DOCSLIB.ORG

The Status of Local Wildlife Sites 2014 & Why These Special Places Need

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Status of Local Wildlife Sites 2014 & Why These Special Places Need Secret Spaces The status of Local Wildlife Sites 2014 & why these special places need saving Protecting Wildlife for the Future The Wildlife Trusts: Secret Spaces 03 Secret Spaces Dry Street Pastures, Essex The status of England’s Local Wildlife Sites 2014 From mystical ancient woodlands and vibrant, colourful meadows to quiet churchyards and bustling flower-rich roadsides; and, from field-bordering hedgerows to tiny copses, England enjoys special, often unnoticed wild places where nature thrives. These “secret Small pearl Wilderness Island, spaces”, known as Local Wildlife Sites, are truly exceptional areas of land with significant Carr Wood, Derbyshire bordered fritilary London wildlife value. They are frequently a legacy of the goodwill and care of their landowners and managers and of decades of hard graft by conservationists. ocal Wildlife Sites cover management of publically-owned Who treasures and takes at least five percent of sites. Then there is the question care of these places? England’s land mass. of how people and wildlife will Most Local Wildlife Sites are They vary substantially respond to a changing climate. in private ownership and it is L in size and shape. When these factors are considered Stoke ultimately landowners and farmers, Newington They can be privately or publically in combination, it is no surprise that often with the support of nature East Reservoir, London owned and found in the depths of these important refuges for wildlife conservationists, who secure the the countryside and nestled in busy are vulnerable and have never been ongoing existence of these special towns and cities. These special areas under so much pressure. places – through sensitive habitat have been identified and selected management and sheer commitment by partnerships of local authorities, and care for nature. ecologists and local nature experts using robust, scientifically There are also more than 50 determined criteria and detailed partnerships of local authorities, ecological surveys. conservation bodies, Local Record Centres and local specialists across Unlike many nature reserves, these most of the country, helping to Embleton Local Wildlife Site (within special places are not protected care for these amazing places. Pymore Reedbed Dorset a golf course), Northumberland by law and most are not owned by Each partnership is responsible for conservation organisations. While surveying, assessing and selecting they have no direct legal status, Cowslips sites against robust local criteria. Local Wildlife Sites are considered at Crich Chase, Derbyshire Once sites are selected, partners important enough to receive can advise landowners on land recognition within the planning management and grants. They 1 system. National planning policy Every three years The Wildlife should also periodically monitor the requires local authorities to identify Trusts publish an assessment of sites to assess their status and the Local Wildlife Sites and provide for Local Wildlife Sites based on a effectiveness of the advice given. their protection through local policy. national survey of Local Wildlife Unfortunately, due to a lack of Drayton Drewray, St Anne’s on Sea, Fylde, Copper Hill, Site partnerships. This report resources most sites are not regularly Norfolk Lancashire Lincolnshire But, the demands on our land have accompanies a full technical report revisited and, consequently, we don’t never been greater. Predicted growth ‘The status of England’s Local Wildlife have a complete picture of their in housing, new roads and other Sites 2014’ and presents some of the condition: this report provides a infrastructure are all set to increase. key points and trends along with snap-shot of what we do know and Changes to farm environment some background information. presents some worrying trends. schemes are reducing the incentives Despite their considerable value to for owners of Local Wildlife Sites to wildlife and people, Local Wildlife gain support for their management; Sites are being lost and damaged at austerity measures threaten the a significant rate. Bombus lucorum Burgess Park Southwark Breach Hill Common Foxholes Heath