise questions. Questions that will niggle until I head online, to the library or to the pages of other nature writers in order to answer them, thus learning a little more every day. Similarly, when asked or inspired to write on a certain topic, research must be conducted in order to avoid sounding like a babbling idiot. I honestly believe I have learnt more over the years from blogging than I ever did during my three years as an undergraduate.

My blog is my diary. Many people, particularly birders and naturalists, maintain a journal – often a jaded, tattered notebook, treasured above all other worldly possessions. And in which they frequently record anything from seasonal trends in wildlife – the first swallow of Spring, or Redwing of autumn – to memorable encounters and anything else they observed on their travels. Keeping an online diary is no different. Blogging about nature allows me to keep track of my sightings, observe trends in my local wildlife and record the general highs and lows of a life in nature. Even now I find myself looking back, sometimes fondly, other times not so much, on ventures I posted online in the past, and will doubtless do the same for many years to come. If only to reminisce. All of this, of course, goes without stating the more personal aspects of a journal – some of my final outings with my Grandmother, the lady who first introduced me to the joys of wildlife, are recorded online and are deeply treasured. Nature blogging has many perks, but above all else, it is a highly personal affair, not too dissimilar to maintaining a diary. Though this diary lies plain for the world to see.

As well as acting as a journal, nature blogs also provide a means by which to inspire others, with this inspiration manifesting itself in a number of forms. From direct actions undertaken to protect nature, to simple forays outdoors to enjoy the beauty that abounds around us. There are a great number of inspirational nature bloggers online, with some of my favourites including Mark Avery, Ben Eagle and Sophie-May Lewis, all of whom inspire me greatly whenever they take to the keyboard. I do not count myself among these people, not yet at least, but hope that from time to time my blog may to cause people to think harder about a certain topic, or visit a new place. The simple act of prompting a person to enjoy and discover wildlife in an unfamiliar setting is highly rewarding in itself.

In addition to the previously mentioned points, blogging also provides a gateway to a vibrant community of talented, incredibly friendly individuals. I mentioned some of my favourite bloggers earlier in this post but there are an awful lot more out there – more every day it seems, hurrah. Writing a blog provides an opportunity to engage with other bloggers, to trade ideas, to promote one another and, above all else, provides an opportunity to make friends. Indeed, many of the people I am lucky enough to know at present first became known to me after commenting on my blog, or when I luckily stumbled across their own. All of these people boast similar interests, thus blogging, for me, has proven a real game changer when it comes to dragging myself out of the reclusive shell familiar, sadly, to many with an interest in nature.

Finally, and I leave this until last because it is the least important, in my opinion at least. Blogging is also a great way to bring about new opportunities for yourself, and a well-written or simply enthusiastic article has the potential to open up a whole new set of horizons. For me, simply sharing my thoughts on my humble online journal has progressed, on occasion, to the opportunity to contribute to magazines, books and, of course, the blogs of other people. It has lead to day trips, volunteer work, links to notable groups and even the odd press-trip. And through these opportunities, each of which I am horribly grateful for, blogging has greatly boosted my confidence. Both as a writer and an aspiring naturalist. It has helped hone my ambitions for the future and given me the reassurance I feel I needed to “grab the bull by the horns” and make things happen for myself.

The reasons set out above detail precisely why I, personally, maintain a nature blog. Obviously, every writer puts pen to paper for a different reason – figuratively speaking, I seldom use a pen – and not all will do so for the reasons listed in the post. I do, however, hope to have answered the question I began with. And moving forward I intend to use this post as a means to appease those who raise such topics in the future.

Agricultural Policy To Blame For The Sorry State Of Nature

The latest State of Nature report was released this week to widespread debate on social media, and widespread coverage in national media. Though not all chose to dignify it, with the BBC in particular, and rather shamefully may I add, deeming the topic unworthy of a spot on the prime-time news. Combining the expertise and hard work of 50 conservation bodies, the report gives a brutally honest overview of the health of nature in the UK, and beyond, in her oversea territories. And, truth be told, does not make for overly pleasant reading, setting out a sombre tale of widespread and often catastrophic declines, and highlighting sorry state of wildlife populations in the British Isles.

“Of the nearly 8,000 species assessed using modern Red List criteria, 15% are extinct or threatened with extinction from Great Britain.”

The overall message of State of Nature is not a positive one, with countless British species now at risk of extinction. With population trends suggesting that the UK has lost “significantly” more nature than the global average over recent years, and that between 2002 and 2013, that 53% of species have declined in the UK. A woeful set of observations by any standard, the blame laid predominately on the doorstep of policy-makers in the agricultural community, with changes in farming practice listed as a driving force behind many of the declines. And climate change coming in second, though the impacts of this have been mixed.

When talking specifically of farmland, the report states that “Over the long term, 52% of farmland species declined and 48% increased”, while over the short term, the overall picture was unchanged”. Ultimately reaching the worrying conclusion that, overall, “12% of farmland species are threatened with extinction from Great Britain”. With farmland birds and butterflies perhaps of greatest concern, declining by 54% and 43% respectively since the 1970’s. With the reasons for these worrying trends laid bare for all to see and including:

  • A switch from spring to autumn sown crops
  • A decrease in hay production and the subsequent rise in silage production
  • The increased use of insecticides, herbicides and fungicides
  • The loss of marginal habitats such as hedgerows and farmland ponds

If anything, State of Nature highlights a need for a rapid and radical overhaul of farming policy and a distinct change in how farmers  conduct their operations. No easy task, given the fact that we all need to eat, and that Britain’s population continues to increase each year. Yet I fear tough decisions must be made in order to protect species such as the High Brown Fritillary and Corn Marigold from further declines in the future. With many cherished species now standing on the edge of an abyss.

Obviously, the farming community did not take the findings of the report lying down, and many have come out fighting against the accusations. With both the NFU and former Environment Secretary Owen Patterson quick to highlight the beneficial changes in farming policy that have taken place in recent times. Which, to be fair, I agree with. Agriculture has, after all, come on leaps and bounds in the last few decades, through sympathetic management and environmental stewardships – which the report discusses in length. Though it is clear, to me, that this is simply not enough. And equally clear that Owen Patterson’s assertions that uncontrolled predator numbers are to blame for the downward trend in our wildlife, are completely ludicrous. Yes, predators can and will cause a problem from time to time – unlike many people in the environmental field, I accept this and often condone control – though would it not be better to tackle the fundamental, irrefutable problems faced by our farmland wildlife before shifting the blame?

I am not anti-farmer by a long shot, nor are those behind State of Nature it would seem. They do, after all, refuse to pin the blame on farmers themselves, choosing instead to tackle the dubious decisions of policy makers. Yet the findings of the report tell a worrying tale, and it is clear that action must be taken now. Action that I feel must centre on maintaining the existing subsidy system post-Brexit, and provide a clear financial incentive for farmers to make the right choice. Though the situation post-Brexit remains unclear, and the natural world could well suffer as a result of weaker environmental policies. Only time will tell.

It is important to remember that the situation on our farmland is not all doom and gloom. It is not great, by a long shot, but there are notes of positivity in which we may take some solace. As the Daily Mail (I cannot believe I am mentioning them here) were all too quick to point out in a recent article.

