2019 2 State of Nature Report 2019
#STATEOFNATURE State of Nature 2019 documents how human impacts are driving sweeping changes in wildlife in the UK. The loss of nature affects us all, but the greatest impacts will be upon the lives of young people and generations yet to come, if they have to live in a world impoverished of nature. In recognition of this, we asked some of the UK’s most passionate and committed young conservationists to tell us what nature means to them.
Nature provides The revival of the liberation from the Red Kite, Ospreys hustle of modern society, bouncing back, breeding allowing our attention to Cattle Egrets – many species shift away from ourselves are bringing new life to the and focus on the glorious UK but the list of declining and the sublime. For me species is ever growing. it is not a supplement, We must unite now to save it is a necessity.” these species before they’re BELLA LACK, 15 but a distant memory.” DAN ROUSE, 23
Nature is our life I wholly believe that support system. As it is our duty an autistic teenager, nature to protect nature and has provided a safe space the environment as a to which I can crawl into, reciprocation to how rejuvenate my spirits and nature takes care of us keep me going.” every single day. Nature DARA MCANULTY, 15 allows us to eat, drink, breathe, live. The least we can do is protect it.”
YETUNDE KEHINDE, 17
Nature is important I have never to me because it seen a Hedgehog, reminds me to keep going although my parents even when things are used to see them all hard. The fresh air and the time in the area. petrichor give me space Many others my age have to breathe and let go and had the same experience. make me feel better. Nature I’m worried that we’re always gives a solution, close to losing them from and adapts, always trying our countryside forever.” hard, and I think we all JAMES MILLER, 17 have something to learn from nature.” ESTHER BIRD, 13 State of Nature Report 2019 3
Photo: David J Slater (rspb-images.com) Swallows
Thanks to the Whenever I have dedication of the chance to schoolchildren and experience the outdoors, volunteers in the City, the presence of nature wildflower meadows and brings a feeling of roof gardens have been tranquillity. Seeing the created, allowing pollinators, variety of animals and including many butterflies, plants that our forests, to thrive in central London. parks and meadows This shows the potential we contain gives me the all have to protect nature, urge to protect the in every place, even in our environment even more.” concrete jungles.” KHADIJAH HAQ, 14 KABIR KAUL,14
My favourite thing I worry that people about nature is its don’t recognise unmistakable diversity. how valuable their I am reminded of the individual actions are in woods by the captivating sparking change. Planting scents of wildflowers; wildflowers, drilling a few majestic colours of birds holes in bricks, being a soaring high, and simply bit ‘lazier’ in the garden, the soothing symphony can encourage so much of birdsong.” wildlife to your doorstep – PRINCESS-JOY EMEANUWA, 17 it couldn’t be easier!” SOPHIE PAVELLE, 24
During my GCSE It is everyone’s exams, Dartmoor responsibility to was a refuge – wading contribute to help the through streams, finding natural environment. bats in hidden caves and Even the smallest of making camps under actions can make the trees. Immersing ourselves biggest of difference, like in nature like this is the rewilding your own garden antidote to our dissociation to make it insect, bird from the earth that has and mammal friendly.” driven the climate crisis.” XANDER JOHNSTON, 13 SOPHIE SLEEMAN, 17 4 State of Nature Report 2019
STATE OF NATURE 2019
presents an overview of how the country’s wildlife is faring, looking back over nearly 50 years of monitoring to see how nature has changed in the UK, its Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories. As well as this long-term view, we focus on what has happened in the last decade, and so whether things are getting better or worse for nature. In addition, we have assessed the pressures that are acting on nature, and the responses being made, collectively, to counter these pressures.
Unless otherwise stated, all photos are from RSPB Images (rspb-images.com). This report should be cited as: Hayhow DB, Eaton MA, Stanbury AJ, Burns F, Kirby WB, Bailey N, Beckmann B, Bedford J, Boersch-Supan PH, Coomber F, Dennis EB, Dolman SJ, Dunn E, Hall J, Harrower C, Hatfield JH, Hawley J, Haysom K, Hughes J, Johns DG, Mathews F, McQuatters-Gollop A, Noble DG, Outhwaite CL, Pearce-Higgins JW, Pescott OL, Powney GD and Symes N (2019) The State of Nature 2019. The State of Nature partnership.
Photo: Ben Andrew (rspb-images.com) Cover photo: Mark Eaton State of Nature Report 2019 5
CONTENTS 46 Conservation
6 Headlines 50 Marine
8 Key findings 64 UK countries
Results in UK Overseas 12 more detail 80 Territories and Crown Dependencies
Historical Essays 14 change 86
Drivers of Appendix 16 change 92
This report has been produced by a partnership of more than 70 organisations involved in the recording, researching and conservation of nature in the UK and its Overseas Territories. These include a broad spectrum of recording societies with expertise on a wide range of taxonomic groups, including our best and least known wildlife; research organisations responsible for gathering and analysing data that advances our knowledge of the UK’s nature; conservation charities that take action for all elements of our wildlife and habitats; and the country nature conservation bodies for the UK and it’s four countries which have provided evidence and advice in the production of this report.
Much of the content of State of Nature 2019 can be used to inform on the UK’s progress towards the Convention on Biological Diversity’s (CBD) Aichi 2020 targets – see pages 90–91 or further details. We have used the For guidance on how to interpret the CBD’s icons for the Aichi targets to indicate when results presented in this report, report content is relevant to these targets. please refer to pages 92–93. 6 State of Nature Report 2019
THE HEADLINES In this report we have collated the best available data on the UK’s biodiversity, with a focus on the trends in species as the key evidence of how nature is faring. In addition to assessing the state of nature we have reviewed the pressures acting upon nature, and the conservation response being made to counter these pressures, in order to give a rounded view of the UK’s nature in 2019.
Our statistics demonstrate that the abundance and distribution of the UK’s species has, on average, declined since 1970 and many metrics suggest this decline has continued in the most recent decade. There has been no let-up in the net loss of nature in the UK.
Prior to 1970, the UK’s wildlife had already been depleted by centuries of persecution, pollution, habitat loss and degradation. Pasqueflower Photo: Ben Andrew (rspb-images.com)
13% 5% 41% 53% 15% By 2020 decline in average decline in average have decreased in of species show of species are most CBD targets species’ abundance. species’ distribution. abundance. strong changes. threatened. won’t be met. Our indicator of Our indicator of More species have Our wildlife is Of 8,431 species that An assessment based average species’ average species’ shown strong or undergoing have been assessed on the best available abundance of 696 distribution, covering moderate decreases rapid change; the using regional Red data indicates that, terrestrial and 6,654 terrestrial and in abundance (41%) proportion of species List criteria, 15% although progress freshwater species freshwater species than increases (26%) defined as showing have been classified has been made, the has fallen by 13% over a broad range since 1970, and strong changes as threatened with UK will not meet most since 1970; the of taxonomic groups, likewise more species in abundance, extinction from Great of the CBD’s 2020 rate of decline was has fallen by 5% since have decreased in either increasing or Britain, and 2% are Aichi targets. steeper in the last 1970, and is 2% lower distribution (27%) decreasing, rose from already extinct. 10 years, although than in 2005. than increased (21%) 33% over the long not statistically since 1970. term to 53% over the significantly so. short term. State of Nature Report 2019 7
The pressures that have caused the net loss • Legislation has driven marked of biodiversity over recent reductions in emissions of some decades continue to have a harmful pollutants, although negative effect. negative impacts remain. • Agricultural productivity, • Thousands of hectares linked to the intensification of farmland, woodland of land management and the and wetland are built decline in farmland nature, on every year to meet the is still increasing, although needs of our increasingly with government funding urbanised population, some farmers have adopted although woodland cover wildlife‑friendly farming. has increased, new wetland Photo: Chris Gomersall (rspb-images.com) habitat has been created • Average UK temperatures have and heathlands and increased by nearly 1°C since the moors restored. The impacts of climate 1980s with widespread impacts on nature evident already. change and fishing on species’ abundance and distribution are evident throughout the UK’s seas. At the base of the food web, plankton communities have changed in response to warming seas. While some fish stocks are showing signs of recovery, the impacts of decades of unsustainable fishing persist. The precise impact of other pressures on the marine environment, such as noise and plastic pollution, remain unclear.
Photo: Ian Francis (rspb-images.com) This report showcases a wide range of exciting conservation initiatives, with partnerships delivering inspiring results to secure a brighter future for the UK’s nature. Public Photo: Ben Andrew (rspb-images.com) support for conservation continues to grow, with non-governmental The UK has a long organisation (NGO) expenditure up by 24% since 2010/11 and a 46% increase history of love for, and in the time donated by volunteers fascination with, its since 2000. However, public sector expenditure on biodiversity, as natural heritage. a proportion of gross domestic Thanks to this, tens of thousands product (GDP), has fallen by 42% of volunteers collect data on wildlife since a peak in 2008/09, although the every year. Without their dedication UK’s expenditure on international this report would not be possible; biodiversity has grown. we thank them all. #STATEOFNATURE 8 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
KEY FINDINGS Our species’ status metrics make groups (including vascular plants, use of two broad types of data: lichens, bryophytes and a number of invertebrate groups). These trends Abundance data from a number of well- We are able to present trends in measure the change in the proportion established monitoring schemes in the of occupied sites, so our metrics status for more species than ever UK encompassing c700 species (birds, effectively report the average change before in State of Nature 2019. mammals, butterflies and moths). Many in range for these species. This is due to new datasets of these species are popular to record becoming available and the and are relatively easy to identify and We show trends for species for our development of analytical tools to observe, making it possible to count long-term period, from 1970 to 2016 individuals to get a measure of relative for abundance data and from 1970 which enable a much broader abundance. Our abundance metrics to 2015 for occupancy data. Our range of taxonomic groups to report the average change in relative short-term period covers the final be represented. abundance across these species. 10-year period of these time series. Using multispecies indicators, Occupancy data from large-scale FIND OUT MORE our goal is to communicate a datasets, which we can now use to clear, objective assessment generate trends for 6,654 species p92 How to interpret this report across a wide range of taxonomic of the state of biodiversity Photo: Mike Read (rspb-images.com) in the UK. The metrics we Stag Beetle present show how measures of average species’ status have changed over time as well as showing the variation in trends between species. We focus on measuring change over two periods: the long term, over nearly 50 years, and the short term, the last 10 years.
CHANGE IN SPECIES’ ABUNDANCE u a e ator (697 species) o ter S ort ter Within multispecies indicators like 19 0 201 200 201 All (697) All (687) these there is substantial variation 1 0 100 between individual species’ trends. 1 0 To examine this, we have allocated 0 120 species into trend categories based on
100 0 the magnitude of population change.
19 0 100 0 • Over the long term, 41% of species 0 0 had strong or moderate decreases e e Percentage of species Percentage
0 and 26% had strong or moderate 20 20 increases; 33% showed little change.