London , Avon Derbyshire, 04 Secret Spaces :The Wildlife Trusts The Wildlife Trusts: Secret Spaces 05 “Because of the way sites are selected for national protection, the wildlife-rich habitats of Berkshire, Why do Local Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire receive virtually no legal protection. Just over 1% of our region is protected – the national average is just under 8%. Our Local Wildlife Sites, without the status of national sites, but which may have just as much wildlife value, therefore support the vast majority of our wildlife. Most survive thanks to sympathetic Wildlife Sites matter? landowners, and they need support. Without these sites quite simply we would have virtually no wildlife left.” Matt Jackson, Head of Conservation, Policy and Strategy at Berks, Bucks, Oxon Wildlife Trust (BBOWT) ocal Wildlife Sites are vitally important Along with our statutory protected been in decline, with 30 percent in sharp Local Wildlife Sites and for wildlife and people alike. Many studies sites like Sites of Special Scientific decline. And currently, more than one in Sites of Special Scientific have shown how they add value to local Interest (SSSIs) and National Nature ten of all the species assessed are under Interest (SSSIs) communities and contribute significantly Reserves, Local Wildlife Sites now threat of disappearing altogether. There is a general misconception that L to our quality of life, health, well-being and represent the core areas where much all the best nature conservation sites If society wants to stop and reverse education. While many are private and/or out of reach - of England’s wildlife resides. As are designated and legally protected. this trend of wildlife loss and provide the very existence of this network of thousands of areas changes in land-use have eroded and This is not the case. While the network for nature’s recovery, we have to of natural habitat across the country contributes to the fragmented the wildlife-rich expanse of Sites of Special Scientific Interest expand, restore and recreate habitats wildlife we find in our gardens, parks and other public of habitats that once covered the (SSSIs) is crucially important, they on a landscape-scale, way beyond natural spaces. Ultimately, they also provide some of the country, these places are now refuges represent only a small sample of natural services we rely on to maintain a healthy and Norfolk Wildlife Trust for wildlife - remnant ‘islands’ in a ‘sea’ the boundaries of traditional nature staff meeting a owner Moss Farm Staffordshire our most important habitats and reserves and wildlife sites. This is central sustainable environment; such as clean air and water, of intensively managed urban, coastal their species; the SSSI network is to The Wildlife Trusts’ Living Landscape pollinators and food production, and flood resilience. and rural landscapes. Some habitats selective and is not intended to be vision 23 and core to the outcome of a such as wildflower meadows, mires, comprehensive. Numerous areas with comprehensive review of England’s fens and wet woodlands are now equivalent nature conservation value Wildlife Sites led by Professor Sir John so scarce that the majority qualify are not designated as SSSIs and have Improved health, well-being and social interaction Lawton in 2010 24. This review revealed for Local Wildlife Site status as a no protection despite being of equal or minimum. They offer vital havens for that there were ‘serious shortcomings’ in As a population, we are experiencing increasing levels of greater value to wildlife. obesity and physical inactivity 2 and one in four of us will a wealth of wildlife including many our existing network. It recommended experience a mental health problem at some point in our threatened and declining plants such that ‘greater protection’ should be 3 By contrast, the approach for Local lives Yet natural places such as Local Wildlife Sites can as: frog orchid, green winged orchid, given to Local Wildlife Sites and their Wildlife Sites is comprehensive: all encourage physical activity and help to improve health. Isle of Man cabbage, limestone fern, management ‘must be improved’. It sites which meet the given criteria are In general: marsh gentian and the beautifully concluded that ‘we need to take steps Friends of Carr Wood hay making, Derbyshire selected, some of which