While the Mail’s apparent attempt to gloss over the woes of our countryside is troublesome, at best, and their dismissive stance in regards to the figures set out in State of Nature is nothing short of infuriating, I fear they do make a good point. For once. And one that fits with earlier statements made by high-profile members of the farming community. That a great deal of our wildlife is also increasing. Indeed, State of Nature shows that “44% of species increased, with 29% showing strong or moderate increases” with 48% of farmland species also increasingly over the long-term. With no change in the number of species threatened over a short-term period.

While “no change” may not immediately sound like a good thing, it is promising to learn that no new species have been added to the ranks of those facing impending doom, and with 48% of farmland species actively increasing, it is clear that some credit must be given to the farming community. So yes, Guy Smith’s statement that the “the environmental lobby should not criticise all the time but to also pay attention to the successes” may well be based in the realm of reality. Indeed it is very easy to criticise farmers, and I have seen many blog posts doing so over the past few days. Yet it should be remembered that they do, from time to time, conduct some wholly positive work, and, at the best of times, have a rather difficult job balancing the needs of feeding an ever-growing population with those of the natural world.

As Ben Eagle states a recent (and rather excellent) blog on the subject: “It is very easy to farmer bash and for farmers to take this personally and bring up the drawbridge“. Though in doing so, we shoot ourselves in the foot. The only way forward now is to build on past gains and work together, as a combined and effective force, to improve the state of nature. This will involve work with farmers, but also other groups with a stake in our countryside, and may prove difficult at times. It is, after all, not easy to forgive the slights inflicted upon the natural world. We must, however, pool our resources in an effort to sway policy in a more promising direction, and through education inspire cooperation, to achieve our goals in the future. Cooperation, of the kind demonstrated by the fifty or so NGO’s behind the State of Nature report, will be our only respite in the future.

Now many will disagree with me here, but to me it seems to that the time has come for conservationists to yield the moral high-ground, and take note of the positive achievements of others, and for additional factions, namely farmers, to take the warnings of conservationists on board. To abandon their entrenched positions and to help sway environmental policy in the right direction. The State of Nature report does not make for enjoyable reading, but it does contain glimmers of positivity, and provides a basis for unified work in the future. Work which our embattled wildlife so desperately needs if it is to surivive long enough to be enjoyed by future generations.

TREEPTYCH: a Guide to Truly Perceive Trees – Willemijn Heideman

Trees: where I live in northwestern Europe, we all encounter at least a few of them each day. We walk past them or we walk underneath them without giving them too much notion. Trees are just there, dependable in their spot every day, relegated to the background by our lack of recognition or interaction. We pay far less attention to non-moving objects; they pose no threat so our brains are not wired to constantly keep an eye on them. And that’s a pity really because trees are not only great to look at; they provide something to marvel about. Just looking at trees is now understood as very healthy and good for our wellbeing.

As an experiment, in order to prompt you to actually perceive trees when you go home tonight, to really see them, I have made a list of my own favourite types of trees, a Treeptych. The list is actually longer than three tree types but I like the alliteration…

   1.      The ‘I-Love-To-Live’ Tree

In The Netherlands the pollard willow, or knotted willow, often is planted alongside canals. Pollarding (from the word “poll,” which originally meant “top of head”) has been used since the Middle Ages — in fact, there are still stands of continuously pollarded trees that date to that time. This is an ancient agricultural practice for producing poles and firewood, while keeping the branches above the grazing level of livestock. Every 3 years or so the branches of this tree are ‘knotted’ or lopped, giving the tree it’s distinct shape of a big trunk with proportionally small branches on it.

 While it may seem rough treatment for such a willing and helpful tree ally, the periodic pollarding actually extends the life of the willows far beyond their wilder relatives, by continuously rejuvenating the branches. Diseases rarely have time to take hold of the young growth and weather elements do not affect trees of short stature. Ancient appearing pollards can actually be very old indeed. In the UK, the King of Limbs is a pollarded oak thought to be about 1,000 years old.

If that doesn’t give you cause to pause, perhaps you’ll notice a visual inconsistency as you amble, ramble or bicycle by. It is not uncommon to see a knotted willow with two kinds of leaves, and it takes a closer look to discover the reason: In the rotting core of this willow you can find elder trees starting a new life, so in summer it is as if the knotted willow carries elderberries. Even in its decay, the knotted willow is continuing to provide opportunities to shelter biodiversity. Now ask yourself: how did that elder get there in the first place? Who planted it? The answer is that at some point, a bird feasted on elderberries and then spent time in the willow doing what birds do: nesting, resting, and evidently passing on the seeds in a lovely little pre-fertilized packet.

We’ll leave the elder for another story on another day, but it may pique you to know that here in the Netherlands, as all across Europe, the Elder was held in even higher esteem: as a curative. But also as a magical ally. In Ireland for instance, folk tradition still holds that you must ask the Elder’s permission before cutting it, or you risk the wrath of the fairies.

The willow is not nearly the only species of tree that is sturdy and resilient. There are a lot of trees that after heavy damages still stubbornly keep on growing. Some species of pine trees actually need forest fires to keep growing: the Canarian pine for instance re-sprouts directly from its thick bark after a fire, unusual for a pine in not only being able to re-sprout but also withstanding the flames. Other pines have cones that only open under intense heat, dropping seeds onto newly cleared soil fertilised by fresh ashes. But the mother tree burns to a crisp.

I am in awe of the strength and endurance of those trees. Imagine: to be rotten to the core and with your branches brutally cut off as the willow in the picture… And yet, making new leaves as if nothing has happened to you. Burned and badly bruised, but going strong!

2        The ‘I-Am-A-City-Dweller’ Tree

So there you stand, cramped on a sidewalk, bearing the ultimate insults of not just dogs that pee on your trunk, but pigeons on your branches as if you were a common statue! Kids and drunks carve their initials into your skin, bikes get parked against you (well in Amsterdam that is). On the other hand, although stationary, a tree has time on its side, and can be known to turn the tables, sometimes swallowing kerbstones, abandoned bicycles and park benches.

The life of a city tree isn’t easy. Because besides all the physical abuse there is the problem of air pollution and water shortages that in general are more serious in cities. Trees in cities are also more prone to diseases, because often the trees in a street are all of the same species. If one is affected, than the rest will follow. Think of it from the pest’s point of view. Free lunch as far as you and your progeny can go!

Yet trees in cities are extremely important. They absorb odours and pollutant gases such as nitrogen oxides, ammonia, sulphur dioxide and ozone. Trees also filter solid particles out of the air by trapping them on their leaves and bark. In summer trees help cooling the city by up to 4-5 ⁰C, by shading our homes and streets. In this way trees break up urban “heat islands” and release water into the air through their leaves.

We literally depend on trees. Not only because trees give us fruits like apples, cherries or peaches and nuts, but because they give us oxygen too: An average tree exhales enough oxygen for 18 people annually. While they are doing that they are also busily scrubbing out tons of CO2 and putting it into long-term storage, both above and below ground.