0 0 • Over the short term, 44% of species 19 0 19 0 1990 2000 2010 201 Strong increase Moderate increase had strong or moderate decreases Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Little change Moderate decrease and 36% had strong or moderate Strong decrease increases; 21% showed little change. • Over the long term, 33% of The abundance indicator for 697 the rate of change between the long species showed a strong change terrestrial and freshwater species and the short term. in abundance (either increase or shows a statistically significant decline The white line with shading shows decrease). Over the short term this in average abundance of 13% (95% the smoothed trend and associated rose to 53% of species. confidence intervals (CI) -22% to 95% CI, the blue line shows the -5%) between 1970 and 2016. Over Using a different, binary categorisation: underlying unsmoothed indicator. this long-term period, the smoothed • Over the long term, 58% of species The bar chart shows the percentage indicator fell by 0.31% per year. Over showed negative trends and 42% of species within the indicator our short-term period, the decline showed positive trends; over the that have increased, decreased was a statistically non-significant 6%, short term, 53% of species showed (moderately or strongly) or shown a rate of 0.65% per year. There was, negative trends and 47% showed little change in abundance. however, no significant difference in positive trends. State of Nature Report 2019 9
CHANGE IN SPECIES’ DISTRIBUTION u a ator 5 species o ter S ort ter • Over the long term, 27% of species 1 70 2015 2005 2015 5 5 showed strong or moderate 120 100% decreases and 21% showed strong 100 0% or moderate increases; 52% showed little change. 0 0% • Over the short term, 37% of species 1 70 100 0 showed strong or moderate 0% e e 0 of species Percentage decreases and 30% showed strong
20% or moderate increases; 33% showed 20 little change.
0 0% 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 Strong increase • Over the long term, 17% of Moderate increase species showed a strong change n icator 0% cre i e inter a s Little change Moderate decrease in distribution (either increase or Strong decrease decrease). Over the short term this The occupancy indicator for 6,654 from a site, this change of 5% could rose to 39% of species. terrestrial and freshwater species reflect more severe underlying Using a different, binary categorisation: shows that on average species’ abundance declines that we are distributions have declined by 5% currently unable to quantify. • Over the long term, 58% of species between 1970 and 2015. In 2015 the showed negative trends and 42% To examine the variation in species’ indicator was 2% lower than in 2005. showed positive trends; over the distribution trends, we allocated Because species tend to decline in short term, 56% of species showed species into categories based on the abundance before they disappear negative trends and 44% showed magnitude of distribution change. positive trends.
NATIONAL RED LIST ASSESSMENT MARINE
Here we show the percentage of species in Great Britain that have been allocated Trends in abundance for marine species into each of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List are shown by broad taxonomic group categories. Species assessed as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable are (see pages 94–97 for more details). formally classified as threatened and therefore at risk of extinction. Demersal fish indicators show increases Percentage of species threatened = (CR + EN + VU)/(total number assessed – DD – RE). in average abundance in the Celtic and Key Greater North Seas of 133% and 58% Endangered (EN) Near Threatened (NT) Least Concern (LC) Extinct or Regionally (RE) Critically Endangered (CR) Vulnerable (VU) Data Deficient (DD) respectively between the early 1980s and 2017. 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percentage of species The UK Breeding Seabird Indicator shows a 22% decline in average abundance for 13 species between 1985 and 2015. Trends in the abundance of marine mammals, for which we have data, vary by group; cetacean species show stable 0% 10% 20%25%30% 40% 50% 75% populations100% since the early 1990s, and Grey Seal numbers continue to increase Percentage of species while Harbour Seal numbers are decreasing in a number of areas. Of 8,431 species that have been are historic (1800 to mid-20th Changes in plankton communities are assessed against the IUCN Regional century), but losses continue; e.g. evident across the northern North Sea Red List criteria, 1,188 (15%) of the two breeding birds (Wryneck and and the English Channel; the indicator extant species for which sufficient Serin) have been lost this century. for large copepods shows a 5% increase data are available, are classified as Several other species have not in the northern North Sea over the last threatened and therefore at risk been found during recent targeted 10 years, compared to a 41% decrease of extinction from Great Britain. In surveys and will almost certainly be in the English Channel. addition, 2% of species are known classified as extinct in Great Britain (133) or considered likely (29) to when assessments are updated. An have gone extinct since 1500, and a assessment of threatened species in further four are extinct in the wild. Northern Ireland is given on page 70. Most extinctions in Great Britain 10 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
KEY FINDINGS – of the UK’s wildlife, and will continue In recent years public sector to do so for decades or even centuries expenditure on biodiversity PRESSURES AND to come. The 21st century so far conservation in the UK has declined has been warmer than the previous (see figure below), both in absolute RESPONSES three centuries. Since the 1980s, terms and as a percentage of GDP – average UK temperatures have the latter by 42%, from 0.038% As well as reporting on the state increased by nearly 1°C. to 0.022%, between 2008/09 and 2017/18. Governmental expenditure of the UK’s nature, we have Pollution: emissions of many on international biodiversity sought to identify trends in the pollutants have been reduced conservation, including in the UK’s dramatically in recent decades, key pressures that have caused Overseas Territories (OTs), has although diffuse air and water the net loss of nature, as well increased steadily since 2000/01. pollution continues to have a severe as in the responses being made A measure of NGO expenditure on impact on the UK’s sensitive habitats biodiversity has increased since to help nature. and freshwaters, and new pollutant 2010/11, indicating growing public threats continue to emerge. PRESSURES ON NATURE support for nature conservation. Urbanisation: there was an te o The State of Nature 2019 reviews the 00 0 0 0 0 8% increase in proportion of UK 0 0 major pressures on the UK’s nature; 700 population living in urban areas 00 0 0 0 022 500
agricultural management, climate 201 17 prices 0 01 between 1970 and 2018. 00 0 02 00 er e ta e of er e ta e change, urbanisation, pollution, o 200 0 01 hydrological change, invasive non- Woodland management: woodland 100 0 0 00 2000 01 2005 0 2010 01 2017 1 native species (INNS) and woodland cover in the UK increased P ic sector s P ic sector as % of P o rce ncc go i 2 management. Although monitoring by 9% between 1998 and 2018, change in these pressures, and although only 44% of woodland Millions of people across the UK love the impact they have on the UK’s is managed sustainably. and care for wildlife, as shown by support for wildlife charities, garden biodiversity, has not been systematic, Hydrological change: 1,000 hectares bird feeding and television viewing we have sought the most relevant (ha) of UK wetlands were converted figures. Many show their support available metrics to convey how the to artificial surfaces in six years by donating time as conservation pressures on wildlife are changing. (2006–2012), although new habitat has volunteers; the measure of this has Agricultural management been created, for example through increased by 46% since 2000. We 00 post-mineral extraction restoration. estimate that around 7,500,000 250 Invasive non-native species: volunteer hours go into collecting On average 10–12 new non-native biodiversity monitoring data every year. 200 species become established in the Exciting and ambitious projects and 150 UK annually, and 10–20% of these policy commitments highlighted cause serious adverse impacts. 100 throughout the report illustrate the ro u t t 1 7 100 ro u t t wide range of responses for nature 50 RESPONSE FOR NATURE in the UK and OTs, including but of 0 1 7 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 Conservation in the UK is delivered course not limited to: by a broad coalition of national • Nature-friendly farming. The steady increase in agricultural and local governments, NGOs, productivity, a product of increased land businesses, landowners, farmers • Climate change mitigation schemes. 1 and resource use efficiency , is linked to and private individuals, often • Legally binding limits for the intensification of land management, working in partnership. There are pollution emissions. which has had many documented many notable successes, some • Habitat restoration schemes. impacts on the farmland wildlife found highlighted in this report, but as • Vast landscape-scale conservation on 75% of the UK’s land area. our state metrics demonstrate these projects to restore ecosystems. have been insufficient as yet to stem Climate change • Community engagement and citizen 1 5 or reverse the net loss of nature. science projects. 1 0
0 5 • Reintroduction schemes
0 0 returning once-lost species.
0 5 • Managing problematic
1 0 ffere e fro fro ffere e non-native species. 1 5 1 1 10 1 50 1 0 2017 nn a a e 10 ear r nning ean Continued monitoring of biodiversity Climate change is driving will enable us to determine whether widespread changes in the they are delivering the hoped-for abundance, distribution and ecology recovery in the UK’s wildlife. State of Nature Report 2019 11
STATUS OF UK PRIORITY SPECIES The official UK Biodiversity Indicators for 214 species and change in We feature these indicators include two indicators to assess distribution for 395 species. In addition throughout State of Nature 2019. the status of species of greatest to the Priority Species Indicator, official Note that the short-term assessments conservation concern; the UK’s priority UK Biodiversity Indicators are published for UK Biodiversity Indicators are species. Of the 2,890 species included as annually for species groups including over five years, not 10 years as for priority species on the combined list for birds, butterflies and mammals, as well the State of Nature indicators. the four UK countries, data are available as other measures of biodiversity status. to assess change in relative abundance jncc.gov.uk/ukbi
UK Biodiversity Indicator: Change in the relative abundance of UK priority species, 1970 to 2016
u a e ator (214 species) o ter S ort ter • Since 1970, the indicator 1 70 201 2011 201 21 207 of abundance for 214 priority 120 100% species has declined by a statistically significant 60%, and between 100 0% 2011 and 2016 by 22%. 0 0% • Over the long term, 63% of species
1 70 100 0 showed strong or moderate 0% decreases and 22% showed strong e e 0 of species Percentage or moderate increases; 16% showed 20% 20 little change.
0 0% • Over the short term, between 2011 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 Strong increase Moderate increase and 2016, 46% of species showed Indicator 95% confidence intervals Little change Source: jncc.gov.uk/ukbi-C4a Moderate decrease strong or moderate decreases and Strong decrease 35% showed strong or moderate increases; 18% showed little change.
UK Biodiversity Indicator: Change in the distribution of UK priority species, 1970 to 2016
u a ator 5 species o ter S ort ter • Between 1970 and 2016, the index 1 70 201 2011 201 5 5 of distribution of priority species in 120 100% the UK declined by 27%. The index 100 0% was 3% lower in 2016 than in 2011.
0 • Over the long term, 37% of species 0% showed strong or moderate 1 70 100 0 decreases and 16% showed 0% e 0 of species Percentage strong or moderate increases;
20% 46% showed little change. 20 • Over the short term, between 0 0% 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 Strong increase 2011 and 2016, 50% of species Moderate increase showed strong or moderate n icator 0% cre i e inter a s Little change o rce ncc go i Moderate decrease decreases and 33% showed Strong decrease strong or moderate increases; 17% showed little change.
Photo: Richard Brooks (rspb-images.com) Bittern 12 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
RESULTS IN MORE DETAIL
The composite nature of multispecies indicators In the graphs shown here, the white line with shading means they do not show the variation in trends shows the smoothed trend and associated 95% CI, the blue line shows the underlying unsmoothed indicator. between individual species and species groups. In order to help understand changes in our State of Nature 2019 headline abundance and distribution indicators better, we present indicators disaggregated into species groups.