are of SSSI named coral necklace; and animals to rebuild nature’ by providing more quality. Consequently, in some counties n individuals with easy access to nature are three times including: pearl-bordered fritillary, natural areas, which are bigger, better Local Wildlife Sites are where most of more likely to participate in physical activity and 40% grizzled skipper, yellow wagtail, noble and more joined up, so that existing our special wildlife can be found. For less likely to become overweight or obese 4,5 chafer, grass snake, slow-worm, harvest fragments of wildlife-rich land are example, in Nottinghamshire, SSSIs n people living near moderate or high quality green space mouse and water vole. reconnected to create a climate-resilient account for just 1.5 percent of the are twice as likely to report low psychological distress and self-sustaining whole. 6 county’s area whilst Local Wildlife Sites than those living near low quality open spaces cover 10 percent. In Greater London Vital havens for England’s wildlife Local Wildlife Sites are key to making n the simple act of viewing nature from a window can there are just 37 SSSIs compared to this happen. As the natural ‘green’ reduce stress, increase recovery from illness and Eighty percent of threatened vascular more than 1,500 Local Wildlife Sites, 7, 8, 9, 10 fabric of our towns and countryside, improve concentration and mood plants, all priority butterfly species covering eight times the area and and significant areas of England’s collectively they create a web of n nature close to the home increases the ability of Hickinwood Pond White admiral,Gutteridge almost 20 percent of the capital.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Report & Accounts 2012-13
    Royal Society of Wildlife Trusts Annual Report & Accounts 2012/13 Registered charity number: 207238 Version: 07/10/2013 10:17:20 Royal Society of Wildlife Trusts CONTENTS for the year ended 31 March 2013 Page Chair‟s Report 2 Chair of TWT England‟s Report 3 Trustees‟ Report 4-19 Auditor‟s Report 20-21 Accounting Policies 22-23 Consolidated Statement of Financial Activities 24 Consolidated and Society Balance Sheets 25 Consolidated Cash Flow Statement 26 Notes to the Financial Statements 27-39 The following pages do not form part of the statutory financial statements: Appendix: Grant Expenditure by Organisation 40-47 Page | 1 Royal Society of Wildlife Trusts CHAIR‟S REPORT for the year ended 31 March 2013 It has been an „eventful‟ year for me, my first as appointment. It is clear that the movement owes Chair of our 100-year-old movement. It all started them a great debt. with a bang - our tremendous centenary celebration at the Natural History Museum. At this It seems to me that this dynamic, creative event we traced our history back to our founder, movement is as united and effective as ever. Charles Rothschild, and awarded our medal in his, and his daughter Miriam‟s name, to philanthropist Peter De Haan. There were other occasions for celebration as well, including Sir David Attenborough presenting our centenary medal to Ted Smith, the father of the modern Wildlife Trust movement. There was also a gathering of one hundred of our most committed people from across the UK at Highgrove where our Patron HRH The Prince of Wales recognised their achievements.
    [Show full text]
  • Catchment Partnerships in Operation
    Catchment Partnerships in Operation 100 80 53 81 89 25 90 17 74 26 67 33 71 39 16 99 28 99 56 95 2 3 20 30 37 18 42 42 85 29 79 79 15 43 91 96 21 83 38 50 61 69 51 51 59 92 62 6 73 97 45 55 75 7 88 24 98 8 82 60 10 84 12 9 57 87 77 35 66 66 78 40 5 32 78 49 35 14 34 49 41 70 94 44 27 76 58 63 1 48 23 4 13 22 19 46 72 31 47 64 93 Legend Category No group yet established 0 20 40 80 Kilometres GSurobu cpa/gtcrhomupesn wt orking at sub catchment scale WGrhooulpe wcaotrckhinmge antt whole catchment scale © Crown Copyright and database right 2013. Ordnance Survey licence number 100024198. Map produced October 2013 © Copyright Environment Agency and database right 2013. Key to Management Catchment ID Catchment Sub/whole Joint ID Management Catchment partnership catchment Sub catchment name RBD Category Host Organisation (s) 1 Adur & Ouse Yes Whole South East England Yes Ouse and Adur Rivers Trust, Environment Agency 2 Aire and Calder Yes Whole Humber England No The Aire Rivers Trust 3 Alt/Crossens Yes Whole North West England No Healthy Waterways Trust 4 Arun & Western Streams Yes Whole South East England No Arun and Rother Rivers Trust 5 Bristol Avon & North Somerset Streams Yes Whole Severn England Yes Avon Wildlife Trust, Avon Frome Partnership 6 Broadland Rivers Yes Whole Anglian England No Norfolk Rivers Trust 7 Cam and Ely Ouse (including South Level) Yes Whole Anglian England Yes The Rivers Trust, Anglian Water Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Wildlife 8 Cherwell Yes Whole Thames England No Trust 9 Colne Yes Whole Thames England
