|
|||||||||
| You are here: Home > Activities > Meetings > 2002 > abstracts > symposia > | ||
Abstracts< Go Back
10.15 - 10.30 10.30 - 10.45 GREEN, Rhys, Conservation Biology Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, <reg29@hermes.cam.ac.uk> RESPONSES OF FARMLAND BIRDS TO CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT Attempts have been made to aid the recovery of declining populations of several species of farmland birds in the UK. All examples that have shown any signs of success have been preceded by detailed studies to assess the causes of population decline and range contraction. Causes of decline mainly involve conversion of key habitats for the species to other uses or changes in management that affect breeding success and survival. Examples of the latter include drainage, indirect effects of the application of pesticides and herbicides and changes in the timing of crop establishment and harvesting. Identifying the change in management implicated in a population decline is much easier than finding a practical way to overcome the problems it caused. Even minor changes in crop or animal husbandry may be difficult for farmers to implement, particularly when production is heavily subsidized. State-funded agri-environment programmes and private initiatives that provide payments to farmers for practices that assist particular species offer a possible remedy, but the funding involved is usually dwarfed by continuing production subsidies. Careful design and targeting of the conservation measures are required. If farmers and their advisors just "go through the motions" of the agri-environment programme it tends not to work. These problems and progress with solutions will be illustrated using attempts to recover the UK populations of corncrake, stone-curlew and cirl bunting. 10.45 - 11.00 MACDONALD, D.W., Ruth Feber and Fran Tattersall. Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS. david.macdonald@zoology.oxford.ac.uk HOW CAN FARMING PRACTICES RESTORE BIODIVERSITY? LESSONS FROM ORGANIC FARMING AND INTEGRATED FARMING SYSTEMS. Agriculture provides an important arena within which biodiversity must function. Farmers overwhelmingly consider themselves ‘custodians of the countryside’, and are increasingly interested in wildlife. Various farming practices, such as organic farming or field margins, are intended to benefit wildlife and the wider environment. Over the past decade we have tested whether or not these practices are indeed beneficial to small mammals and invertebrates, and have examined ways of improving farmland management for these groups. For example, we report on ten-years of experimental field margin management that found that larger and more species rich invertebrate assemblages are likely to be fostered in the absence of regular cutting. Other management practices such as organic farming and leaving land fallow as set-aside also impact on biodiversity. However, while much can be achieved by the accumulation of small actions, this should not deflect conservationists from the search for realistic radical changes in farming practice and land use. 11.00 - 11.15 WARREN, MARTIN, S., Tom Brereton, and Valerie K. Brown, Butterfly Conservation, Manor Yard, East Lulworth, Wareham, Dorset BH20 5QP, UK. (MW, TB) Centre for Agri-Environmental Research (CAER), Department of Agriculture, University of Reading, Earley Gate, PO Box 237, Reading RG6 6AR, UK (VB) THE IMPORTANCE OF AGRI-ENVIRONMENT SCHEMES FOR CONSERVING INSECT BIODIVERSITY Agri-environment schemes have emerged as a major new mechanism for improving the management of semi-natural and farmland habitats in the UK. Two factors are especially crucial to insects: firstly, the role of schemes in protecting and extending the basic resource of semi-natural habitats; and secondly, their impact on management regimes that affect species performance on individual sites. Studies of butterflies and other insects have shown that sward height and heterogeneity are crucial factors governing populations in grasslands. We will present evidence gathered from the systematic monitoring of butterfly populations on over 500 sites, and refer to examples from other insects, that demonstrate the importance of managing sward structure. The results show that schemes are having a positive effect on many species, while others have fared less well. Our conclusion is that schemes have enormous potential to help conserve biodiversity in the UK’s heavily human-modified landscapes, but that further improvements and expenditure are needed to maximise benefits for biodiversity. For many insects, the improvement of ‘deep and narrow’ schemes is equally, if not more, critical than the development of ‘broad and shallow’ schemes. Moreover, the monitoring of insect populations is essential in order to assess the impact of schemes on biodiversity and to refine prescriptions so that schemes fulfil their potential. 11.15 - 11.30 MARSHALL, E.J.P., David Kleijn. Marshall Agroecology Ltd, 2 Nut Tree Cottages, Barton, Winscombe, Somerset, BS25 1DU, UK <jon.marshall@agroecol.co.uk> (EJPM), Nature Conservation and Plant Ecology Group, Wageningen University, Bornsesteeg 69, NL-6708 PD Wageningen, The Netherlands (DK). AGRI-ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPORT SCHEMES — WHAT DO THEY DELIVER FOR PLANT SPECIES CONSERVATION? A number of agri-environmental schemes have been implemented across Europe, many with financial support under the EU Regulation 92/2078. Within England, Environmentally Sensitive Areas and the Countryside Stewardship Scheme and several earlier initiatives have addressed a variety of biodiversity targets. A number of commissioned projects have assessed the success of some of these programmes to a variety of levels. Recent work in The Netherlands has indicated that there may be situations when there is little if any benefit from certain schemes. A review of the targets of a number of UK and Dutch schemes, the management prescriptions within schemes, some of the assessment protocols and results of implementation is presented. Whilst there are a number of successes in terms of plant biodiversity protection, there are many situations where prescriptions are contradictory for different targets. There are also shortcomings in the approaches to monitoring progress and in The Netherlands monitoring is not being implemented at all. Proposals for improved success and in monitoring such schemes are suggested and discussed in the light of the report from the Policy Commission of Food and Farming. 11.30 - 11.45 EDWARDS-JONES, GARETH, School of Agricultural and Forest Sciences, University of Wales, Bangor, Gwynedd N. Wales, LL57 2UW (g.ejones@bangor.ac.uk) WHAT MAKES FARMERS ADOPT CONSERVATION SCHEMES? Much European environmental and conservation policy which is relevant to agriculture is voluntary. That is farmers are free to adopt it should they so desire, but suffer no penalty should they chose not to. Such a voluntary approach has economic advantages but severe ecological disadvantages. The ability to predict likely uptake of voluntary environmental policy would be of great benefit to policy makers, but to date such models remain elusive. This is surprising as adoption dynamics have been studied for over 50 years, and many quantitative models of adoption have been developed for agricultural technology. This paper will review previous work on adoption dynamics over a range of fields and will seek to identify key variables that may act as general predictors of adoption. These variables will be compared with the results of recent studies on the dynamics of the adoption of agri-environments schemes in the UK. The adoption of agri-environment schemes depend upon farm structure, farm profitability, age and education level of farmers along side less quantifiable factors such as personality of farmer and perceptions of lead organisations. These factors have important implications for the future of biodiversity in agricultural systems 11.45 - 12.00 SUTHERLAND, WILLIAM J.Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Conservation, School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK w.sutherland@uea.ac.uk WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS FOR THE COUNTRYSIDE? It is widely accepted that current EU agricultural policies are unsatisfactory for farmers, consumers, biodiversity and the taxpayer. Following BSE and foot and mouth disease there is widespread agreement, including amongst top politicians, that fundamental changes in the agricultural sector are required. I will review the history of this change in attitude, show how the consequences of intensification (such as that from genetically modified crops) can be predicted, and suggest that we combine targeted agri-environment schemes with large-scale habitat restoration. Such restoration provides the opportunity to deal with several problems simultaneously, such as sea level rise, flood defence, tourism and water catchment protection. I will express my concern that this opportunity for meaningful change may be missed. 12.00 - 12.15 Discussion |