CHANGE IN AVERAGE SPECIES’ ABUNDANCE BY TAXONOMIC GROUP
Butterflies, 1976 to 2016 Moths, 1970 to 2016 u a e ator (57 species) u a e ator (442 species) 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 120 120 100 100 1 70 100 1 7 100 0 0 0 0 e e e e 0 0 20 20 0 0 1 7 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 n icator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals n icator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals
The long-term decreases in average abundance in butterflies (-16%, CI -32% to 1%) and moths (-25%, CI -35% to -15%) have not slowed; short‑term declines are 12% and 9% respectively. The UK Biodiversity Indicator for habitat specialist butterflies (not shown here; jncc.gov.uk/ukbi-C6) showed an unsmoothed decline of 68% between 1976 and 2018, showing a pattern of greater declines among habitat specialist species than generalists that appears to be prevalent in many taxonomic groups.
Terrestrial and freshwater breeding and wintering birds, Mammals, 1994 to 2016 1970 to 2016 u a e ator (171 species) u a e ator (25 species) 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 120 120 100 100 1 100
1 70 100 0 0 0 0 e e e 0 0 20 20 0 0 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 1 2000 2010 201 Indicator 95% confidence intervals n icator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals
The abundance indicator for terrestrial and freshwater The abundance indicator for mammals starts breeding and wintering birds shows a 43% (95% CI in 1994 and shows little long-term change in average 39% to 47%) increase in average abundance over abundance. Over the short term, the indicator the long term but little change over the short term. remained stable, just 3% lower in 2016 compared The increase in this indicator is driven by recovery to 2006. Species trends vary and just over two-thirds of some species from very low numbers, the arrival of species show strong or moderate increases of colonising species, and increasing numbers of in abundance, some from very low baselines. wintering waterbirds. These increases mask abundance declines in common and widespread breeding species: it is estimated that the total number of breeding birds in the UK fell by 44 million between 1967 and 20092. State of Nature Report 2019 13
CHANGE IN AVERAGE SPECIES’ DISTRIBUTION BY TAXONOMIC GROUP Similarly, the occupancy indicators can be separated to show the change in average species’ distribution between 1970 and 2015 for four terrestrial and freshwater groups: insects, bryophytes and lichens, vascular plants and mammals. Some mammal and moth species are included in both our abundance and occupancy indicator, but a number are only included in the latter (see methods).
Insects, 1970 to 2015 Bryophytes and Lichens, 1970 to 2015 u a ator 1 2 species u a ator 1 2 5 species 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 120 120 100 100 1 70 100
1 70 100 0 0 0 0 e 0 e 0 20 20 0 0 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 n icator 0% cre i e inter a s n icator 0% cre i e inter a s The occupancy indicator for insects shows a decrease Over the long term the occupancy indicator for in average distribution of 10% over the long term, bryophytes and lichens shows a 17% increase in average and 8% over the short term. distribution, having decreased during the 1970s and 80s. The indicator shows an 7% increase over the short term.
Mammals, 1970 to 2015 Vascular plants, 1970 to 2015 u a ator 1 species u a ator 1 51 species 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 120 120 100 100 1 70 100 1 70 100
0 0 0 0 e e e 0 0 20 20 0 0 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 n icator 0% cre i e inter a s n icator 0% cre i e inter a s Over the long term the average distribution of The occupancy indicator for vascular plants is 4% lower mammals has decreased by 26% and is 6% lower compared to 1970, and shows little short-term change over the short term. in average distribution.
GREAT BRITAIN RED LIST ASSESSMENT BY TAXONOMIC GROUP The bars show the percentage of assessed species, in broad taxonomic groups, falling into each of the IUCN Red List categories. Species assessed as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable are formally classified as threatened and therefore at risk of extinction. The number of species assessed is shown in brackets.
Higher taxonomic Taxonomic group Summarising these results group (% threatened) by the main higher taxonomic e ar n ang ere e as t o n ata e ata ic ens 1 2 tinct or egiona r ner Lichens (13%) itic a groups, 440 plants (18%), 232 fungi n ang ere a e Fungi and lichens rea ficie nt
ce rn Fungi* (44%) ngi 15 te ne and lichens (15%), 111 vertebrates (40%) and 405 invertebrates (12%) Bryophytes (16%) r op tes 1 055 Plants are classified as being at risk of Vascular plants (19%) asc ar p ants 1 527 extinction from Great Britain. Molluscs (10%) o scs 1 2 In addition, there are species Millipedes & centipedes i ipe es (5%)centipe es 2 in each group that are known to have gone extinct from Invertebrates Crustaceans (4%) r staceans 51 Great Britain already: 32 plants Insects* (11%) nsects 2 77 (1.2%), 33 fungi and lichens Spiders (16%) pi ers (1.8%), seven vertebrates (2.4%) and 61 invertebrates (1.6%). Terrestrial mammals errestria (26%) a a s Vertebrates Birds (43%) ir s 2 1 A breakdown of all-Ireland
0% 25% 50% 75% 100% assessments for species in Percentage of species Northern Ireland is given *1% of fungi and 12% of insects were assessed. on page 70. 14 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
HISTORICAL CHANGE IN BIODIVERSITY
THE GOOD NEWS
ACTION TO • The first nature eserver was • Wild Birds Protection Act 1876 HELP NATURE established in 1821 at Walton introduced. Hall, West Yorkshire. • The RSPB was formed in 1889, the National Trust in 1895 and the first of the Wildlife Trusts in 1912.
1870 to 1930
1800 to 1870 PRESSURES ON • The first industrial revolution spanned • The UK’s human population exceeded NATURE 1780–1830. 30 million in 1871. • 1,000km2 of wetlands were drained • The introduction of steam trawlers annually between 1840 and 1880. caused a rapid increase in fishing during the 1880s.
THE BAD • The Great Auk was hunted to extinction • Invertebrate extinctions hit a high in NEWS in the UK in 1840. England, with 12 species lost between • Salmon disappear from the Thames 1900 and 1910. in 1833. • The loss of Mitten’s Beardless Moss from Sussex in 1920 means the species goes extinct globally.
Photos: istock State of Nature Report 2019 15
State of Nature 2019 focuses on recent changes in biodiversity, and the drivers of these changes, but we must remember that we have been shaping our landscape, and the wildlife within it, for millennia. It is widely accepted that the UK’s biodiversity had been massively depleted by centuries of habitat loss, management changes, development and persecution before State of Nature’s 1970 baseline. We are unable to measure this depletion accurately, but know many of the significant changes which occurred over the last two hundred years.
• In 1941, Avocets return to the UK • The Large Blue butterfly is eintroducedr • Otters returned to every county after a 100-year absence. to the West Country in 1985. in the UK by 2011. • Polecats begin a slow recovery • Salmon return to the Thames after • By 2014, the Lady’s Slipper Orchid was in Wales from a low point in a 125-year absence. flowering at 11 reintroduction sites. the 1930s. • Fisheries management enables • Corncrakes return to breed in the recovery of Herring stocks. Northern Ireland in 2016.
• UK Government’s Nature • Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 introduced. • The global 2020 Aichi targets Conservancy established in 1949. • The harmful pesticide DDT was banned in are adopted in 2010. • First National Park, the Peak the UK in 1984. • In 2017, UK carbon emissions drop District, designated in 1951. • Countryside Stewardship Scheme piloted to 43% below 1990 levels. • Whaling by the UK ended in 1963. in 1991. • Beinn Eighe in the Scottish Highlands • The EU Water Framework Directive, becomes the UK’s first Gene Conservation addressing water pollution, comes into Unit protecting local Scots Pine lineages. force in 2000. 1970 to 2000
1930 to Post- 1970 2000 • The UK’s first full-length motorway, • The UK joined the Common • The Central England temperature time the M1, opened in 1959. Agricultural Policy in 1973. series was 1°C warmer in latest decade • 97% of wildflower meadows were • 10,000km2 of land were drained compared to the pre-industrial period lost between the 1930s and 1984. in the 1970s. (1850–1900). • The area of crops treated with pesticides increased by 53% between 1990 and 2010. • In 2019, the UK’s sixth national report to CBD indicates that the country is on track to meet five of the 20 Aichi targets by2020 .
• Overfishing led North Sea Herring • Thirteen species of farmland bird were • The indicator of habitat specialist stocks to decline by over 99% red-listed as Birds of Conservation butterflies down yb 68% since 1976. between the 1960s and mid-70s. Concern in 1996, including Turtle Dove, • The Birds of Conservation Concern • Since the 1950s wildflowers have Grey Partridge and Corn Bunting. Red List increased from 36 to 67 been lost at a rate of up to nearly • The Freshwater Pearl Mussel became species between 1996 and 2015. one species per year per county. extinct from two Scottish rivers per year on average, between 1970 and 1998. We have identified the most significant pressures acting on terrestrial and freshwater nature in the UK: agricultural management, climate change, urbanisation, pollution, hydrological change, INNS and woodland management. Here we examine how each of these proximate drivers affects nature, the state of nature as a consequence of this, and the conservation actions being taken in response. We examine marine drivers of change on pages 50–63.
Photo: Mike Read (rspb-images.com) In the State of Nature 2016 we reported Informed by this analysis, in the following the most significant drivers of change that pages of State of Nature 2019 we take a have acted on the UK’s wildlife since the 1970s, more detailed look at what we believe to and attempted to quantify the impact these be the biggest threats to terrestrial and drivers had over that period, both to the freshwater nature in the UK currently: benefit and detriment of nature. This research1 agricultural management, climate change, identified that changing agricultural urbanisation, pollution, hydrological change, management had the biggest single impact INNS and woodland management. upon nature in the UK over recent decades, Of course, in addition to these pressures, with the great majority of that impact being wildlife in the UK benefits from conservation, to drive species’ populations downwards. The whether it is targeted action to save second most significant driver was climate threatened species or the everyday actions change, which is causing range and population of farmers and other land managers working change in sensitive species, alongside to help nature across the country. We finish landscape-scale alteration to vulnerable this section of the report by giving a brief habitats. Other important impacts included overview of conservation in the UK, and how hydrological change, urbanisation and how governments, NGOs, businesses, landowners, woodlands are managed. Positive impacts farmers and private individuals work together were detected from wildlife-friendly farming, to save nature, showcasing a broad range habitat management and the creation of new of the many efforts being taken. wildlife habitats. Drivers of change
AGRICULTURAL MANAGEMENT
A wide range of changes in agricultural management in recent decades has led to greater food production but they have also had a dramatic impact on farmland biodiversity. For example, populations of farmland birds have more than halved on average since 1970, and similar declines have been seen in many other taxonomic groups. Targeted wildlife-friendly farming, supported by government-funded agri-environment schemes (AES), can halt and reverse these declines, but to date the only successes have been for rare and localised species. The area of land receiving effective agri-environment measures may have helped slow the decline in nature but has been insufficient to halt and reverse this trend.