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Partners
    Natural partners The achievements of local biodiversity partnerships in England England Biodiversity Group CONTENTS 1 Foreword 3 Local action for biodiversity in England 9 Delivering targeted action 15 Awareness, education and involvement 19 Biodiversity integration in practice 28 Funding and resources 31 Signposts to the future 32 Links and further information ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS England Local Issues Group Members Charlotte Gault, England Local Biodiversity Action Facilitator, The Wildlife Trusts Alison Barnes, England Local Biodiversity Action Co-ordinator, Defra John Robbins, Chairman, England Local Issues Group, Defra Anne Brenchley, English Nature Robin Wynde, RSPB Chris Mahon, Cheshire Wildlife Trust Maggie Bosanquet, Local Government Association Chris Spray, Northumbrian Water Colin Headley, Country Land and Business Association Wendy Brooks, Environment Agency David Pape, Association of Local Government Ecologists The England Local Issues Group would like to acknowledge the help of everyone who contributed information and case studies used in this report: Keith Bowey, Durham BAP; John Smith, Staffordshire Wildlife Trust; Richard Marsh, Cornwall Wildlife Trust; Valerie Keeble, The Peoples Trust for Endangered Species; John Hayward, Gavin Saunders and David Leach, Devon Wildlife Trust; Alex Preston, Worcestershire County Council; Keith James, Bromsgrove District Council; David Armitage, Malvern Hills AONB; Dave Jackson; Nick Cheales and Susan Lindsay, Scottish Wildlife Trust; Chris Strachan and Sandi Bain, London Wildlife Trust; Fiona
    [Show full text]
  • Countryside Jobs Service
    Countryside Jobs Service Focus on Volunteering In association with the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) 9 February 2015 Volunteering and diversity Over 15 million people volunteer every month in the UK. They make a huge contribution to society, and in 2012 volunteering was estimated to contribute the equivalent of £24bn towards the economy1. Despite these impressive statistics, access to volunteering is still limited for some groups in society. People who are unemployed and those with a disability or life- limiting illness are less likely to volunteer. Not only does this mean that many people aren’t benefitting from skills and experiences which can be developed through volunteering, organisations are also missing out on the skills of talented individuals and are less likely to reflect the diversity of the communities they work in. Although the Equality Act doesn’t apply to volunteers, it is still unacceptable to discriminate against them, and organisations University of Gloucestershire SU – by recruiting volunteers should try wherever possible to reduce from diverse backgrounds organisations can benefit from a range of experiences. barriers to volunteering. Here are some of the key barriers faced by potential volunteers, and top tips for how to solve them. Time commitment A common misconception is that volunteering requires giving up large chunks of time each week, and that only retired people or people who work part-time have the time to volunteer. Organisations which only offer fixed or lengthy commitments risk excluding people with unpredictable workloads, shift work, and caring or child care responsibilities. Having a range of volunteering opportunities will help you recruit volunteers from a more diverse background.
    [Show full text]
  • English Nature Research Report