 It gets personal too: people appreciate the greens in a city. Studies show that in a tree-lined street motorised traffic slows down; pedestrians are more relaxed and more likely to linger and thus socialise, thus strengthening community. Studies even show that anti-social behaviour and crime rates drop on tree-lined streets. In some studies the reduced crime was evident from the very same day the trees were planted, For more benefits, click here.

3        The ‘I-Am-Small-But-Strong’ Tree

The one thing I hate about gardening is having to take out all the brave saplings of yew (pictured), oak, hawthorn or birch trees that started their lives in my garden. They didn’t choose where to start their lives, their seeds just happened to have been dropped where they sprouted. They were taken there by the wind (birch seeds) or by birds. A bird probably dropped the acorn, the hawthorn fruit was digested first and then, well…

With all their power these little seeds started a life and I brutally take it. For if I don’t, my stamp sized garden is overgrown in no time.

I remember that as a kid I grew an apple pip in a pot. It took months before it was approximately 20 cm high. On a cloudy day I took it to the garden, because I had learned that direct sunlight might burn it. I dug a small hole for it and planted the ‘tree’. After that I gave it a red ribbon to distinguish it; planted with purpose. And there it stood; minding its own business and growing for quite a while, until my father, equally keen of removing saplings as I am now, just took it out.

After you have experienced how long it takes before a seed grows into something that starts to look like a miniature tree, it’s impossible not to feel guilty for ruthlessly destroying it. Or at least it is for me.

4        The ‘I-Have-An-Odd-Shape’ Tree

As I pointed out in the introduction, we often don’t take notice of trees. Speaking from a recent experience and even though I consider myself a tree-lover: I have passed the tree in this picture by bike many, many times. And yet, it was only this spring that I first noticed ‘the hole’. This hole is obstructed from view when the tree is carrying full leaves, but still. How could I have missed it? I was more or less subconsciously aware the tree was standing there, but I guess I never really looked at it closely.

A ‘hole’ like this develops over many years of time when two branches slowly grow together. This phenomenon is called inosculation and is, in fact, natural grafting.

One wonders how many years it has taken before these two branches were grown together so firmly that it requires a very close look to see the conjoining surface.

Discoveries like these, so close to home, always make me realise the splendour of nature. And such marvels fill me with delight and make me happy. It keeps me WALDENIZING…

5        The ‘I-Was-Here-First-So-Get-Out-Of-My-Way’ Tree

 Every time I drive along the A58- highway in the Netherlands I look forward to passing this remarkable monumental oak. She (I think of this tree as a she) is standing in the middle of the road, proud! Until the mid-sixties, the tree grew beside the driveway of a monumental villa. Then the garden was ripped from around it, leaving it marooned in the centre of the new highway.

To me it looks as if the tree bargained a deal and reached a poor compromise with the road workers. She could stay, but only in the middle of the road with traffic speeding by 24/7. Currently the tree has the status of a monumental tree (see link in Dutch), but her position is at stake. There are plans to broaden the highway, adding two lanes. I really do hope she keeps her feet in the ground! She was there first!

 Curious about Waldenzing? Join the group Waldenizing Project here on LinkedIn

I encourage you to take a closer look at the trees around you. Let me know what your favourite type of tree is, or what your favourite species is and why.

And Please, Do Protect and Enjoy Nature!

 This article was written with some dendrological help of me great friend Erik van Lennep

 I highly appreciate comments on my article. If you liked it, please SHARE this article with your network by clicking on the LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter buttons! 

© Willemijn Heideman, 2016. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without written permission from this author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Willemijn Heideman with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

The Importance of Dead Wood

The sight of a dead tree, denuded and stripped of its prior glory, appears to be a worrisome one to some. Those who view such things as a public health hazard, a catalyst for fire or, worse still, as simply untidy. Often to such an extent that some actively remove fallen trees, or at the very least, encourage others to do the same. Sanitising our woodlands through the misguided notion that dead wood somehow represents dead weight in the woodland ecosystem, and does not quite fit with the verdant vision of perfection many people have for our wooded places. Though, in truth, this could not be further from the truth.

Dead wood has littered the floors of British woodlands for millennia – since the first trees began to live, and die, in natural succession. Indeed in prehistory, our woodlands would look much different than they do today. Not least due to the absence of dead wood which, in a healthy woodland ecosystem, can comprise as much as 30% of total woody biomass. The woodlands of today, somewhat poor in comparison, lacking a great deal of this valuable resource. But what is it exactly that sends conservationists balmy over dead wood?

The truth is that dead wood is keystone component within woodland ecosystems, with between 20-40% of woodland species directly dependent on the resource. With both standing and fallen deadwood of paramount importance in creating microhabitats in which a vast number of species thrive. Including a diverse range of saproxylic (deadwood-dependent) fungi and a mindboggling variety of mosses and lichens. Species which, over time, break down the wood, releasing nutrients and allowing larger plants to colonise. The characteristic “hummocks” formed by aged tree stumps blanketed first in mosses, and later in Bilberry and Ling a familiar sight in our more natural woodlands. With dead wood, in turn, providing a valuable habitat for a number of increasingly rare insects. With notable examples including the Black Tinder Fungus Beetle – found only in Glen Affric – and the increasingly scarce Aspen Hoverfly. The latter now listed as BAP species of conservation concern and wholly dependent on, as its name suggests, decaying Aspen. These are not alone, however, and a veritable smorgasbord of beetles, flies, worms and bees also call dead wood their home.

The virtues of dead wood stretch far beyond the realm of invertebrates, however, and a number of arguably more charismatic species are also directly linked to its abundance. Among these, the Crested Tit, the poster-boy for enigmatic Scottish wildlife, which is highly dependent on dead Scots Pines for nesting. There is also the Willow Tit, a species subject to a pronounced population decline in recent years, as well as, of course, more woodpeckers, owls, tits and treecreepers than you can shake a decaying stick at. All of which goes without mentioning the myriad species which feed on the insects associated with dead wood – the warblers, flycatchers and crests. With bats too utilising standing dead wood (snags) for both summer and winter accommodation. Indeed, ten of our fifteen native species have, in fact, been shown to utilise such places.

CRESTED TIT (Parus cristatus)

The loss of dead wood from our woodlands is one of the most pressing conservation issues in Britain today, and many species are feeling the pinch. Whether from a decrease in suitable nesting sites or the loss of a vital food source. With dead wood dependent birds and insects comprising some of the most rapidly declining species today. Something which does not appear to have gone unnoticed, with many now, mercifully, taking action to rectify the problem, including both Trees For Life and the Foresty Commission. Though one of the most promising initiatives I have seen to date comes from the Westquarter Wildlife Group, who, at present, are pioneering a simplistic yet highly effective means of conserving this important resource. Through the use of specially designed plagues in order to educate the public regarding the importance of dead wood. Though the words below from Les Wallace gives perhaps the best summary:

“Westquarter Wildlife Group has pioneered something which may prove to be a useful tool in saving woods from the loss of dead wood, and it’s extremely simple and cheap. Dead trees, which constitute no genuine health and safety hazard, now carry a simple wooden plaque (a cut section of tree trunk), like the ones people have their house number on, with a message inscribed. With examples including, ‘Woodpeckers Love this Tree’ or ‘Dis Tree is Gr8 4 Wildlife’. The latter showing you can ‘text’ in order to make use of limited space and cut down on the routering, a form of carving, needed for a long lasting sign. There’s plenty of scope for creating new messages and making images of the animals and fungi that needs dead wood. Children could be asked to come up with their own designs. Which would be placed high enough on the tree to prevent vandal attacks, and remain conspicuous for years.