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE Agricultural productivity Farmland bird indicator has Area under agri‑environment has increased by over 150% fallen by 54% since 1970. increased to around 3 million ha. since 1973. 300 120 4
3 200 80
1 70 100 2 i ion ectares ro u t t
100 e 40 1 rea a r e e e a r e rea
0 0 0
Photo: Andy Hay (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 19
PRESSURES and farm ponds3,4. Over this period, support payments, but have now agriculture has followed a consistent fallen back. Spring-sown cereals, ON NATURE trend of increasing productivity (the which can benefit farmland wildlife ratio of inputs to outputs, a product by providing an overwinter stubble, of increased land and resource are also making a slight comeback, Agriculture has been the use efficiency), with associated in part to combat herbicide-resistant dominant use of land in the consequences for wildlife. Of course, weeds such as Black Grass. UK for centuries, driven by increased productivity does not of the need to produce food for itself impact wildlife; it is some of the Total quantities of nutrients used in the UK, 1965 to 20176 subsistence or profit since changes in management that have humans moved from hunter- delivered increased productivity that 1 00 have had a detrimental effect. 1 00 gatherer societies to begin 1 00 Agricultural productivity in the UK, cultivating crops and raising 1 200 a measure of intensification, animals. These practices have 1 000 1973 to 20185 00 profoundly shaped historical oto e and cultural perspectives on 00 00 00 our landscapes and nature, 250 200
0 and continue to do so today. 200 1 5 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2005 2017 Agricultural change has been itrogen Potash Phosphate 150 identified as the most important driver of biodiversity change 100 Reported trends for pesticide use ro u t t 1 7 100 ro u t t over the past 45 years1, with 50 in the UK demonstrate some of the complexities involved in monitoring. most effects being negative. 0 1 7 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 Although the total weight of the active There are, however, also a ingredient in pesticides has fallen range of species and habitats An increasing awareness of the markedly over the past 25 years, that largely depend on impact of modern farming methods the number of hectares treated with agricultural management. on nature has led to changes in how pesticides, along with the frequency public funds are used to support the of treatments, have increased. Currently, 72% of the UK’s land area is agricultural sector. Since the 1990s In addition, there have been managed for agriculture, about one- a move away from direct production increases in the toxicity of pesticides third arable and two-thirds pastoral subsidies to area payments, coupled and the variety of pesticides used (grassland, moor and heath). Half of with requirements to meet basic on a single crop7. the arable land is used for cereal crops, environmental standards (cross- while pastoral land is predominantly compliance) and the introduction Trends in pesticide use in the UK, used to raise sheep (over 30 million) 8 of agri-environment schemes (AES), 1990 to 2016 and cattle (over 10 million)2. has aimed to mitigate some of 0 Although historical changes have the impacts of farming and help 0 had massive impacts, it is only since wildlife recover. 70 the systematic recording of a suite 0 Although agricultural productivity of wildlife taxa began in the 1970s 50 continues to increase, the use of that we have been able to clearly link 0 fertilisers, particularly nitrogen and specific changes in management to 0 phosphates, has decreased since 20 changes in biodiversity. The changes 6 peaking in the 1980s . Numbers of 10
in farmland management over the i ions treate e t e u e a area sheep and cattle peaked in the 1970s 0 past 50 years that have had the 1 0 1 5 2000 2005 2010 201 and 1980s as a result of market trends greatest impact on the UK’s nature ota area treate a ota eig t app ie g and Common Agricultural Policy include the increased use of pesticides and fertilisers; increased stocking Photo: Colin Wilkinson (rspb-images.com) rates, changes in crops and cropping patterns (e.g. grasslands managed for silage rather than hay production, with reseeding and drainage, crops sown in the autumn rather than the spring); farm specialisation (e.g. in either arable or livestock enterprises); greater mechanisation and increase in farm size; and loss of nature-friendly features such as field margins, hedgerows, wooded areas 20 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Agricultural management Climate change Hydrological change Urbanisation INNS, pests and pathogens Pollution Woodland management
THE STATE Trends do vary across the UK Arable plants such as Shepherd’s‑ countries and generally farmland needle, Corn Buttercup and Pheasant’s- OF NATURE birds are faring better in Scotland, eye have shown significant declines where on average they have increased attributed to the use of fertilisers since the 1990s, than elsewhere. and herbicides and a range of One of the clearest examples Upland farming has arguably management practices that reduce of how farmland management seen less dramatic changes than the seed bank or survival through has affected biodiversity is the lowlands, with some formerly increased crop density and decreased the trend in farmland birds; widespread species now restricted crop diversity16. Fertiliser use and the suite of bird species to an upland range. However, the conversion to arable have contributed most closely associated with recent trends in upland birds show to the loss of 97% of wildflower multispecies declines are occurring in meadows and other species‑rich farmland have declined these habitats as well14. grasslands in the past century17. more severely than birds in The impacts of management changes Farming has shaped the countryside any other habitat, with a are not limited to those on birds. for centuries and recent research fall of 54% in the Farmland A similar pattern of declines is shows that some current occupants 9 Bird Indicator since 1970 . evident for butterflies in the wider including widespread bumblebees, Research has revealed the countryside (figure below), though for brambles, Cow Parsley and Spear diverse processes by which other insect and invertebrate groups Thistle have adapted well to this species have been affected. the available data are insufficient to landscape. Along with other adaptable derive broad trends. There is growing generalists such as Woodpigeons For example, the shift to concern about pollinators, largely and Jackdaws, some species appear autumn sowing has resulted related to use of pesticides such as resilient to agricultural intensification in a fall in Skylark breeding neonicotinoids (which have seen recent and have prospered in recent productivity as cereal crops restrictions in permissible use) but decades, while specialist species become too tall and dense also the decrease in plant diversity and have seen widespread and often 15 in the breeding season10, flower‑rich habitats . continuing decline. and the loss of overwinter stubbles has meant poorer UK Biodiversity Indicator: Trends in breeding farmland birds in the UK, 1970 to 2017 survival for granivores such 11 u a e ator (19 species) o ter S ort ter as Yellowhammer . Increased 1 70 2017 2012 2017 pesticide use has resulted 120 100% in less invertebrate food 100 0% for young Grey Partridges12, 0 while the drainage of wet 0% grasslands and the loss of 1 70 100 0 0%
e e a a e mixed farming systems has of species Percentage 0 far a a a e e t 13. led to a decline in Lapwings 20% 20
0 0% 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 Strong increase Moderate increase Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Little change Source: jncc.gov.uk/ukbi-C5 Moderate decrease FARMLAND BIRDS Strong decrease
HAVE DECLINED UK Biodiversity Indicator: Insects of the wider countryside, 1976 to 2017 – butterflies MORE SEVERELY u a e ator (24 species) o ter S ort ter THAN THOSE IN ANY 1 70 2017 2012 2017 120 100% OTHER HABITAT. 100 0%
0 0%
1 70 100 0 0% e e 0 of species Percentage
20% 20
0 0% 1 7 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 Increase Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Little change Decrease Source: jncc.gov.uk/ukbi-C6 State of Nature Report 2019 21
THE RESPONSE UK Biodiversity Indicator: Area of land bat species have been shown to in agri-environment schemes in the UK, benefit, at a local scale, from the FOR NATURE 1992 to 2018 presence of field margins and 0 boundary features that include mature trees19,20. There has, however, been One of the mechanisms for 5 0 little evidence of benefits to species mitigating the negative impacts 21 2 5 occupying in-field cropped habitats . of agriculture is through 2 0 Although agricultural intensification environmentally sustainable 1 5 may have slowed since its late 20th farming practices. Although 1 0 century peak, and there have been many farmers engage in 0 5 notable successes in recovering
nature‑friendly farming e e i ion ectares a r e rea 0 0 some threatened species such as 1 2 2000 2015 201 Cirl Bunting and Stone Curlew, voluntarily due to their own o rce ncc go i 1a interests or as part of voluntary aggregate farmland biodiversity indicators continue to decline despite networks (for example, the There has been widespread uptake by the farming community, but the government commitments to reversing Nature Friendly Farming Network effectiveness of AES has been hard the downward trend and a huge effort and The Farming and Wildlife to demonstrate. Despite the proven from farmers and the conservation Advisory Group), government- value of many AES options in field sector. This may in part reflect a lag sponsored AES have provided the trials, a number of broader studies in the response of wild populations to main impetus. Although there have failed to establish clear cause habitat change, meaning that declines can continue even after habitat are challenges to implementing and effect for population recovery at larger geographical scales, largely as change has halted or been partly particular actions at a sufficient 22 a result of the complex interactions reversed . Research has identified scale to reverse declines in of different factors. Where broad- many of the issues contributing to widespread species, AES provide scale successes have been identified continuing population declines, but a mechanism to target the most for birds18, these have been mainly a key factor for some species is the appropriate conservation actions related to the provision of winter food lack of implementation of remedial action at a coordinated landscape scale in the relevant areas. through stubble management and wild bird seed mix. Some moth and sufficient to make a real difference.
CASE STUDIES Corncrake recovery since 2003. Alongside unusual spring tussock‑forming grassland, heath and weather, a reduction in payments to mire that contains Devil’s-bit Scabious, Successes for individual species have delay mowing and a reduction targeted the plant that the caterpillars require been achieved where research has advice may have contributed to this for food. By working with landowners, led to the identification of a particular downturn, highlighting the vulnerability Butterfly Conservation and Natural problem and resources deployed at a of rare species to changes in policy. England helped secure Higher Level sufficient scale to tackle it – typically Stewardship for landholdings on for very rare species with a restricted Calling male Corncrakes in Great Britain Dartmoor where they were able to range, such as the Corncrake in the and Isle of Man, in survey years introduce butterfly-friendly measures Scottish islands. Here, farmers and 1978 to 2018 such as controlled grazing, scrub crofters receive targeted advice 1 00 removal, increased connectivity regarding habitat management 1 200 between patches and reintroduction and mowing regimes, and receive of the larval food plant. By 2010, payments to delay grass cutting. Male 1 000 the area of occupied habitat had Corncrake numbers have risen from 00 almost tripled, and in occupied a low of under 500 in the early 1990s 00 areas, the counts of larval webs to 1,289 in 2014. Although this is a 00 had risen tenfold. Facilitated by AES success, the population is still tiny with 200 funding, the project has been a great a highly restricted range and is no ou t of a a e or ra e success, due to strong partnership longer a breeding species on the Isle of 0 1 0 2000 2010 working between the project officer, Man. Setting this in context, the species 1 7 201 Natural England advisors, Dartmoor was once found in all counties of the Land management National Park ecologists and the UK and in every meadow and cornfield for butterflies24 farmers and volunteers delivering the in the north of Ireland, where one late management. Ongoing management 19th century author reported that “its The Marsh Fritillary is one of the advice is crucial if benefits are to incessant cry is monotonous if not fastest declining butterflies in the continue, and the follow-on project, wearisome”23. Since 2014, numbers in UK, having lost two-thirds of its All the Moor Butterflies, is producing the core area fell for three consecutive colonies between 1990 and 2000. similar positive results. years, with the 2017 count the lowest The main cause is the loss of damp Drivers of change
CLIMATE CHANGE
Climate change, caused by human activities, is one of the most significant threats to global biodiversity, and is projected to become increasingly severe through the course of this century1. While climate change has had the second largest impact (after agricultural change) on UK nature over the last 40 years, impacts on wildlife have been mixed2. There is growing evidence that climate change is driving widespread and rapid changes in the abundance, distribution and ecology of the UK’s wildlife, causing changes to species communities and will continue to do so for decades or even centuries to come. Conserving and restoring nature‑rich areas of the UK will contribute to mitigating climate change and benefit species, while strategies to counter the negative effects of climate change will help species to adapt to its increasing influence in future.
