National
Trust, 23 September 2005
The National Trust
has unveiled its first Nature Conservation
Strategy, Nature and the National Trust.
The strategy identifies
the most important habitats and species in the Trust's care and provides
an action plan to tackle the increasing range of threats to the
country's wildlife.
Central to Nature and
the National Trust is the need for conservation to break out from
the management of isolated and fragmented nature reserves and to focus
on managing natural resources on "a landscape scale".
David Bullock, Head of
Nature Conservation for the National Trust, explained:
"The pockets to which
British wildlife is increasingly being confined cannot be managed in
isolation from the outside world - they are deeply affected by the way
we manage surrounding landscapes. We need to develop much wider
strategies to improve the quality of our soil, water and air, whilst
also giving wildlife the room to move and adapt to the increasing pace
of climate change and habitat decline. ………Our responses have to be
developed at an appropriate scale - and this means looking beyond land
ownership boundaries and working in partnership to consider the needs of
a habitat as part of a whole landscape."
A
list of major nature conservation projects currently in progress
can be seen at
www.nationaltrust.org.uk/nature. The press
release says a copy of Nature and the National Trust can
also be downloaded from the
website.
WN
member Mark Fisher notes that the National Trust is joining an
increasing number of organisations that are adopting a landscape scale
approach to nature conservation that includes the Forestry Commission,
the Woodland Trust and English Nature. "Early evidence of this new
approach comes from the larger scale rewilding projects that the
National Trust has embarked on, usually in combination with other
land-owning partners, such as Wild Ennerdale in Cumbria, Alport Valley
in the Peak District and Wicken Fen in Cambridgeshire".
Extracted from the NT press release at:
National Trust unveils its Nature Conservation Strategy
Department of
Trade and Industry: Renewable energy
Public
Accounts Committee Sixth Report 05-06
HC 413, 15
September 2005
PDF version
The report concludes
that the Renewables Obligation is more expensive than the other
mechanisms currently being used under the Climate Change Programme to
reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The expense of the Obligation reflects
the high cost of renewable generation and poor targeting of the scheme –
around a third of the funds exceed the support needed by generators. The
DTI hopes that funding investment in renewables now will reduce future
generating costs and thus the cost of each tonne of carbon dioxide
saved. It has not established measures or targets to track the
industry’s progress in reducing costs, however, and consumers will not
necessarily benefit if generating costs do fall.
Two points on
windpower in the report were:
-
Predictions
commissioned by the National Audit Office suggest that output from
onshore wind sites should grow from 0.4% of the UK’s total electricity
supply in 2003–04 to nearly 3% by 2010–11. These sites are often
unpopular with local communities and the likely rapid expansion of
onshore wind power in the next five years could create a public
reaction against renewable energy.
-
Wind power
generation is much less environmentally intrusive when sited offshore.
The Department should factor in this environmental advantage when
considering the relative costs and benefits of onshore and offshore
wind power, and the level of financial support provided to each.
The
Renewable Energy Foundation gave its full support to the Committee
of Public Accounts Report on Renewable Energy. The report suggests that
the existing renewables subsidy system is both wasteful and
unjustifiably expensive, costing the consumer about £1 billion a year by
2010. Following on from the very important study by the National Audit
Office earlier this year (see news item below), the PAC report
shows the extent to which public monies are being wasted through the
Renewable Obligation's "poor targeting", creating undeserved rewards for
some technologies, mostly onshore wind, at the direct expense of other
renewables which are much more deserving of support (such as tidal and
biomass, which are 'firm', high value generators).
Scottish Executive,
7 September 2005
press release
Renewable wave and
tidal energy could provide up to 10 per cent of Scotland's electricity
production and create around 7,000 new jobs under measures announced by
Deputy First Minister and Enterprise Minister Nicol Stephen.
The Minister told
Offshore Europe delegates at the new Science and Energy Park in Aberdeen
that he would make major changes to renewable energy regulations,
awarding additional Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) to wave and
tidal output, with the aim of putting Scotland at the global forefront
of marine energy.
Nicol Stephen said:
"The changes I am announcing today will unlock Scotland's marine
powerhouse. Tens of millions of pounds of support will be available -
with the potential for hundreds of millions to be invested in new wave
and tidal projects around Scotland's shores. Our aim is to generate up
to 10 per-cent of Scotland's electricity from the sea around us. That is
equivalent to completely replacing one of Scotland's huge fossil fuelled
power stations.
The Renewable Energy Foundation
(REF) welcomed Nicol Stephen's announcement. Campbell Dunford, CEO of
the REF, said: "Nicol Stephen is to be congratulated on revising the
Renewables Obligation Scotland to offer more to high value marine
technologies.”
The REF argues that the Renewables
Obligation (RO) was flawed in that it made no distinction between lower
value randomly intermittent generation technologies, such as onshore
windpower, and those systems such as tidal and biomass plant, which are
strongly predictable.
A National Audit Office report (DTI:Renewable
Energy, 11 Feb 2005) concluded that onshore windpower has a significant
degree of over-support. This, coupled with the flaws in the RO, has
resulted in an un-precedented rush to develop industrial onshore wind in
many inappropriate locations. National Grid Transco revealed in the last
few months that there are over 17,000 MW of wind (approximately 8,500
turbines) currently applying for grid connection in Scotland alone. Wind
development on this scale is judged by REF to be both impractical, and
unsustainable.