It’s straightforward enough – Gordon Harper of the Forestry Commission kindly donated the sawn wood, we just needed a wonderfully creative and patient person to router the actual message. Step forward group secretary Amanda Cameron. With the help of ranger Lesley Sweeney and assistant Finlay Maxwell two of the plaques have now been put up on dead tree stumps in Westquarter Glen. More will follow and hopefully there be other ideas to promote the need for dead wood and dying trees in the future. It may seem a very small step in practical terms, but, in reality, it’s quite a significant one.”

Personally, I love the idea listed above and take my hat off to the group for attempting it. As Les says, the scheme is simple, almost incredibly so, yet that, I feel, is the beauty of it. In a day where most people are unlikely to venture online in an effort to obtain the latest set of Forestry Commission guidelines or peer-reviewed journals, such things are a life saver. Short, sharp, informative messages – particularly important to children who, in the future, will be tasked with safeguarding the natural world. Such basic moves are essential in our day of growing detachment from nature, and I wish the group all the best in the future. Hopefully, in a few years, we will be seeing such measures enacted elsewhere in the UK.

If you would like to hear more about the antics of the Westquarter Wildlife Group, you can find them on Facebook. And if you wish to “do your bit” in the fight to conserve our priceless dead wood, the RSPB provide some tips on how you can do so. In your own backyard no less. See Here.

A Vison for a #WilderNE

Wilder, the new grassroots activism group, is gaining momentum at present, largely due to the hard work and determination of the passionate young people at its helm. Of late, we have successfully launched our first campaign (#LawsOfTheLand), have featured in a number of media outlets, and have build a substantial following on social media. Successes which look set to continue long into the future. As such, following the successful launch of the Wilder Dorest group, We have decided to create a regional branch right here in the North-East.

The ultimate aim of Wilder, as a whole, is to support wildlife conservation and raise awareness of important environmental issues – something we hope to do via a variety of means, utilising the individual talents of members to make a difference for nature. It is a community born of necessity, of the concerns of the young people behind it and the need for unified action. More than just a group of conservationists clamouring for change, Wilder, we hope, will become a movement – towards a greener and more enlightened Britain. No small task, but something we hope to achieve through a variety of means:

  • By promoting and publicising just causes, on both a local and national scale – making the public aware of any decisions made to the detriment of our wildlife and, hopefully, encouraging positive action to reverse them.
  • By facilitating the campaign efforts of those working to protect wildlife. Something we hope to achieve through a variety of means but not least by; encouraging dialogue with local MPs, by organising events/talks to raise political awareness and by emphasising the power of petitions and social media.
  • And, most importantly of all, by stressing that each and every one of us, young and old, urban, rural or otherwise, has the potential to influence the decisions that impact our wildlife.

When applied to Wilder North-East however, I have decided that these aims are not enough. And despite the fact that we live in an altogether beautiful region, bursting with wildlife, I have reached the sorry conclusion that not enough people care for our local environment. This is something I would like to change and as such, WilderNE will adopt some additional objectives in addition to those listed above:

  • To promote a wider interest in the natural world, and thus inspire action to protect it. Something we hope to do through everything from school visits and youth engagement to “wildlife walks” making use of talented local naturalists to invoke interest in the natural treasures of the North-East.
  • To encourage people to dedicate their time to protecting, studying and conserving nature. Something we hope to achieve through work with local NGO’s to promote volunteer work, while at the same time, encouraging wider participation in everything from beach cleans to citizen science schemes.

The North-East is, in my opinion, the jewel in the crown of wild Britain. Though, like any other place in our day of human ignorance and growing detachment from nature, it faces its fair share of problems. Its landscape and wildlife subject to the same threats as anywhere else in Britain. Because of this, I believe the time has come to give nature in our region a unified, strong and independent voice. And sincerely hope, that WilderNE can accomplish this.

Of course, given the magnitude of the proposed task, I cannot do this alone, and desperately need people from all walks of life to get involved. As such I am hoping, over the coming weeks, to piece together a team of dedicated environmentalists to operate the day to day running of the group. Something which could involve anything, from building our social media presence or writing articles, to promoting Wilder at events. Or, in the future, visiting schools and leading walks to stress the value of nature. The possibilities are endless.

It is not going to be easy, not by a long shot, but if you wish to get involved, please join the Facebook group here or contact me directly. We will need all the help we can get! You can also find us on Twitter for updates and more information.

#PatchChat: Back on the Blyth…

The last week has been spent getting well and truly reacquainted with my local patch – the Blyth Estuary. The lowlands of coastal Northumberland a far cry from the precipices of the Cairngorms and Banffshire where I had been stationed until quite recently, and the wildlife a welcome change to iconic, yet limited cast of creatures present around my former haunts. Simply put, it has been great – with warm days and a fantastic assortment of wild titbits to ogle and enjoy as late summer gives way to early Autumn. And usual spectacles associated with this transitional period begin to unfold once more.

There has definitely been a noticeable movement of passerines of late, mainly at the coast, with migration and more localised dispersal evidence right across the patch. The coastal thickets are now teeming with warblers, with Chiffchaff, of course, the most numerous, closely followed by Blackcap. Many of which seem to have descended, true to form, on the plump Blackberries now bejeweling the various shrubby places. Whitethroat have been less numerous, but present nonetheless, while a number of Willow Warblers have begun to sing once more – somewhat more half-hearted that their Spring melodies. Likewise a Grasshopper Warbler in song yesterday provided a welcome surprise, reeling from the small reedbed that straddles the Southern bank of the estuary – my first here for quite some time. While each day now sees a steady passage of Hirundines heading South over most areas of the Blyth and the few remaining Swifts have now well and truly departed.

Elsewhere resident birds are also on the move, with the most notable trend observed in the local Goldfinch population which, with numerous juveniles in toe, have assembled into enormous charms in the sand dunes. With c250 observed on a recent foray, and few Linnet tagging along for good measure. Great Spotted Woodpeckers have begun to turn up in funny places, including at the coast, and juvenile Stonechats – doubtless the result of breeding in the dunes – have begun to move inland. With similar small-scale movements noted in both the local Dippers and Kingfishers too. As the fledged young of both, doubtless forced out by their parents, have now taken up residence downstream towards the estuary. With the latter, in particular, showing marvellously of late, and brightening up no end of morning walks.

The estuary itself has also seen its fair share of visitors of, with wader passage continuing at a steady pace. At least two Greenshank are now in residence, standing out like a sore thumb amid the ranks of the much more familiar Redshank which have arrived on mass back from their breeding territories. Black-Tailed Godwit numbers have increased also, to around forty birds, with some still clad in their delightfully crimson summer garb, while for a touch of scarcity, a lone Whimbrel and, more impressively, eight Ruff were also seen. The latter comprising my first record for the estuary, ever! Birds which, coupled with the usual assortment of Turnstone, Curlew, Oystercatcher, Knot, Dunlin and Ringed Plover, have made the Blyth an exciting place to be of late. Especially if, like me, you are fond of leggy birds.