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE All the top 10 warmest years Climate change Protecting nature-rich areas since records began have has already impacted secures carbon, benefits occurred post-1990. population trends species and provides vital
0 1.5 of moths (explaining ecosystem services –
1.0 40% of the decline) providing benefits all round.
0.5 and aphids (explaining 60% of the increase). 0.0
-0.5
-1.0 Difference (°C) from 1961–199 -1.5
Photo: Peter Cairns (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 23
Time series of average UK land temperatures PRESSURES in °C since 1884, expressed as anomalies relative ON NATURE to the 1961 to 1990 average3
1 5 Increasing temperatures and rising sea levels are just 1 0 two symptoms of the complex climatic changes that have 0 5 been apparent in the UK 0 0 over recent decades. The graph to the right shows annual 0 5 mean temperature for the UK, 1 0 expressed as anomalies relative to the fro ffere e
1961–1990 average. The blue line is 1 5 a smoothed trend, which is roughly 1 1 10 1 50 1 0 2017 equivalent to a 10-year running mean. nn a a e 10 ear r nning ean The UK has experienced significant warming, with mean annual days. There has also been an increase Climate change is also affecting temperature in the most recent in the amount of sunshine by 6% from conditions at sea; sea surface decade (2008–2017) nearly 1°C 1961–1990 to 2008–20173. temperature has increased by 0.6°C warmer than the 1961–1990 average. from the 1961–1990 average and the These trends are apparent in all Rainfall shows more variability sea level has risen by 16cm since the countries, and across all seasons, between years, making trends more start of the 20th century. Sea-level with spring warming being the most difficult to spot. However, the most rise increases pressure on intertidal pronounced (1.1°C warming). There recent decade has been 8% wetter habitats and may lead to more has been a reduction in the number than the 1961–1990 average, with severe flooding and coastal erosion of days of ground frost and an trends being most apparent in winter by waves4. increase in the number of growing and summer.
PROJECTIONS FOR 21ST 20th century climate change – Projections for 21st century climate: CENTURY CLIMATE most recent decade 2008–2017 by 2070 compared to 1961–1990 average The current predictions of the future UK climate, published most recently in November 2018, are provided by the UK Climate Projections5,6. Projections are made for several different emissions scenarios. Given current levels of emissions, we present those for a high Temperature Rainfall Temperature Rainfall emissions scenario. 0.7 to 4.2°C ON LAND 1°C warmer 8% increase WINTER -1% to +35% warmer There is projected to be a greater chance of warmer, wetter winters 0.9 to 5.4°C SUMMER -47% to +2% and hotter, drier summers and warmer by mid-century the chance of hot summers, resembling the 2018 heatwave, will increase from <10% to 10–20%. Rainfall patterns will change significantly; increasing in winter and decreasing in summer. Sea-level rise will occur for all emission scenarios level
and at all locations around the UK Temperature Sea level Sea surface temperature Sea with the associated risk of increased 16cm rise 1.5 to 4°C c30cm coastal flooding. Extreme weather AT SEA 0.6°C warmer since start of AT SEA warmer to115cm* events, such as drought and flood, 20th century will increase in frequency.
*Relative to 1981–2000. 24 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Agricultural management Climate change Hydrological change Urbanisation INNS, pests and pathogens Pollution Woodland management
THE STATE CHANGES IN TIMING There is growing evidence that warming has driven significant The onset of seasonal events is now OF NATURE changes in plant communities in earlier for a wide range of marine the Scottish Highlands, with declines and terrestrial species. Species’ in arctic-montane species17, and Temperature, rainfall and responses vary: for terrestrial plants in specialist snow-bed species18. and invertebrates this has been by other climatic factors consistent The impacts of seasonal changes about four days on average for a with a warming climate in climate vary across different 1°C increase in temperature, while affect the abundance and taxa. Summer drought can have a for birds the figure is two days on significant impact on the growth and occurrence of individual species, average12. Different responses by survival of tree species, leading to acting on range, population different parts of the food chain may major changes in the composition and phenology (the timing disrupt ecosystems if the availability of and structure of woodland19. of seasonal events)7,8,9. prey and the timing of peak predator requirements do not align. Although Whether an individual species is seen DISTRIBUTIONAL CHANGES there are examples of this impacting to benefit from, or to be adversely particular populations13 there is, at affected by, climate change within Small Red Damselfly present, only weak evidence that a particular geographic region, this mismatch has driven observed the resultant shifts in species’ long‑term declines in predatory distributions will impact on the species, such as insectivorous birds14. structure of communities. This can impact community processes POPULATION TRENDS and species’ interactions (such as predator-prey relationships and Garden Tiger Moth competition) which can in turn drive further population change20.
Photo: Jeroen Stel (rspb-images.com)
In the UK many species, including birds, butterflies, moths and dragonflies, have moved north over the last four decades. Shifts for these groups averaged 23km per decade between the 1970s and 1990s, and 18km per decade between the 1990s and the mid-2000s10. In the marine environment, warming seas have led to changes in plankton and fish distribution resulting in changes to species composition. Such shifts in range rely on there Photo: Tom Marshall (rspb-images.com) being suitable habitat to permit movement and establishment, and Our State of Nature metrics show on species’ ability to disperse. The declines in moths and butterflies threat from climate change therefore across the UK, although trends in interacts directly with other pressures Scotland are, on average, stable. MANY SPECIES, on species, meaning that impacts A recent study modelling climate 11 can be exacerbated . impacts on species’ abundance BOTH ON LAND concluded that across all moth AND IN THE SEA, RELATED DRIVERS OF CHANGE species, approximately 40% of the HAVE SHIFTED p54 Marine > Climate change significant decline could be attributed to climate change15. Increases in the THEIR RANGES p18 Agricultural management abundance of flying aphids is probably NORTHWARDS IN due to warmer temperatures, which RECENT DECADES. p26 Hydrological change reduce generation time16, leading to more aphid generations in a year. State of Nature Report 2019 25
THE RESPONSE PROTECTING AND ENHANCING Butterfly banks FOR NATURE THE PROTECTED AREA NETWORK There is strong evidence that protected areas remain a vital Responses to combat the conservation tool in spite of shifting negative effects of climate species’ distributions. For eight change on species involve invertebrate taxa, colonisations have occurred on protected sites more planning and conservation often than expected by chance based action at a range of scales. on the availability of protected areas22. It will be essential for us More specifically, colonisations by to understand the risks seven butterfly and bird species Photo: Patrick Cashman (rspb-images.com) and identify areas, habitats are over four times more likely in protected areas than expected by and species groups At an ex-arable farmland site in chance23,24 – this is probably because that are most vulnerable. Wiltshire, 200ha of species-rich such sites better preserve important grassland has been created for areas of semi-natural habitat. ASSESSING THE RISKS TO the benefit of specialist plants and There is also some evidence that SPECIES IN ORDER TO butterflies. For butterfly species at protected areas reduce the risk of PRIORITISE RESOURCES the north of their climatic range population extinction towards the in the UK, such as the Adonis Blue A detailed assessment accounting southern range-margin of species’ and Silver‑spotted Skipper, varied for potentially confounding and distributions24. This may be because topography with steep, warm exacerbating factors applied to 402 protected areas protect high-quality south‑facing slopes is essential. species suggested that 35% are at risk habitats or because conservation To support existing populations of range loss, particularly among the management at those sites reduces and increase connectivity in the bryophytes and vascular plants, while negative impacts of climate change. landscape, butterfly banks have 42% may expand their range. Notably, Notwithstanding this, areas projected been constructed by bulldozing chalk three-quarters of the upland species to have suitable climates would up from the field into an S-shaped considered are predicted to be at risk need to be targeted for habitat bank. This ingenious shape ensures from climate change21. restoration and creation to provide that its sides face in all possible space for species to move into, and directions, providing warm slopes Example results for four taxonomic improved habitat connectivity is vital, throughout the day and provides groups (birds, bryophytes, carabid particularly for less mobile species. beetles and spiders) from assessment a variety of microclimates to of climate vulnerability for Great Britain support a wide variety of insects. SITE-BASED MANAGEMENT across 17 taxa, separating those species A population of Small Blue butterflies regarded as negatively impacted BogLIFE – Lowland raised has become established just (medium and high risk), from those bog sites25 two years after it was created. with potential opportunities to benefit (medium and high opportunity)21. The Cumbria BogLIFE project is Conserving carbon undertaking large-scale restoration and conserving species 100% works, using specialist contractors 0% A recent project mapped the best and innovative techniques that are: 0% places for nature across the UK and 70% • Re-creating wetter, boggier ground – calculated the amount of carbon 0% by blocking drainage ditches and contained in the vegetation and top 50% creating “bunds” (little walls of 26 0% 30cm of soil . Across these nature- undamaged, wet peat) that will hold er e ta e of e e er e ta e 0% rich areas, the amount of carbon, if 20% water within the bog. lost to the atmosphere, would equate 10% • Removing some areas of trees that (very conservatively) to two gigatons 0 ir s rop tes ara i pi ers have started to grow in the artificially of CO , equivalent to four years of the eet es 2 High risk Medium opportunity dry conditions – as bogs do not UK’s annual overall CO2 emissions. Medium risk High opportunity Risks and opportunities Limited impact naturally have trees growing across Only 34% of this carbon is currently their surface. protected. Poor habitat condition • Reintroducing bog plants to areas often means that stored carbon is with a bare peat surface. This has being lost to the atmosphere – as has included growing trials of Sphagnum been well documented for peatlands27. mosses to replace peat in gardening, Mapping is the first step to integrating with commercial potential across these carbon and nature-rich areas lowland peat agricultural soils. into plans and initiatives to secure their protection, restoration and maintenance to ensure long-term benefits for both nature and people. Drivers of change
HYDROLOGICAL CHANGE
Throughout history humans have sought to alter natural water systems for their benefit – such that there are few pristine freshwater ecosystems remaining in the UK. Many rivers have been straightened, piped and dammed, marshland and agricultural land has been drained, groundwater abstracted and floodplains built upon. Species reliant on the range of wet habitats affected by these changes have seen long-term declines and face ongoing pressures of unsustainable water abstraction and the continuing drainage and conversion of wetlands to other land uses. Recent large-scale projects addressing some of these issues include the rewetting of upland peat bog that had been drained for agriculture and forestry; the re-creation of lowland wetland habitats; river restoration; and pond creation. Despite these landscape-scale projects, the extent of wetland habitats remains greatly reduced compared to the middle of the last century.