    Appendix 1 List 01 all county inventories County Authors Date Avon Pinchcs, Lister, Oxford, Ashlcy, Worrd, Rosscr 1988 and Ncwcornbc Bed fords hi re Robinson 1987 Berkshire Welsh 1986 B ucki ngham shi re Hug lies 1988 Cambridgeshire Robinson 1987 Cheshire Robinson and Whitbread 1988 Clevelar1d Cooke 1987 C:omwall Listcr aid Walkcr 1986 Cumbria Phillips I994 Dcrhyshirc Bcvai, Robinson, Spcnccr and Whitbrcd 1992 DeVOll Lister and Pinches 1986 Dorsct Spcnccr 1988 Durham Cooke 1987 East. Sussex Whitbrcad, Barton and Hatton 1'389 Essex Barber, Millington, Spcncer aid 'T'hornas 1992 Clouccstcrshirc Spencer arid Thorns 199'1 Grcatcr Manchcstcr Cartcr aid Spencer 1988 and Merseyside H;nnpshi re HCC Ecology Tcm and Wilsorr 1994 Herefordshire Whitbrcad 1986 - Hertfordshire Robinson 1988 Ilumbcrsidc Spencer 1989 Isle 01' Wight Spcnccr, cox md Cliattcrs 1987 Kent Pritchard, Phillips, Jones & Reid 1994 L,ancas hi re Phillips 1994 Leicest ershirc Evcrctt aid Robinson 1990 1,incolnsliire Hughes 1988 21 I Lontlon I Spencer 1986 I Norfolk I Spencer and Thomas 1992 Nor-ih Yorkshire Phillips 1994 Par1 1 Craven ruid Richmondshirc Part 2 Harrogate, Phi1 lips 1994 EIamhledon, Selhy and York Par( 3 Ryedale and Phillips 1994 Scarborough Norllin~npi~nsliire Robinson 1988 I Nortliurnberlarid I Carter 1988 I Nott ingliunshirc I Listcr, Robinson and Whitbread 1990 1988 I988 1986 I South Yorkshire I Eccles 1986 1993 Suffolk Spencer and Thornas 1992 Surrey Drucker, Witbread and Barton 1988 * Tync aid Wear Cooke 1987 W anvickshi rc Lcm and Robinson 1989 I Wcst Midlands I Lean and Robinson 19x9 I West Yorkshire I Pliillips 1994 I West Sussex I Whitbread, Barton and Hutton 1989 1987 I Worcestcrsliirc I Whitbread 1986 22 Appendix 2 Countics whcre dalwheets include 10 km sq sheets Clcvclmd Durham Kent I,aiicaslrire Mmchcstcr Merseyside Nortlium bcrlmd Hcrcfordshi rc Tyne and Wcar West Yorkshire Worcestershire Appendix 3 Counties whcrc local ofllices hold the only copies of original data sheets.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Review 2012/13
    Annual Review 2012/13 Protecting Wildlife for the Future Brown hare The Wildlife Trusts | Annual Review 2012/13 3 Contents Find out more about our Your Wildlife Trusts 4 work online wildlifetrusts.org and follow us @wildlifetrusts Where We Are 5 Scan this code to view this report on a mobile device. What We Do 6 From our Chair & CEO 8 People & Nature 10 Download a QR reader Living Landscapes 12 to access these codes. Living Seas 14 Highlights from 2012-13 16 Financial & 24 Organisational Overview Picture Credits 26 Statistics cover the period April 2012- March 2013. Work covered in the Review spans Spring 2012 to Summer 2013. Your Wildlife Trusts Our goal is nature’s recovery – on land and at sea. To achieve this we take an integrated approach – from saving wildlife-rich places through to influencing Europe-wide policies on fisheries and agriculture. Many of our staff and volunteers are on the front line, leading school parties, studying undersea wildlife, managing and creating habitats for wildlife and talking to farmers, planners, MPs, policy-makers and businesses about the value of nature and what they can do to help. Each Wildlife Trust is run by people who care for the natural environment of their patch - whether a city, county, country or island. We have a mission to create Living Landscapes and secure Living Seas and to inspire people to value and take action for nature. Waresley Wood, Cambridgeshire The Wildlife Trusts | Annual Review 2012/13 5 47 Wildlife Trusts N around the UK, Isle of Man and Alderney W E > 7 million Visits
    [Show full text]
  • Written Evidence Submitted by the Wildlife Trusts (FLO0101)
    Written evidence submitted by The Wildlife Trusts (FLO0101) The Wildlife Trusts previously contributed to evidence submitted by Blueprint for Water, the water-focussed Working Group of Wildlife and Countryside LINK. This response builds on some of the key points made in Blueprint’s submission and adds further evidence drawing upon the experiences and recommendations of Wildlife Trusts across the country, who are actively involved in delivering natural flood management schemes, and in undertaking conservation land management which also delivers flood risk and other benefits. Our key recommendation is that a more integrated approach to land and water management must be taken in order to deliver multiple benefits and more cost-effective outcomes. The Nature Recovery Network (NRN), being established under the Environment Bill, will provide a key means of identifying opportunities to deliver schemes which work with natural processes to reduce flood risk, and also provide biodiversity and other public benefits. As recognition increases that activities to reduce flood risk can be undertaken across catchments, rather than just in locations vulnerable to flooding, the forthcoming Environmental Land Management (ELM) scheme will be a significant potential source of funding that can support both specific interventions (e.g. Natural Flood Management techniques, NFM) and wider land management (e.g. soil health) that work with natural processes to deliver flood benefit. Any barriers to the pooling of funding to support such techniques need to be resolved. 