Also in residence on the estuary at the minute are at least five Little Egrets, a jolly good count for the site, and something which would have seemed impossible in my childhood. Likewise, Goosander numbers are building nicely, with around twenty now fishing the river and the first of the “winter wildfowl” have arrived back in the form of a few Teal, Shelduck and Wigeon. With Eider numbers swelling just off-shore and a number of Common Scoter moving past in addition. The sea providing a real bounty of late, with Terns in particular rising to prominence. Monday’s seaward venture revealing no less than a hundred fishing close to the beach, with four species picked out from the fray. The best of which was a diminutive Little Tern which, like the Ruff, marked a patch-first for me. Here too Guillemots remain in evidence, with a number of growing chicks at hand, and other interesting sightings including Shag, Kittiwake, Gannet, Manx Shearwater, Red-Throated Diver and two more Whimbrel. Surely it cannot be long before an interesting Skua graces me with its presence?

What else? Well, moving away from the avian world and butterflies continue to dazzle. With a late “Big Butterfly Count” along the estuary providing an exciting variety of critters. Including, best of all, a few Common Blue and Small Copper looking altogether dishevelled as the Autumn draws in. Painted Lady and Red Admiral were also numerous here, as were Peacock, while elsewhere Speckled Wood, Meadow Brown, Comma, Large White and Small Tortoiseshell ensured that I was not left wanting. Speckled Wood have been incredibly numerous this year, cropping up everywhere from my urban garden in nearby Bedlington, to the small ornamental plantations that line coastal dunes. Representative of wider national trends I suspect? But we will have to wait for the results of the count to see just who the winners and losers this year have been.

Peacock and Red Admiral

As you can see, things have been far from boring at Blyth of late and it will be interesting to see what appears as Autumn migration enters full swing. A few wayward Pied Flycatcher would be expected but this year I have set my sights a little higher and have predicted the occurrence of both Wryneck and Pallas’s Warbler. It doesn’t hurt to aim high right?

Buzzards, Badgers and Buffoons

Yes, the title of this blog post was directly influenced by former Daily Telegraph columnist Robin Page, who, true to character, recently launched a preposterous attack on “self-delusional” conservationists and what looks like every predatory species living in the UK. Check it out, it can be found here: “Buzzards and Badgers and Bigots“

I do not make a habit of launching personal attacks, no matter how much I disagree with a person’s point of view, thus will not aim to slander Mr Page here. It is clear that his views lie poles apart from my own, and that it fine by me. It is, after all, rather healthy to possess different opinions. On the contrary, it is not, however, healthy to broadcast misinformation. Nor to produce a misguided rallying cry for the predator-hating wildlife criminals in the UK, or attempt to justify their illicit actions under the guise of conservation. Which is exactly what I think Robin has done here, whether intentional or not. Condemning species such as Red Kites, Buzzards and Badgers for their “widespread” ecological damage, yet, somewhat mysteriously producing no evidence to back it up. Oh wait, moles in the conservation sector, right?

 First thing first, do predators impact upon prey populations? Yes of course they do. But only in localised areas, where a host of other factors have already reduced prey numbers. Factors that usually can be attributed to humans, whether they be farmers, gamekeepers, developers or any other group. It would make no sense, in evolutionary terms, for any predator to decimate stocks of its own food source. And, as a rule, predators only flourish where prey stocks remain healthy, targeting species based on abundance. An argument I have had with anglers, on a number of occasions, who had claimed that otters purposely target large salmonids, while in truth they prey on the most numerous species within the ecosystem. Amphibians during spawning, or ducks during the breeding season and so forth. Something I am sure also applies to badgers and raptors too.

As for predators such as sparrowhawks, badgers and kites wiping our declining species such as Skylarks, there is a wealth of evidence out there that shows that this is not the case. With a particular study, by the impartial BTO no less, springing to mind immediately. Concluding that “for the majority of the songbird species examined there is no evidence that increases in common avian predators or Grey Squirrels are associated with large-scale population declines”. While for more information on the topic you can check out Thomson et al whom similarly conclude that spreading corvids are not driving songbird declines, and a quick google search will turn up a wealth of similar evidence, all of which serves to dismiss this misguided view.

As I said, predators can have a localised impact on scarce species, hence why genuine conservation bodies, like the RSPB, do occasionally implement control measures. Sometimes such measures are justified and I, personally, agree with these. I do not, however, think it is just, nor reasonable, to blame predators for nationwide declines. Or to propose preposterous acts of “control” based on myths. Take a look at Skylarks, a species Mr Page has mentioned quite a lot in recent blog posts. They have declined horribly in recent years, as a direct result of poor habitat management and habitat loss, not predation. I really would be interested if anyone could produce a scientific paper suggesting otherwise? The same applies to Lapwings – I had thought that Lapwing declines had been driven through farming and the all out destruction of traditional breeding sites?

The next snippet that irked me in Robin’s latest outpouring was the bit about Buzzard and Badger diet. And his apparent belief that their diets are seemingly painted in an untrue light, with conservationists claiming that both species are heavily reliant on Earthworms, while in truth they are actually feasting on fledgeling birds. Well, yes, they undoubtedly do predate birds (and nests – as seen on Springwatch when a Badger at Minsmere unceremoniously destroyed an Avocet colony in a single night). Is this, and the horror stories produced by a vocal minority, reason enough to condone a change to the protected status of these species? No, not in my opinion.

Both Buzzards and Badgers are generalistic, opportunistic predators. They will eat whatever they find, when they find it. No one can dispute that. They do however rely predominately on common and widespread species. Such as Lagomorphs and, contrary to Robin’s assertions, Earthworms. No, they do note rely solely on these species, no one has ever claimed that to the best of my knowledge, but the facts point towards such items making up a large proportion of their diet, in keeping with their widespread status and the theory of abundance based prey selection. Do songbirds feature? Yes, they do crop up in dietary assessments from time to time, but in not in substantial levels. And certainly not to such an enormous extent to suggest that predators are eradicating passerine populations. It is no coincidence that many in the rural community have noticed vast increases in predator numbers at a time when prey populations have declined. This is, however, most likely due to the fact that such carnivorous species would likely, and wrongly, have been killed on sight in the not too distant past. Not the result of a conspiracy by conservationists, content to bury their heads in the sand.

Another point in this blog that stands out, is the blame cast towards the Badger for Hedgehog declines. Well, this one may be justified, to some extent. Badgers do have a negative impact on ‘hog populations where alternate factors such as road traffic and habitat fragmentation have taken effect. Again, is this reason enough to justify removing the Badger from the protected list? No – if conservationists are worried about the local impact of badgers they should apply for a license to control them. If it is deemed vital, I am sure they will be granted. To me it makes more sense to pursue the root causes of declines before jumping to radical extremes. And the same can be applied to wading birds, ground-nesting passerines too. Would it not be better to tackle the main causes – overgrazing in our woodlands, a lack of hedgerows, intensive farming, traffic, shoddy gardening etc – before resorting to such  shortsighted barbarity?