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE In 2018, just 35% of water Change in distribution of Since 2010, the bodies had “good” or freshwater invertebrate Nature After Minerals “high” ecological status. species, 1970 to 2015. partnership has created 2,000ha of wetland 120 through the restoration of minerals sites
80 across the UK. 1 70 100
e e 40
0
Photo: Richard Brooks (rspb-images.com) Marsh Harrier State of Nature Report 2019 27
PRESSURES Drainage activity in post-Second Some of the most acute problems World War Britain rose to a peak in of over-abstraction have occurred in ON NATURE the 1970s due to government grant lowland chalk stream systems, which payments – about 1 million ha was are of global ecological importance. drained in that decade alone2. An The Water Framework Directive Many of the pressures affecting estimated 300,000ha of lowland wet (2000)9 committed EU member the distribution and quality grassland were lost between 1970 and states to achieving good qualitative of freshwater habitats relate 19853, and 1.5 million ha of upland and quantitative status of all water to historical land drainage. blanket peatland was drained in the bodies (including marine waters up Drainage of the great fens of mid-century, mainly through the to one nautical mile from shore) by East Anglia began in Roman mechanical digging of surface grips 2015. Of all of our waters, rivers are (channels designed to lower the water perhaps facing the most pressures. times and continued with table)4. Upland drainage reduces Despite the requirements of the WFD, further major drainage in the carbon storage and can contribute there has been a slight decline in 17th century. Technological to lowland flooding, with impacts on the percentage of water bodies with innovations introduced during people and their livelihoods. The loss “good” or “high” ecological status, the 19th century transformed of wetlands continues to be a cause to 35% in 2018. Diffuse pollution from 10 seasonally flooded marsh and for concern; land-cover maps show agriculture remains a key issue . that between 2006 and 2012 over Physical changes to rivers, lakes and pasture into the agronomically 1,000ha of wetland was converted estuaries, such as flood defences productive farmland we see to artificial surfaces5. and weirs, affect the ecology of over today1. Field drainage has a third of our waters, preventing Alongside general land drainage, loss been a major technical factor them from functioning naturally. of specific wet features on farmland Further pressures on the hydrological in relieving modern farming has been substantial. Up to 90% of network come from climate change from previous limitations on lowland ponds in the UK were lost in (both increasing flood risk and production. Improvements the 20th century, through neglect or prolonged droughts) and INNS, direct human intervention6. Those that to farming productivity have which have had major impacts on remain face increasing pressure due simultaneously led to the loss freshwater ecosystems. These issues to agricultural land drainage, pollution, of other ecosystem services are discussed further in the relevant isolation and urban development7. including water regulation sections elsewhere in this report. Rapid population growth in recent and soil stabilisation. decades has led to an increase in RELATED DRIVERS OF CHANGE demand for freshwater. This has p34 Invasive non-native species, been particularly apparent in South pests and pathogens East and Eastern England where 22% of freshwater is abstracted. p38 Pollution These regions are categorised by the Environment Agency as overexploited8. p22 Climate change
Photo: Richard Revels (rspb-images.com)
Up to 90% of lowland ponds in the UK were lost in the 20th century, through neglect or direct human intervention6. 28 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Agricultural management Climate change Hydrological change Urbanisation INNS, pests and pathogens Pollution Woodland management THE STATE OF NATURE
Changes in the populations UK Biodiversity Indicator: Breeding water and wetland birds in the UK, of water and wetland 1975 to 2017 – Abundance indicators birds can be closely linked All water and wetland birds (26 species) o ter S ort ter to hydrological changes, 1 75 2017 2012 2017 although the impacts vary 120 100%
100 widely across species, and 0% other factors interact and play 0 their part. The breeding water 0% 1 75 100 0 and wetland bird indicator for 0% e e 0 the UK fell by 6% between 1975 of species Percentage 20% and 2017, but over the short 20 term has increased slightly, 0 0% 11 1 75 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 Strong increase by 3% . Moderate increase Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Little change Source: jncc.gov.uk/ukbi-C5 Moderate decrease Within the indicator, species Strong decrease can be split into groups based on breeding habitat. Species associated Birds of slow-flowing and standing water (6 species) Birds of wet grassland (8 species) with slow-flowing and standing 200 200 water, and with reedbeds, have 175 175 on average shown increasing 150 150 trends, with a range of species 125 125 100 benefiting from new habitat 100 75 75 e 1 75 100 e e 1 75 100 e created through the restoration 50 50 of gravel pits after extraction has 25 25 0 0 finished and improvements in river 1 75 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 1 75 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals management. Conversely, birds Source:Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/wild-bird- Source:Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/wild-bird-https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ wild-bird-populations-in-the-uk wild-bird-populations-in-the-uk of fast-flowing (typically upland) populations-in-the-uk populations-in-the-uk rivers, and wet grasslands, have Birds of reedbeds (4 species) Birds of fast-flowing water (4 species) declined on average. Declines have been most notable in breeding 1 0 120 waders of lowland wet grassland 150 100 such as Lapwing and Snipe, due 120 0 to habitat loss. Outside Scotland, 0 0 e 1 75 100 e a large proportion of these species’ 1 75 100 e 0 0 populations are now confined to 0 20 sites managed as nature reserves. 0 0 1 75 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 1 75 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/wild-bird- Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/wild-bird- wild-bird-populations-in-the-ukpopulations-in-the-uk wild-bird-populations-in-the-ukpopulations-in-the-uk
Change in distribution of freshwater invertebrate species, 1970 to 201512
u a ator Occupancy modelling has in water quality (such as a recovery 120 revealed interesting patterns in from acidification) are likely to
100 the distribution of several groups have played an important role, of aquatic macroinvertebrates. but hydrological management to 0 Freshwater invertebrates, Stoneflies restore rivers, changing river flow
1 70 100 0 (Plecoptera), Caddisflies (Trichoptera), conditions and the presence of aquatic bugs (Hemiptera), specific local-scale habitat features e e 0 Dragonflies (Odonata), Mayflies may have played a part for some 13,14,15 20 (Ephemeroptera) and freshwater species . In addition, concerns molluscs were recorded at a remain about the status of aquatic 0 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 declining number of sites through macroinvertebrates more generally, n icator 0% cre i e inter a s the 1970s and 1980s, followed by including the widespread impacts strong increases in the years since. of sediment and pesticide run-off, The drivers for this recovery are not as well as the localised impacts fully understood, and improvements of pollution events. State of Nature Report 2019 29
THE RESPONSE • Over 8,000ha of new habitat of the trial, and of an additional (including 2,000ha of wetland) unauthorised release on the Tay at FOR NATURE created and managed since 2010. around the same time, on both the 16 • With specialised ecological advice, natural and the human environment . Conclusions from this work include: Given that good hydrological a range of habitat features can be created to benefit rare species. • Beavers have an overall positive management can bring influence on biodiversity with major benefits for humans • 13% of all the UK’s breeding Bitterns now nest in restored mineral sites. a wide range of species benefiting through the provision of from the habitats created, including • When training is delivered with and clean water for consumption fish, amphibians and a wide range for industry partners, best practice of invertebrates. and industrial use, and flood can be shared. prevention, many recent • Ecosystem services are provided, Examples of habitat creation include policy actions have primary such as increased groundwater the UK’s largest created reedbed aims in these areas. However, storage, water flow stabilisation through the Hanson–RSPB Wetland and flood prevention. as good hydrological practices Project in Cambridgeshire and 1,000ha • A number of species may be also benefit nature, this is of new habitats created over 10 years adversely impacted, including Aspen through the CEMEX–RSPB partnership. increasingly recognised as woodland lichens, bryophytes, having all-round benefits Bringing back fungi communities and some by policymakers. the Eurasian Beaver invertebrates16. In England, the five-year River CASE STUDIES Beaver Otter Beaver Trial is being led by Creating new wetlands on Devon Wildlife Trust with research mineral extraction sites by the University of Exeter and is due to report in 2020. In Wales, plans for a trial are being developed by the Welsh Beaver Project. The future for Beavers • There is an estimated 120,000ha Photo: Nick Upton (rspb-images.com) of “potential Beaver woodland” – appropriate broad-leaved woodland Eurasian Beavers are native to the in suitable proximity to freshwater – UK, and were once widespread across in Scotland. Scotland, England and Wales, but Photo: Kevin Harwood (rspb-images.com) • In 2014, 84% of respondents in a were hunted to extinction by the end survey of mid-Argyll residents were of the 16th century. in favour of Beavers continuing to The restoration of worked-out sand live in the area17. and gravel extractions to wetlands Beavers are well known for their has become widespread in recent dam-building habits and can be • The monetary value to society of the decades and provides an important considered as ecosystem engineers, Knapdale trial has been estimated at opportunity for increasing the extent with the ability to rapidly alter the up to £6.7 million with the monetary of wetland habitats. Partnerships hydrology of the landscape they cost of civil engineering impacts and between conservation organisations occupy. By blocking flows, they slow timber loss being put at no more and operating companies help to down the passage of water and create than £44,00018. ensure success. For example, as pools with diverse structures while • The Scottish Government concluded part of the Nature After Minerals modifying the local habitat through in 2016 that Beavers were in project, the RSPB, Natural England, natural coppicing, opening of glades Scotland to stay and in May 2019 the Mineral Products Association and and creating deadwood. they were granted European the British Aggregates Association Protected Species status. Recent efforts to restore Beavers to work alongside quarry companies Scotland were led by the Scottish With an increasing number of Beavers and planners to create new spaces Wildlife Trust and Royal Zoological in the wild and in fenced trial sites for nature at worked-out quarries. Society of Scotland with Scottish in England and Wales, and provided Transforming previously industrial Natural Heritage and Forestry that the right balances can be struck, sites to places where nature can Commission Scotland. As a trial, four it may be that this charismatic thrive is a powerful symbol of what families of Beavers were released ecosystem engineer is making can be achieved through effective at Knapdale in Argyll in 2009. An a long‑awaited return to the UK. partnerships. Highlights of this intensive programme of monitoring approach include: and research assessed the impact Drivers of change
URBANISATION
The end result of urbanisation – the process of making an area more urban – can vary from extensive sprawl, where built land is interspersed with green spaces, to intensively urbanised areas where compact built environments are separated from green space. Urbanisation need not always result in biodiversity loss: the conversion of an intensively managed arable field to a housing estate with gardens, a community orchard and a pond may provide net gain for species diversity and abundance. Conversely, much valuable habitat, including brownfield and semi-natural habitat, has been lost or damaged by development. Management and habitat creation projects can improve habitat diversity, resource availability and connectivity across green spaces within urban environments. As well as helping biodiversity, these can enhance ecosystem function and help human well-being1.