Renewable Energy Foundation
www.ref.org.uk
National Audit Office report
www.nao.gov.uk/pn/04-05/0405210.htm
The
Wilderness Foundation has also hailed the Scottish Executive's
decision to devote more resource to marine energy as an important step
forward. "This is a major step towards delivering effective progress
against climate change" said Toby Aykroyd, the Foundation's policy
coordinator. "Hopefully it will herald the turning of the tide in
renewable energy strategy. Up until now we have seen scarce resources
poured almost exclusively into onshore windfarm developments, a
relatively inefficient means of lessening greenhouse gas emissions which
is likely to prove ruinously damaging to landscapes and livelihoods
across large swathes of Scotland and elsewhere in the United Kingdom".
www.wildernessfoundation.org.uk
DEFRA 2 September
2005
Defra is inviting
people affected by or interested in wild boar to have their say about
how the animals should be managed in England.
A review of the way
wild boar are managed and monitored is needed because, for the first
time since becoming extinct in Britain 300 years ago, wild boar have
established several small populations in England following escapes from
captivity, and these populations are expected
to grow. There are thought to be fewer than 500 feral wild boar in
England, with the main population in Kent and Sussex and smaller
breeding populations in Dorset and Herefordshire.
People are asked to
give their views on a range of issues surrounding feral wild boar,
including disease risk (Classical
Swine Fever, Foot and Mouth disease and bovine Tuberculosis),
potential for damage to crops and property, effects on animal exports,
animal welfare, conservation and biodiversity, game and shooting
interests, and human safety.
Their
impact on conservation habitats is likely to be mixed, probably
beneficial in woodland but negative on species like ground-nesting
birds. Their affect on human safety is mainly by causing road traffic
collisions or even attacks.
The
consultation will run until 6 January 2006. The consultation documents
can be accessed at
www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/wild-boar/index.htm
Extracted
from Defra news release
375/05
Scottish Executive, 1st September 2005
The Scottish
Executive has decided not to approve an application to proceed with a
trial re-introduction of the European beaver to Scotland.
Ministers had
examined the case presented by Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) but
turned it down because of concerns about the particular proposal in
relation to European legal requirements.
Deputy Environment
and Rural Development Minister Rhona Brankin said the decision did not
rule out consideration of any future applications for species
re-introductions and indicated her support for the work SNH is
undertaking to develop a Species Conservation Framework for Scotland.
The framework will take into account the new duty placed on all public
bodies under the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act to contribute to
halting biodiversity loss.
The Executive's
decision letter on the application to SNH sets out the reasons for
rejecting the application. These are:
·
Part
of the trial area, Knapdale Woods, is a European Special Area of
Conservation (SAC). The plan outlined by SNH highlighted 'possible
negative effects on the SAC' such as the Western Atlantic Oak Woodland
and lochs with aquatic vegetation, both of which are features of this
site. A recent European Court judgement suggests that any intervention
in a SAC where there is scientific doubt about the prospect of a
negative environmental impact would be likely to infringe the European
Habitats Directive
·
The
exit strategy proposed by SNH involved the potential killing of any
beavers found outwith the trial site or causing more damage than might
initially have been considered. Any beaver introduced to Scotland
would be protected under European law which raises doubts about the
legality and practicality of the exit strategy
Members of the Wildland Network have expressed
surprise and regret at this decision. Scottish Natural Heritage carried out the most extensive and expensive evaluation
and public consultation process ever
undertaken for a beaver reintroduction
(over
a
10-year period), but that has not satisfied the Scottish Executive.
Derek
Gow, WN Species Re-introduction Group Co-ordinator believes the
Scottish Executive's refusal of a licence for the trial release in
Knapdale of European beavers is questionable.
"It
fails both process based nature conservation and common democracy."
"European beaver are an extremely well studied species which are
easy to live with and sensibly control. This is well demonstrated by
their restoration to every other western range state in Europe where
they formerly existed, barring Great Britain, Montenegro and
Liechtenstein. SNH did what was asked of it as an organisation by
creating an entirely reasonable project which would have allowed for a
limited process of monitored restoration."
"The failure of this reasonable, limited, popular project must now
be seen as a direct challenge to the will of the nature conservation
community and general public alike. There is no good reason why this
popular and important species should not be restored to the wider
countryside of the United Kingdom."
Wildland Network members predict that the spotlight for
beaver re-introduction is now likely to switch to England and Wales,
prompting Scotland to look again
at the prospects for beavers and the benefits that can be
gained for wildlife, for land management,
for landowners, and for the experience of visitors.
Mammals Trust UK is reported to be extremely
disappointed to learn of the decision by the Scottish Executive not to
grant a licence for the controlled reintroduction of the beaver to the
remote area of Knapdale in Strathclyde. The reintroduction would have
been undertaken by a partnership of Mammals Trust UK, Scottish Natural
Heritage and the Scottish Wildlife Trust.
"The decision to refuse to
approve a licence for the trial reintroduction of the beaver has left
Mammals Trust UK both baffled and disenchanted," stated MTUK Chief
Executive Jill Nelson. "When one considers that the consultation process
has been going on for several years, it seems highly surprising that the
reasons that have been given by the Scottish Executive have suddenly
become apparent."
A Scottish
Natural Heritage
spokesman has said it was
disappointed that the application had been turned down. And a source
close to the decision said the exit strategy could easily have been
altered to include a licence to cull a protected species.
Simon Milne, the
chief executive of the Scottish Wildlife Trust, said: "The
decision ignores the benefits to ecology and tourism from the project,
disregards strong public support, overwhelming scientific evidence and
the fact that there have been numerous successful beaver reintroductions
across the rest of Europe.
"If the Executive
really wanted to undertake this trial, then there are no practical
issues that would prevent this. The reasons for rejecting this trial are
deeply flawed."
Sources:
Scottish Executive
www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2005/09/01131458
and
www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Environment/Wildlife-Habitats/16330/Beaverapplication2
British Wildlife
Conservation Magazine, 2 September 2005
www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk
The Scotsman, 1 September 2005
http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1878442005
| 