On, and as for the “designer conservationists with little understanding of the countryside” argument – that is a debate for another day. Though, like I have said before, attacks of this kind on scientists, interested townies and well-known TV presenters are nothing more than an attempt to “gag the opposition” and serve only to widen the divide between the two sides. In some cases, such designer conservationists have the best interests of our countryside at heart, whereas, in a number of cases, rural know-it-alls do not. (Many other rural folk are also excellent and certainly do have the best interests of the countryside at heart).

Robin Page does occasionally make a good point, I am unashamed to admit that, but calling for the widespread control of iconic predators based on sketchy evidence and high profile, yet sparse, instances of recorded predation is wrong.

Rant over, I promise to go back to pictures of fluffy animals and more positive accounts next time.

Five #conservation success stories from the UK

The life of a conservationist can be a thoroughly depressing affair, fraught with worry and persistent bouts of hopelessness. Indeed, in our day of constant negative news associated with the natural world – of declining species, degrading habitats and human ignorance – it can be hard to maintain an optimistic outlook. Particularly when the headlines are so often dominated by tales of once plentiful species now plummetting towards extinction, with Hen Harriers, Willow Tits, Small Tortoiseshells and so many iconic figments of our countryside teetering on the edge of an abyss.

Britain, at present, is not a rosy place for wildlife, nor those who enjoy it – with crushing news delivered near daily as yet more slights are inflicted upon mother nature. Despite the best efforts of those seeking to protect it. Yet, despite this, it should be remembered that positive change is, in fact, possible. And that, when we put our minds to it, we have shown time and time again that it is possible to reverse negative trends in our wildlife populations. That through practical conservation work, changing attitudes and a healthy dose of optimism, we can make a difference. As such, and in dire need of a more upbeat topic, below I have included a list of five such success stories.  All of which centre on species that, due to our own actions, have been pulled back from extinction in the UK. And all of which represent some positive nature news for a change, standing in stark contrast to the perpetual negativity that so often dominates the airwaves.

Red Kite

By Tim Felce (Airwolfhound) – Red Kite – Gigrin Farm, CC BY-SA 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=30783810

Many raptors have shown an upwards trend in recent times, since misguided killings and dangerous pesticides became illegal. Species such as the Osprey and Goshawk are once again a familiar sight in our skies, while White-Tailed Eagles have been successfully reintroduced to Scotland and Buzzards have increased by around 300%. Indeed, with so many success stories in the raptor world, it is rather difficult to choose any one in particular, though, for me, the story of the Red Kite stands out from the crowd. For both its success, and the undeniable charm of the bird itself.

Going back a century or two, Kites were one of our most frequently encountered raptors. A familiar sight in countryside and town alike, and a cherished part of our biodiversity. Though sadly as time progressed, and our attitudes towards wildlife shifted, kite numbers suffered. As a direct result of persecution and the accumulation of dangerous chemicals in the food chain. Both of which damaged kite populations to such an extent, that by the early 1900’s Red Kites were extinct across most of the UK, including in both Scotland and England. The only remaining population of this iconic raptor clinging on in Wales, where the birds were eventually granted special protection.

Due to the slow rate of natural dispersal from the Welsh population, in 1989 steps were taken to restore this species to the wider countryside, and a reintroduction scheme was launched by the RSPB and the Nature Conservancy Council. With fresh stock imported from Spain, and some birds translocated from Wales, in order to establish populations in four additional areas. The Chilterns, East Midlands, Yorkshire and North-East England, with further reintroductions taking place at various sites across Scotland. And such measures, combined, helping to once again establish the species as a widespread breeding bird in the UK.

While the Red Kite is not out of the woods just yet, particularly in parts of Scotland where illegal persecution continues to limit population expansion, it is is largely out of danger. And today, some 1600 pairs of this enigmatic raptor now breed in the UK, with numbers set to increase further in the future. To the joy of many whom hold the birds to heart, and the annoyance of the few, who still view this species as a pest.

Bittern

From one charismatic bird species to another, the Bittern. A superbly adapted member of the heron family that once “boomed” in reed beds across the length and breadth of Britain. Before, of course, becoming extinct in the late 19th century as a direct result of habitat loss and hunting. The species formerly prized as a food source, and entirely dependant on wetland areas which, until fairly recently, suffered greatly from drainage.

The Bittern first made a comeback on British soil in 1911, when a pair bred in Norfolk. The precursor to a natural resurgence that saw 80 “booming” males in residence by 1954. Though this natural recolonisation was soon cut short as a direct result of the drying out of wetland habitats and a lack of sympathetic management, and by 1997 only 11 males were recorded nationwide. The Bittern, once again, one of our scarcest breeding bird species. And this decline alarming conservationists, including those at the RSPB, who then undertook a research project designed to assess the needs of this cryptic species, with the aim of conserving our dwindling population.

This research, conducted by the RSPB, has since lead to species-specific management across vast areas of the UK, involving reedbed restoration, scrub removal and the reshaping of pools across a number of historic breeding sites. And, ultimately, has saved the Bittern from a second extinction. The initial, embattled population increasing at thirteen of the sites managed by the RSPB by 2004, and the national population increasing to over 100 booming males in 2016. The highest it has been for quite some time.

While the Bittern is still far from a common sight across the UK, and remains at risk from climate change and rising sea levels, overall the future of this reedbed denizen look bright. Due, almost entirely, to the work of man. And, of course, the fact that dietary habits have changed greatly since the days when a Bittern made an acceptable choice for supper.

Large Blue

Large Blue by PJC&Co – Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7329673

The Large Blue, the largest and rarest of our blue butterflies, has the regrettable honour of being the only butterfly species to go extinct, in the UK, in recent times. Succumbing to extinction in 1979, despite over fifty years of conservation efforts enacted to halt its rapid decline. The reasons for this thought to relate to habitat loss, poor management of traditional haunts and, finally, the onset of Myxomatosis which obliterated Britain’s rabbit population – rabbits are excellent at maintaining the short-cropped grassland that Large Blues, and their food plant, Wild Thyme, depend on.

Measures to reinstate the Large Blue were first undertaken in 1984, when the species was reintroduced to a number of suitable sites in Southern England. With butterflies brought in from Sweden following years of habitat managment to ensure the released sites met the standards required by the returning butterflies. Since then, our population of this bedazzling butterfly has increase year on year, and now the UK holds the largest population of this species found anywhere in the world. With roughly eleven populations now persisting in Devon, Gloustershire and Somerset, and managment continuing to ensure that the Large Blue flourishes long into the future.

Interesting fact: the Large Blue is unique among British butterflies in the sense that it depends, solely, on a single species of ant (Myrmica sabuleti). On which its larvae feed on during their ten month stay underground, having been carried into the ants nest by workers fooled by the caterpillars scent. As such, any management for the Large Blue must also benefit the ants too, which thankfully, it often does.