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE There was an 8% increase Between 2006 and 2018, The concept of net gains in the proportion of the 1,600 miles of road for biodiversity through UK’s population living were constructed development have in urban areas between in Great Britain. recently been enshrined 1970 and 2018. in planning policy in England and Wales.
Photo: Andy Hay (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 31
PRESSURES UK urban and rural population, 1970 to 2018 0 Urbanisation has direct consequences ON NATURE for wildlife in terms of land use and 50 land cover changes, but it also acts The UK’s human population 0 to fragment landscapes by creating i ions barriers between habitats, thus has risen steadily over the 0 isolating some populations and in turn last century, mainly centred 6 20 reducing their genetic fitness . A wide o u at o around urban areas (see variety of green spaces exist within 10 figure)2. This has required urban environments, the biodiversity 0 value of which varies with the degree large-scale infrastructure 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 developments, to meet r an ra of fragmentation, management, local Source: https://population.un.org/wup/Country-Profiles/ demands for food, goods and population density and surrounding land use. Increases in air, light and human movement. While Analyses presented in State of Nature noise pollution, human disturbance the increasing intensity of 2016 showed that urbanisation accounted for a greater impact and predation by domestic animals development within specific on species than any other habitat particularly affect biodiversity in urban zones potentially conversion3. Comprehensive data urbanised areas. reduces impacts on the on habitat loss to urbanisation are Nevertheless, most urban wider countryside, the not available, but we know that an environments are not completely biodiversity value of additional 1,600 miles of road were covered with built structures but existing urban green spaces constructed in Great Britain between contain a substantial area made up of 2006 and 20184. Permanent damage and wildlife-rich natural domestic gardens, parks, allotments, to soil function and increased diffuse cemeteries, ponds, road verges and areas can be impacted. pollution from urban run-off are two brownfield sites. Detailed analysis of detrimental results of covering land four British urban centres (Bristol, with built, impermeable surfaces. Edinburgh, Reading and Leeds) In recognition of this, Scotland show that over 60% of the total has recently introduced a new landcover is “green” – with residential Environmental Health Indicator gardens making up 24–36% of each for sealed soil, which enables city7. While much of this area is not development to be tracked more managed for the benefit of nature, robustly. Between 2009 and 2018, the value of green infrastructure the area of sealed soil in the Clyde for biodiversity is worthy of catchment, for example, increased consideration and it is also important from 4.38% to 5.2%, representing for the health and well‑being an area of 41,149ha5. of the human inhabitants.
Photo: David Broadbent (rspb-images.com) 32 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Agricultural management Climate change Hydrological change Urbanisation INNS, pests and pathogens Pollution Woodland management
THE STATE vulnerable species, including urbanisation can increase species’ heathland reptiles such as Sand richness for some groups, which has OF NATURE Lizard and Smooth Snake, and rare been associated with the mosaic of ground-nesting birds like Nightjar habitats available9. Urban areas have and Woodlark. Although direct loss of been shown to support higher bee DIRECT HABITAT LOSS heathland habitat through land-use species’ richness than non-urban Development for housing, industry change is now controlled by planning habitats and a recent study found that and infrastructure projects such as and environmental legislation, it residential gardens and allotments 8 10 road and rail result in a loss of natural was still occurring until the 1990s . are pollinator hotspots . Green habitats, as well as fragmentation Development in surrounding areas infrastructure such as sustainable and change to those that remain. continues to increase the pressure drainage systems can provide habitat Heathland is one of the habitats on remaining isolated heathland for a wide range of species, including that has been most impacted by patches, through increased fire risk, amphibians and invertebrates, but urbanisation. The UK’s remaining predation by domestic animals and many sites do not fulfil their potential 11 lowland heathland is distributed human disturbance. as wildlife habitats . predominantly in southern England, Hedgehogs, now classified as NATURE IN URBAN AREAS and most is in close proximity to Vulnerable to extinction on Great expanding urban centres. Direct Urban environments can support Britain’s new Red List for mammals loss, fragmentation and degradation high levels of biodiversity and offer due to long-term declines12, are through nitrogen deposition and opportunities for some species. showing positive signs in low-density disturbance has negatively impacted Low and intermediate levels of urban habitats. Since 2012, fewer urban Hedgehog sites have been lost and, where populations remain, Hedgehog numbers appear to be growing13. Other species appear to have shifted from their traditional habitats; Foxes and Herring Gulls, for example, increasingly occupy the UK’s major cities, which can cause conflict with humans. There is concern for the conservation status of both of these species in their traditional habitats, but in urban areas where food is Hedgehogs have readily available (particularly from refuse) they are able to achieve high undergone massive population densities. Many people in urban areas feed long-term declines, wildlife, including birds, Foxes, Badgers, Hedgehogs, and – but there are positive sometimes unintentionally – invasive non-native Grey Squirrels and Brown signs in low-density Rats. There is more to learn about the urban habitats. impacts of this supplementary food for wildlife conservation, but it is clear that many local populations benefit, and national increases in some familiar birds such as the Goldfinch have been supported by the growth in garden bird feeding14.
Hedgehog Photo: David Woodfall (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 33
THE RESPONSE ecosystem service delivery, and Heritage Fund and in collaboration the health and well-being needs of with Wiltshire Wildlife Trust. people to access urban green space. FOR NATURE Reducing the impact of artificial However, these aims may not always lighting on bats and insects be aligned and there is a tension Unsurprisingly, the UK’s urban between intensive development, Artificial night lighting is one of the areas are where most people providing ecosystem services that most pervasive – and yet under- make a connection with nature. need extensive areas (e.g. flood recognised – causes of environmental There is therefore enormous control), and providing accessible pollution. Globally, external lighting is potential for engaging people green space for recreational needs16. increasing by around 6% per year; in the UK we have more than 9 million to take action in their own One solution is to employ a hierarchy of green infrastructure from larger, street lights, and more and more gardens or to act together in more distant places to smaller buildings are illuminated at night on local green space projects. and more local ones. the grounds of security or aesthetics. This is being supported by policy Among known impacts on wildlife, ENGAGING WITH and planning regulations to such as on night-flying insects, GARDEN WILDLIFE ensure best practice in new there is now overwhelming developments and management Increasingly, people are being evidence that bat communities are of existing green spaces, as well encouraged to garden with wildlife in profoundly affected by light pollution. as through empowering citizens mind, and there is the potential for Many species – including all but one substantial biodiversity benefits within of those on the Great Britain Red to take individual and collective the domestic gardens that constitute List – avoid lit areas for foraging responsibility for the nature substantial areas of our cities. or commuting, while the illumination on their doorstep. of historical buildings (or any roosting CASE STUDIES site) at night can prevent bats URBAN PLANNING WITH accessing their roosts. MULTIPLE AIMS Connecting communities with the nature on their doorstep Some local planning authorities Recent changes mean that planning are taking steps to decrease light Launched in March 2019 by Earthwatch policy in England enshrines the pollution, particularly in areas with Europe, Naturehood is transforming concept of net gains for biodiversity sensitive bat species, for example urban green spaces into wildlife through development; similar policies by requiring forms of lighting that havens by bringing people together. of net benefit were introduced in direct the illumination to only those Wales in 2016. The extent to which Naturehood’s approach empowers and areas where it is needed17. Individuals this may be achieved is unknown, connects people with both nature and can help to lessen light pollution as there are no robust systems their wider community. Individuals are by switching off exterior lights at in place yet for before-and-after supported to take action to help and night, focusing security lights more construction comparisons. For monitor local wildlife in their gardens, precisely, choosing bulbs with lower example, a review of a subset of balconies or window boxes, while light intensity and avoiding placing development mitigation for bats in Naturehood’s engagement officers outside lights on white walls, where buildings found that, for a range of work across communities to create their effect is magnified. Simply reasons, mitigation measures varied connected networks of habitat to closing curtains at night also makes 15 in their success . There is increasing support biodiversity. an important difference! recognition that urban planning The first four Naturehoods are now up strategies need to be designed to and running in Oxford and Swindon, provide maximum benefit for multiple with support from the National Lottery aims; for biodiversity, for wider Photo: Andy Hay (rspb-images.com) Drivers of change
INVASIVE NON‑NATIVE SPECIES, PESTS AND PATHOGENS
Humans are increasingly moving species around the globe and releasing them, deliberately or accidentally, into the wild. Some will be moved as contaminants of trade. The number of non-native species colonising or becoming established in the UK continues to grow. Around 12% of established non-native species cause adverse economic, environmental or societal impacts and are therefore classed as invasive non-native species (INNS). As impacts often take time to emerge, and INNS establishment and spread will be facilitated by climate change, that figure is likely to rise. While eradications of INNS from islands, for example, can have direct benefits for impacted species, preventing species from establishing in the first place is recognised globally as the best strategy for avoiding environmental damage and minimising the financial cost of subsequent management.
