Skip Navigation

Search articles

Nature Matters Even More in a Changing Climate

Stephanie HilborneClimate change brings uncertainty on a new scale.  Anyone reading about climate change and its impacts will no doubt feel increasingly unsure of what the future holds.  The Second World War was one of those uncertain times that made people reassess what really mattered to them.  The future of our most special wildlife sites and their legal protection was plotted before and during the 1939-1945 war, some of it from Colditz.  Those visionaries knew that nature mattered in the post war world.

Now wildlife faces its biggest challenge for 13,000 years.  Climate change will mean more unseasonable storms and floods and rising temperatures.  It will mean dozens of new, highly mobile species will be moving in to the UK from mainland Europe.  Within the UK, many species will seek to expand their range, whilst others will retreat northwards or onto higher ground.  We need to give our wildlife room to manoeuvre.

One thing that our future wildlife will depend upon is our existing protected area network.  As climate change takes hold, the importance of the sites that we have protected over the last 60 years will grow, rather than lessen.  We have protected some of our precious natural jewels: saving ancient woodlands from the axe and wildlife meadows from the plough.  We have protected sites from the negative impacts of pesticides and fertilisers, providing pockets of uncontaminated soils supporting a rich array of sensitive plants.  An area of intensively farmed land may retain around 400 to 500 species, whilst a Site of Special Scientific Interest will typically support between 2,000 and 4,000 species.   

A Changing Climate

As the climate changes, these nature rich areas will continue to act as wildlife reservoirs and stepping stones for our species to move around and colonise surrounding areas.  Whilst the species themselves may change, the natural soils of these sites will inevitably continue to host a far greater number of species than an average piece of countryside.

Continuing to protect these few special places is the first step but not enough.  They are too fragmented and nature is under continued pressure.  Barriers exist to the movement of species, so essential for survival in a changing climate.  Not only that, but we need the ecosystems, on which we all depend, to be healthy.  Healthy ecosystems can play a major role in storing and absorbing carbon and flood waters.  We must restore our battered ecosystems.

If we are to take restoring our landscapes seriously this will require a new approach to how we use and manage our land.  "Opportunity mapping" is a useful approach, identifying areas that need restoration, rather than limiting itself to sites that must not be lost.  To deliver restoration effectively will require commitment at a country level to drive change, combined with a decentralised approach to delivery.  This would allow for the engagement of local people who are likely to understand the social and economic issues as well as the historic ecology and hydrology of an area.  It would allow people's creativity and leadership to be harnessed as they take part in designing the future of their own locality. 

In my view, it is the responsibility of the next Government to facilitate this approach and lead us forward to the future.  Climate change provides the impetus for the next stage in how we view the natural world and act to look after it.

By taking a visionary approach to the future of our land use and management we would engage more people in their environment and inspire more people to value the natural world. We would empower people to influence decisions that make a genuine difference not just to our collective future but to their own lives and that of their children.  In that way, people will reassess what matters to them as we face the inevitability of climate change.

Stephanie Hilborne is the Chief Executive of the Wildlife Trusts

Comments

  1. “There will be some hard choices in all of this.
    Do we put wind turbines in National Parks?
    I say yes, most environmentalists I meet seem to say no.
    Who decides where and when to create more well managed woodlands?
    Will it happen as a result of national policy, local opinion or market forces under existing regulation?
    Should energy hungry listed buildings be demolished to make way for zero carbon homes? I think so, most people don't.
    Hard choices in an overheated world.” - Tom Langdon-Davies - 07/08 @ 13:38 reply

  2. “A good start would be lowering the speed limit on our rural lanes to 30mph. This would address the co2 problem, active life styles - non-motorised users cannot compete with motorists on roads of this width with an unlimited speed limit. The use of the lanes is therefore totally supressed by NMU's,- restoring the links between villages would help sustainable transport and green infrastructure, health and obesity problems. It is safer to live in a town than in the countryside where the motorist dominates and causes community severance.” - Maureen Comber - 05/11 @ 21:32 reply

You must be logged in to comment. If you don't have an account, you can register for an account.

Forgot your password?

Editor's Comment

Stephanie Hilborne argues that we need to give out wildlife room to manoeuvre as climate change will give opportunities for some species to expand and drive others to new areas.  Amidst this turmoil, she says that our current protected areas will become more important and valuable than ever.  They will be both refugees and crucibles which will supply surrounding areas with their new wildlife.  But she calls for a Government-led approach to land based on “opportunity mapping” where the wildlife potential of an area is based on its natural geography.  Is this a enlightened view that will enable us to regain the biodiversity rich landscape as part of a renewed farming industry, or is it a claim for more power to be put in the hands of environmental organisations?

 

Article rating

1 stars