Polecat

Polecats, one of our most eye-catching, yet elusive Mustelid species, share an all too familiar story with many other threatened creatures in the UK. In the sense that, like Buzzards, Red Kites and Pine Martens, they were once persecuted to the brink of extinction due to their supposed negative impacts on human interests. With killing once continuing, unabated, to such an extent that the Britains remaining Polecats found themselves restricted entirely to Wales, and a small part of Northern Scotland.

With the onset of laws that prohibited the killing of Polecats and a general shift in public opinion towards such actions, this species has spread extensively in modern times. Regaining ground to such an extent that it can now be found across vast swaths of England, with populations in Suffolk, Norfolk and South Yorkshire, and occasional sightings further afield. Our growing Polecat population further bolstered by reintroductions in Cumbria during the 1980s.

Given the extent of recent gains, conservationists are now optimistic that Britains Polecats will continue to thrive long into the future. And that the species could recolonise yet more counties very soon. While the Polecat remains threatened in some places, mainly due to hybridization with escaped domestic Ferrets, and in some cases, continued illegal persecution, the future of this masked mustelid looks bright. Due, in no small part, to use of legislation to dissuade killing. And a population more sympathetic to the needs of wildlife.

New Forest Burnet

The New Forest Burnet is a scarce moth species now confined, entirely, to a single site on the coast of Western Scotland. Far from the woodland that gives this intriguing species its name. This population only discovered in 1963, with a stroke of luck, following the collapse and eventual extinction of the original English population in the 1920s. It has, since its discovery, been subject to rigorous conservation measures since 1991 in programme lead by Scottish Natural Heritage.

Given its specific habitat requirements, the New Forest Burnet is very susceptible to overgrazing. Particularly by domestic stock which limit the growth of its larval food plants – Meadow Vetchling and Common Bird’s-foot Trefoil. As such, as part of the 1991 initiative to protect this species, sheep were excluded from the site of the Scottish population, with promising results. Indeed, by 2001 population estimates placed numbers of this moth somewhere in the region of 10,000 individuals. A substantial increase on past estimates and a trend which continued until 2004 when the species underwent a partial decline. Though this decline was not sustained, and by 2005 the species had recovered once more.

In recent times, the New Forest Burnet has begun a slow colonisation of suitable sites in the immediate vicinity of the initial location, in some cases aided by man. With the possibility of more widespread introductions in discussion for the future. The main population of this species could, possibly, face declines due to the natural succession of its grassland habitat, although measures have been undertaken to halt this. Including the limited reintroduction of grazing stock into the area. All in all, the prospects of this colourful moth look rosy, with action on behalf of conservationists undoubtedly responsible for its continued longevity.

Environmental education has its challenges, but young people need nature – Guest Blog

Throughout my time in environmental education I have seen children from all walks of life and two key points are consistent; number one no matter their age, their background or socio-economic situation children are fascinated by nature, they love talking about it, they love being outside in it, they love sharing stories and experiences. Never once has a child hated a lesson on local animals; and number two they simply do not get enough wild time. I often find that my programs will be one of only a handful of opportunities, if not the only opportunity, for these young people to have a lesson solely on wildlife. I return to many of the same classes year after year, the excited looks on their faces as I enter the classroom is of course, wonderful for me, but ultimately a stark reminder that in many cases this is their one chance this year to learn about, share and discuss wildlife in depth. Many teachers. of course, are wildlife lovers themselves, they are not denying children the opportunities, but simply do not have the resources.

I love my job, I love going from school to school, from child to child sharing my passion, whilst listening to their stories and often their solutions to environmental issues. Some of the stories they tell me are unbelievable, from the little boy who once woke up to find a cougar eating a deer on his deck to the little girl who shares what is arguably a friendship with a Barred Owl that has lived in her garden for 3 years. But to say that this job is all rainbows and sunshine would be a lie. Experiences like speaking to children who have never visited a local nature reserve because their parents simply cannot afford the bus or asking a young pupil why he was not wearing a raincoat on a nature walk on a wet winter’s, day in Vancouver, only to get the response ‘I do not have a coat, because I am not allowed outside in the rain’ can make this job both frustrating and sad. Over the last 4 years I have seen over 15,000 children mostly in Canada, but also in the UK and the situation in both places is the same.

For me, in my job the number one challenge that we face is funding. Every year is simply a struggle to survive. Whilst there are many wonderful businesses, foundations and multi-nationals willing to give money to environmental education and some limited government funding, it simply is not enough to meet the demand. If we want to seriously adopt environmental education on a wider scale in the education system, more money has to be given to non-profit organisations, who often cannot pay staff to deliver programs, or cannot get funding to cover all the administrative costs of providing environmental education; and to schools, who are often so stretched that paying for extra curricular activities for all their students is simply not possible.

I focus my programs on local wildlife, highlighting the species they could see in their area. When dealing with a such a variety of students, adaptation is key, ensuring that each program is geared to that class is the difference between connecting with them or not. Young people in the city for example face different challenges to those in the countryside. To me this highlights another challenge to environmental education, particularly when thinking about it being added to the classroom experience. We live in a very structured and standardised world, the school environment in particular can be like this, and whilst I do not see this as a negative thing, when thinking about environmental education, it is often not structured, in fact it’s the opposite, it’s mostly organised chaos. So in order for environmental education to work, we have to change our approach. Environmental education should be seen as an opportunity to give students a sense of freedom to explore the environment, a topic with no tests, no progress reports or pressure. Activities such as building bird boxes, researching animals, visiting a local park, dissecting owl pellets, touching trees or pond dipping should be on the agenda. With many teachers already drowning in work and stress, the idea of having to learn to build a bird box or brush up on their bird identification may seem daunting and unappealing. But I think there is a solution to this, non-profits and environmental educators know how to plan programs, we can put together a series of lessons throughout the school year, having this in the curriculum does not have to add to the teachers’ workload. It again comes down to the main challenge of money; give environmental education money and non-profits can develop and deliver programs and give schools the time to include them in the school year.
The final challenge is in my opinion often overlooked in environmental education and communication and that is the message we deliver. I think that when talking about the environment and wildlife it is very easy, particularly for those of us who have studied and watched it for a number of years, to be a little negative and focus on the problems. Whilst the reality is of course that wildlife is in serious decline and the environment is facing issues, we have to be careful how we convey this and the importance of giving a positive, lasting impression cannot be underestimated. Wildlife is can be seen in a negative way in society and this is something that is picked up on by children, so to have someone talking about wildlife in a positive and enthusiastic way is far more likely to engage and spark interest. Wildlife issues can seem too big and are overwhelming, but by breaking them down and keeping it simple with a positive message, young people can see how they can find solutions to the problems.

I am so incredibly lucky to do what I do, how many people can spend their morning showing children species in their school playground and the afternoon learning about the importance of the wolf from First Nations’ children. My job is a privilege, and whilst I would not go as far as to say, I am incredibly important; environmental education is. It has known benefits to not only the environment but to students, it improves their health, their wellbeing, their concentration and their schoolwork. I will continue to advocate and push for environmental education to be added to the curriculum and for adequate funding to be provided to schools and non-profits so that students from all backgrounds can get the access to nature, something they deserve and ultimately need. What makes nature so wonderful is that it is non-discriminatory and inclusive, it can have a positive impact on anyone. I truly believe that if we want to protect our environment and reverse the damage we have caused; our governments must provide environmental education in the classroom to every child that goes to school. They do not get much credit, but let me tell you, the children in school today are some of the most environmentally conscious people you will meet. They want to learn, they want to share and ultimately they want to make a difference. That is the positive message moving forward, lets make it happen.