1. How effectively do the new Government policy statement and Environment Agency strategy meet the challenge posed by a changing climate? The long-term thinking and the consideration of climate change that clearly underpin the Environment Agency’s National FCERM Strategy for England is a new approach which is not just welcome, but necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • TWT Response to the Planning White Paper: Planning for the Future October 2020
    TWT Response to the Planning White Paper: Planning for the Future October 2020 Planning for the Future Consultation Planning Directorate 3rd Floor Fry Building 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF 1. Introduction 1.1 This submission has been developed by The Wildlife Trusts in response to the proposals in the Government’s Planning White Paper: Planning for the Future. As well as preparing a TWT response, we have enabled over 13,000 members of the public to share their views directly with the consultation team. A short selection of comments sent as part of these responses are attached in Annex 1, to help demonstrate the level of interest and support the public has for ensuring wildlife and natural spaces are at the heart of the planning system. 1.2 We are in a climate and nature emergency – an emergency which has profound impacts on the environment and our current and future land use planning decisions. We are also beginning to see the growing impacts of society’s disconnect and progressive decline in its interactions with nature. Restoring a healthy and resilient natural environment is vitally important to health, well- being and economic prosperity. Protecting, restoring and creating wild places will secure carbon-storing habitats, help tackle climate change, provide important wildlife habitat and ensure access to nature to improve people’s lives. A positive planning system has a key role to play in this. 1.3 The Planning White Paper (PWP) rightfully recognises that the planning system is central to many of our most important national challenges including: ‘providing the high quality homes and places where people want to live and work; combating climate change; improving biodiversity; and supporting sustainable growth’.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Full Report
    BARN OWL © DANNY GREEN/2020VISION CONTENTS 1 Executive summary 4 1.1 Protected/designated/important wildlife sites at risk 4 1.2 Habitats at risk 4 1.3 Species at risk 4 1.4 Inappropriate mitigation proposals 5 1.5 Net loss of biodiversity 5 1.6 Conclusion 5 2 Introduction 6 3 Background 7 3.1 HS2 Route & Map 7 3.2 Trusts affected 8 3.3 Policy context 8 4 Findings 9 4.1 Introduction to findings 9 4.2 Route-wide impacts 10 4.3 Nature Improvement Areas and Living Landscapes 12 4.4 Wildlife Trust reserves will be impacted 15 4.5 National Trust sites 17 4.6 Irreplaceable habitats will be lost 17 4.7 Undesignated habitats 18 4.8 Off-route effects 18 4.9 Impact on wildlife 19 4.10 Habitats 21 5 Mitigation and compensation 23 5.1 Inappropriate mitigation proposed 23 5.2 Inadequate mitigation 23 5.3 Inadequate compensation 25 5.4 Monitoring and management 26 5.5 HS2: The case for a greener vision 26 6 Environmental Statements 28 6.1 Missing baseline data 28 6.2 Phase 2a Environmental Statement 28 6.3 Phase 2b Working Draft Environmental Statement (WDES) 28 7 Net loss of biodiversity 30 8 Conclusion 32 9. References 34 WHAT’S THE DAMAGE? WHY HS2 WILL COST NATURE TOO MUCH |3 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Our natural world is in crisis. Over the past 70 years, UK wildlife and wild landscapes have experienced huge loss and sharp declines, with the reduction and fragmentation of habitat a significant cause.
    [Show full text]
  • For Choosing to Support the Work of the Wildlife Trusts!
    for choosing to support the work of The Wildlife Trusts! Each of the 46 Wildlife Trusts is an independent charity: together, we are protecting and restoring wildlife throughout the whole of the UK, Alderney and Isle of Mann. We’re on a mission to restore at least 30% of land and sea for nature by 2030 — and we’re so glad you’ve decided to help us make that happen. By raising funds for your Wildlife Trust, you’ll be helping to support wildlife and wild places where you live, putting us right on track to reaching our goal. We truly couldn’t do it without you. It’s a big ambition, but with people like you on board we know we can do it. So, let’s get fundraising! How your donations could help £10 could buy a bow saw to help our volunteers with woodland management £50 could buy a vaccine used to vaccinate badgers against bovine TB £100 could run an environmental education session for young people £500 could fund a species survey to make sure it’s protected From setting up a sponsored run to organising a special event like an afternoon tea party or bring and buy sale, you can help raise funds in all sorts of ways. This pack is filled with hints, tips and ideas to inspire you, and don’t forget each Wildlife Trust is only a phone call away if you would like any more guidance. Good luck and thank you! Choose a Wildlife Trust Wildlife Trusts across the UK, Isle of Man and Alderney do all kinds of amazing work in their local areas all year round, including work to restore precious peatland, planting wildflower meadows, protecting endangered species, and helping people experience wildlife first hand.
    [Show full text]
  • A Living Landscape Over 100 Schemes Across the UK
    A Living Landscape Over 100 schemes across the UK What is A Living Landscape? It is a strategic vision of our landscape that will help us create a resilient and healthy environment. We are identifying key areas to protect for wildlife, enlarging, improving and joining them up across the UK: on nature reserves, in towns and cities, and in partnership with hundreds of other land-owners. There are now more than 100 Living Landscape schemes around the UK. These schemes are creating inspirational, accessible landscapes – full of wildlife and rich in opportunities for learning, health and wellbeing, as well as sustainable economic development. A Living Landscape Over 100 schemes across the UK South West Lincolnshire Coastal Grazing Marshes (Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust) North Somerset Levels and Moors Project (Avon Wildlife Trust) Lincolnshire Limewoods (Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust) Restoring Avon's wildflower-rich grassland (Avon Wildlife Trust) Trent Holmes Living Landscape Project (Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust) West Cornwall Wetland Networks Project (Cornwall Wildlife Trust) Idle Valley Project (Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust) Working Wetlands on the Culm (Devon Wildlife Trust) Restoring Sherwood’s Ancient Heathland (Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust) Exeter Wild City Project (Devon Wildlife Trust) John Clare Country Living Landscape project (The Wildlife Trust for Beds, Cambs, Northants & Peterborough) Pastures New (Dorset Wildlife Trust) Nene Valley Living Landscape Project (The Wildlife Trust for Beds, Cambs, Northants & Peterborough) Severn
    [Show full text]
  • The Wildlife Trusts (AB52)
    Written evidence submitted by The Wildlife Trusts (AB52) 1. The Wildlife Trusts believe there is much potential for the Agriculture Bill and we welcome its core focus on public money for public goods. In this evidence submission, we set out ways the Bill could be strengthened to deliver the step change that is needed in securing a sustainable future for farming, wildlife and the climate. The Wildlife Trusts as land managers 2. The Wildlife Trusts protects, champions and acts for wildlife and wild places on land and at sea. We believe that people are part of nature; everything we value ultimately comes from it and everything we do has an impact on it. 3. The Wildlife Trusts are a UK-wide movement of 46 independent charities with more than 850,000 members and 35,000 volunteers. We manage over 100,000ha land over 2,300 nature reserves, own 29 working farms, and provide advice to more than 5,000 landowners each year on topics ranging from reducing pesticide use and restoring peatlands, to mitigating flooding and species reintroductions. 4. We want future land management policy and programmes to be a success. Currently, nine Wildlife Trusts across England are leading five Defra Environmental Land Management (ELM) Tests and Trials (see Annex 1) with a further ten in development for the second phase of Tests and Trials. 5. We are members of both Greener UK and Wildlife and Countryside Link and support the proposals1 for the Agriculture Bill of both these groups. 6. The Wildlife Trusts believe that the Agriculture Bill is a once in a generation opportunity to move towards a more sustainable, agroecological food and farming system.
    [Show full text]