For more from Connell, you can follow him on Twitter and check out his personal website: https://t.co/9pAmgWahCE

If young people hope for a greener future, they must act now.

Many people are quick to stereotype the new generation of young people. Branding them lazy, self-obsessed and simply disinterested in current affairs. And, by default, green issues.

The image of detached youths shut away in their rooms, absent care nor worry is, unfortunately, rife in Britain. And the misguided assumption that most young people are content to watch the world go by, detached from the wider issues plaguing our countryside sadly, still commonplace. As is the generalistic assumption that, besides the trail-blazing few, that most young people simply do not care about the environment. A false assumption, but one that prevails nonetheless, in our society. Despite that, in truth, more young people than ever before are now interested in green issues, and many aspire for a brighter future for both the environment and themselves.

From my experience, when asked, the vast majority of young people do care for the environment. For wildlife and, indeed, the future of the very planet on which we all live. At present, more young people than ever before are fighting for a greener future. By speaking out and drawing attention to important issues, or campaigning for just causes. A great deal of these now seek to educate, inspire and inform on green issues. And more still dedicate their time to enact their goals, whether through conservation work, campaigning or by other means. You just need to look at the plethora of dedicated, inspirational young people in the A Focus On Nature group to know that there is hope for the future. And to see that times are, mercifully, changing.

For every one person that takes a stand for a brighter future, however, it is safe to assume that there are ten that do not. People who do not, necessarily, care any less about the environment than their more vocal counterparts. But fail to act nevertheless. It is these people, in our day of ceaseless ecological ignorance, that we need more than ever. These people, the sleeping giants in conservation, ecology, policy and education, that could bring about the future many of them wish for. And these people who, in a day where wildlife finds itself besieged from all sides, who must now stand up and be counted. And while many, to no fault of their own, are unwilling to commit to a career in the turbulent environmental sector, each and all can make a difference. Below are a few thoughts of my own on how you can do just this.

Make yourself heard.

At present, it is easier than ever before to express an opinion and to project important information to a wider audience. Making yourself heard on environmental issues is vital, and at the very least can lead to increased curiosity that may just inspire others to look further into such issues. While, at the same time, it can also actively promote change. In both peoples outlooks, and their actions. Speak to friends, speak to family, and, if the mood takes you, utilise the phenomenon that is social media to inform the world about the causes you care about. Tweet it, Facebook it, Tumblr it, Instagram it. More people than every before are living an online existence, and the likelihood is, that in doing so, at least one person will take notice of you.

Write about it.

This links in with the former point, but for those interested enough to express their thoughts in words, there is a huge audience out there ready to take note of a well-written plea for action. The online realm is a great place to start and nature blogging is growing in popularity at present – with many people inspiring others through their encounters in nature or fanning the flames of action through motivational outpourings. Why not do the same? And remember to share your work far and wide on social media.

On the other hand, you could also proposition local newspapers to offer your views on topical issues, write to your MP to express concern on said issues, or, for those with a particular knack for literature, submit a piece to a popular magazine or mainstream newspaper. Written word has the power to inspire curiosity, intrigue, devotion and rage in equal measure, never forget that, as all can lead to change.

Utilise your talents

Think outside of the box! Many people are not overly confident in broadcasting their views, vocally or in words. Many people, however, do possess unique talents that could allow them to educate or inspire in their own, often quirky way. Can you paint or sketch? Create artwork with a message. Singers? Sing a song with meaning. Athletic? Run for charity, or to raise awareness of your chosen issue. Each person is wonderfully different, and each person is capable of enacting change in their own, unique way. Skydive, serenade or skinny dip, why not do it for a good cause.

Volunteer

Now this is an obvious one, and most people know that, should they wish it, that there are dozens of conservation charities out there ready to accept help. Do it! Build fences, eradicate invasive species, raise money, lead trips, dig ditches, fix footpaths, do whatever you can to contribute to your cause. And for those seeking something different, remember that not all volunteer work has to be physically demanding. Nor for a large NGO. Dedicate time to curate your local museum, utilise your social media and writing skills to contribute to the online presence of a club or group, or venture into schools to inform the next generation of young naturalists. Most people, organisations, schools, and charities, despite not advertising volunteer positions, will gladly accept help. Remember to ask and explain why.

Get into politics

Despite the record turnout, it is likely that if more young people voted in the recent EU referendum, that the disastrous decision to leave may not have come to fruition. That ship has sailed, sadly, but we can learn from it. And getting involved in politics is the perfect way to make a difference on the issues you care about. Read manifestos and join a party you believe in – not who you are told to believe in. Once you have done that, vote in leadership contests and later, local and general elections. Use your vote to make a difference. And, for those wishing to go beyond this, why not lobby your MP? Meet them, write to them, campaign for them. Every little piece of effort really does help.

Do not be afraid to question others

This step really links in with the four mentioned previously but is vital in itself. If you feel that someone has made a dreadful decision, or committed to a dubious course of action, do not be afraid to speak out. Question your MP on their policies, your friends on their views, or even conservation bodies on their choices. Questions raise answers, and answers can sometimes yield positive results. If they do not, and fail to set your worries to ease, then take to social media, write, campaign and get involved in politics. If only to inspire more questions, from others, that may force a different response.

Inspire a friend

This is a difficult one. Many young people will not necessarily possess friends favourably inclined towards the environment, I certainly didn’t until fairly recently. This does not mean they cannot be inspired. Change your planned catch-up to incorporate a more natural setting, and show them first-hand the joys of nature. Inform them of the wider implications of their choices, question their views and educate them. More importantly, ensure them that they, themselves, can make a difference. Start the process anew.

Join a community

Life can be a lonely affair for young people interested in nature, and there are many horror stories associated with this. Though it does not have to be this way. Now, more than ever, there are dozens of groups where you can meet like-minded individuals, to share your views, network and make friends. Join a community and get involved. There are some wonderful ones of there, that meet a host of needs and cover a vast array of interests. A Focus On Nature (again), that provides a hub for all nature lovers. Wilder – for those looking to campaign, and more niche groups such as Next Generation Birders, for those fond of avian pursuits. There are, of course, many more than this. All of which can be found during a brief search of the internet. Or, in the case of local groups, advertised in a whole manner of odd places. Keep your eyes peeled.

Act Now

Now, this is the biggy, and the culmination of all points mentioned previously. Whatever you choose to do, whether you take up writing for nature, uncover a spark for online campaigning, or a particular interest in politics, please act now. As I have said before, every little action can help. What does not help, is waiting for others to enact change on your behalf. If you care about something, and this does not apply solely to green issues, then shout about it. Raise a clamour, educate, inspire, or take up a placard. Action is always better than inaction, and whatever you do, however small, will contribute to a brighter future.