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE 12% of established The number of INNS Simple biosecurity measures non‑native species established in Great Britain can keep INNS off islands. have a demonstrated has increased steadily. Breeding seabird numbers negative ecological have shown a rapid positive
or human impact, and 60 response to successful that figure is likely to rise. rat eradications on UK islands, including Lundy, 40 Canna, Ramsey, the Shiants and the Scilly Isles. 20 Nu er of e e
0
Photo: Craig Churchill (rspb-images.com) Muntjac Deer State of Nature Report 2019 35
PRESSURES Floating Pennywort ON NATURE
The impact of non-native species has long been recognised as a major driver of environmental damage. Impacts are evident across all ecosystems, with particularly severe impacts on native woodlands, freshwater habitats and islands – which often have unique floras and faunas, due to their isolation from nearby continents. There are currently around 2,000 non-native species known to be established in Great Britain, and an average of 10–12 new species establish each year; around 12% of these cause serious adverse impacts and are therefore Photo: GBNNSS classed as invasive (INNS)1,2. • Initially harmless airborne pathogens could be devastating to UK newt Over 1,200 non-native species can become more virulent as the populations; current efforts focus on have been recorded in Ireland. result of hybridising with formerly countering the risk of its introduction benign native microbes. Planting of to the wild via amphibian collections These figures are likely to increase exotic pine stands in the UK appears or the international pet trade. It as climate change proceeds. INNS can to have facilitated the introduction has already caused mass mortality have a number of adverse impacts. of two exotic races of the fungus events in continental Europe, leading • They may outcompete or predate Dothistroma septosporum into to the near extinction of the Fire native species, as has happened with Scotland, which now pose a threat to Salamander Salamandra salamandra American Mink and Water Vole3. native Scots Pine, both directly and in the Netherlands9. • INNS may bring with them diseases through potential hybridization and INNS can also reduce the benefits to which native species have little or introgression with the endemic race4,5. we gain from nature. For example, no resistance, such as squirrel pox • Hybridisation of a novel species with invasive plants can choke up from American Grey Squirrels that a closely related, native one can also waterways and increase flood risk, is fatal to native Red Squirrels. risk effective extinction of the native while others may cause damage to one by loss of its unique/separate Photo: Paul Sawer (rspb-images.com) species of economic importance. In genetic identity, as is currently 2010 the total annual cost of INNS to Toad 6 happening with Scottish Wildcat . the British economy was estimated 10 Novel pests and pathogens can have at approximately £1.7 billion . impacts beyond the species they directly attack. For example, the spread of Ash dieback is likely to affect the many species that rely upon Ash bark, roots or even its decomposing ON AVERAGE 10–12 leaves. Declines in Ash are predicted NEW NON-NATIVE to lead to the loss of insects, lichens, SPECIES NOW ESTABLISH mosses and liverworts, many of which are found largely or solely on Ash7. EACH YEAR IN GREAT Amphibian diseases have become BRITAIN, OF WHICH a leading cause of the decline and AROUND 12% WILL extinction of many amphibian CAUSE SERIOUS populations around the world8. The emerging infectious chytrid fungus ADVERSE IMPACTS. Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans 36 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Agricultural management Climate change Hydrological change Urbanisation INNS, pests and pathogens Pollution Woodland management
THE STATE Over 3,200 non-native species have rapidly, having more than doubled been recorded in Great Britain, since 1999 (see figure below). The OF NATURE with around 2,000 established and greatest numbers of INNS are found reproducing in the wild. Two hundred in woodlands and urban ecosystems, and thirty-four species have had a followed by coastal, freshwater Globally, INNS are one of the documented negative ecological and grassland habitats13. main drivers of biodiversity loss or human impact12. The number of and constitute a particular threat terrestrial invasive species becoming RELATED SECTION to fragile ecosystems, such as established in Great Britain has grown p80 UK Overseas Territories those on islands. Of 247 animal steadily and numbers of marine extinctions where the cause is species have increased even more known, INNS were implicated in 58%, and in 31% of cases where species have gone extinct in the OVER 3,200 wild, INNS were the only cause NON-NATIVE SPECIES cited11. While INNS have been HAVE BEEN RECORDED implicated in extinctions from UK OTs, there are none recorded IN GREAT BRITAIN. from Great Britain and Ireland.
UK Biodiversity Indicator: Number of new invasive non-native species established in or along 10% or more of Great Britain’s land area or coastline, 1960 to 2018 (final columns in each habitat refer to nine years rather than 10)
0
50
0
0
20 Nu er of e e
10
0 1 0 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 1 0 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 1 0 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 1 1 7 1 1 200 201 1 1 7 1 1 200 201 1 1 7 1 1 200 201 re ater ar e erre tr a o rce ncc go i
Photo: John W Anderson American Mink and Gannet Seabirds have proven particularly vulnerable to mammalian INNS, in the UK and OTs. State of Nature Report 2019 37
THE RESPONSE CASE STUDIES FOR NATURE Removing INNS Although islands are often seen as being particularly vulnerable to INNS, While the control of established they have the advantage of offering INNS is important, the GB a contained system from which INNS INNS Strategy emphasises can be removed. Great Britain and the need for prevention, early Ireland are archipelagos, and several detection and rapid response successful projects to remove non- to potential establishment. native species have been carried out here, such as the eradication of Stopping problems before rats on the islands of Canna, Lundy, Photo: Kate Lawrence (rspb-images.com) they start makes huge savings Ynys Seiriol (Puffin Island) and the both in terms of money and Shiants. On the British mainland, of its kind. Before baiting began in ecological damage. The EU projects have successfully eradicated 2010, numbers of Wilson’s Petrel were Coypu, Muskrat, African Clawed Toad, and the UK Government have in the low tens, but five years later Fathead Minnow and Black Bullhead. response plans to deal with hundreds were regularly seen flying Eradication projects are currently new threats, and to date over suitable breeding habitat that underway on UK OTs, including Gough these have proved effective had been infested with rats for over Island, Bermuda and Gibraltar. 14 at preventing colonisation a century . Such recovery is not true After clearing an INNS from an area, in all cases, however. For example, of some new species. the recovery of the impacted species even 30 years after Rhododendron or habitat can be remarkably quick. removal from Scottish Atlantic Oak South Georgia was declared rat-free in woodland, the ground flora had not 2018, following the largest eradication returned to its target condition15.
Chinese Mitten Crab INNS awareness Action plans include ways to reduce the risk of zoo escapes, contaminants from angling equipment and introductions via recreational boating. Invasive freshwater plants and animals can spread quickly and impact whole ecosystems. Killer Shrimp, widely considered one of the most damaging INNS in Europe, spread from the Ponto-Caspian region of Eastern Europe. There are three established populations in the UK, elsewhere records are mainly from eastern and central Europe to date. Killer Shrimp can cause population declines of many native species, preying on other shrimp species, fish larvae and eggs16. Photo: GBNNSS Campaigns such as Check, Clean, Dry and Be Plant Wise17 aim to improve biosecurity by raising awareness with key stakeholders, anglers and boat users, in order to slow the spread of such invasive freshwater species and prevent their establishment in new areas. However, the latest analyses suggests that public awareness of INNS issues has not increased over the past decade, although awareness has improved among key groups such as anglers and boaters18. Drivers of change
POLLUTION
A wide range of pollutants, from many sources, threaten wildlife and have an impact on all habitats. Perhaps the most widespread current harm is caused by excess nutrients (phosphate and compounds of nitrogen) in air and water. Legislative control has been successful in reducing emissions of many pollutants and there are signs of a partial recovery in nature, including fish returning to rivers, and lichen and bryophyte species (that are sensitive to air pollution) expanding in range. Sensitive habitats in particular, however, remain vulnerable. New government initiatives, partly in response to international targets, should lead to further improvement. Public concern regarding pollution has been strengthening recently, particularly over the proliferation of plastic waste in the environment, and there is a widespread appetite for positive change.
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE Nitrogen and ammonia Occupancy trends in The UK has committed emissions have decreased lichens and bryophytes to legally binding limits since 1970. suggest some recovery. for sulphur dioxide, reactive nitrogen, 120 140 ammonia and particulate 120 matter by 2020, and 100 80 further reductions by 2030. 80 1 70 100 1 70 100 60 e e
e e 40
or onia 1 0 100 40 20 0 0
Photo: Chris O’Reilly (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 39
PRESSURES Diffuse pollution represents a from industry and water treatment significant risk to freshwater in the works, but others remain difficult to ON NATURE UK, and arises from the run-off of combat. New threats have arisen with soil, nutrients and pesticides from the introduction of novel agrochemical farming and forestry, contaminated and pharmaceutical products5. There are few places left on drainage from urban areas and the Emissions of reactive nitrogen (NOx), earth unaffected by the deposition of pollutants from the air. sulphur and particulates into the by-products of modern human Point source emissions from industry, atmosphere have decreased since life. Pollution presents a sewage treatment works and fish 1970, though NOx remains a key wide range of threats to the farming add to this pollutant load. source of nitrogenous pollution to environment and the species High levels of phosphates and nitrates the atmosphere. Ammonia emissions are the most frequent causes of rivers, (which contribute to the formation of that inhabit it, as well as to lakes, estuarine and coastal waters NOx) fell overall by 11% between 1980 human health and well-being. failing EU Water Framework Directive and 2017, but have risen since 2013 Pollutants come in a diverse (WFD) water quality objectives3,4, and and constitute a major short-term range of forms, including but impacts can linger for years. threat to sensitive habitats. Dairy and beef cattle, fertiliser application not limited to plastic waste; Recent decades have seen reductions and poultry are major sources chemicals in water, soil and in many forms of pollution, most of ammonia emissions6. air; noise and light emitted notably point source discharges from cities and transport; and nutrient enrichment Trends in annual emissions of various air pollutants, 1970 to 20176 of sensitive habitats. 120
Air pollution and nutrient 100 enrichment affect biodiversity 0 and ecosystem services, harm 1 70 100 human health and contribute 0
e e 0
to climate change. Widespread or onia 1 0 100 changes have been recorded 20 to sensitive ecosystems in the 0 UK, with farming, transport and 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 itrogen o i es onia p r io i e industry being key pollution sources. Eutrophication, acidification and toxic pollution of ecosystems have been shown to drive declines in the presence, abundance and health of sensitive species of plants, lichens and other fungi1. There is strong evidence that nutrient enrichment via nitrogen deposition has impacted plant species in a wide range of habitats2.
Photo: Ray Kennedy (rspb-images.com) 40 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Agricultural management Climate change Hydrological change Urbanisation INNS, pests and pathogens Pollution Woodland management THE STATE OF NATURE
Most semi-natural habitats, UK Biodiversity Indicator: Percentage of nitrogen-sensitive habitat area in UK countries and over two-thirds of our where nutrient nitrogen critical loads were exceeded in 1995–97 and 2014–16 wildflowers (such as Harebell 100 and Betony), require levels of 0 nitrogen to be low7. Nitrogen enrichment has led to 0 changes in plant and fungal communities and the declines 0 of individual species, with 20 species that prefer nutrient- er e ta e of e t e a tat area er e ta e poor environments showing 0 1 5 201 1 5 201 1 5 201 1 5 201 1 5 201 a decline in distribution, on 1 7 201 1 7 201 1 7 201 1 7 201 1 7 201 average (see graph below). a N S ot a a e o rce ncc go i 5a Further up the food chain, moth species whose larvae depend on low nutrient- Many waterways are now cleaner New trends shown here (below) reveal than they have been for many interesting patterns in the distribution adapted plants declined years. In 1957, the Natural History of bryophyte and lichen species since strongly between 1970 Museum declared the lower Thames 1970. While the drivers of this recovery and 20108. Despite recent “biologically dead”, with news reports are not fully understood, the increases progress in input reduction, describing it as a vast, foul-smelling in occupancy began in the 1990s, in 2014–16 62% of all UK drain. Now it is used by a wide variety as levels of air pollution started to sensitive habitats exceeded of fish, with Atlantic Salmon, Brown reduce, and is almost certainly related Trout and River Lamprey all recorded to the recovery of species sensitive to the recommended “critical in recent years10. However, despite pollution12. This is likely to reflect an nutrient load”, above which these improvements, only 35% of UK increase in the distribution of common they are at risk of harmful surface water bodies were classed as species sensitive to acid deposition effects. The figure is 85% for being in high or good status (based but tolerant of increasing nitrogen Northern Ireland and for on the WFD combination of biological, deposition, reflecting changes in air England is close to 100%9. chemical and structural measures) pollution. Evidence suggests, however, in 201811, and species such as the that many specialist lichen species Freshwater Pearl Mussel continue to continue to decline in abundance suffer declines related to water quality. as well as distribution13.
Change in the distribution of species of fertile environments Change in the distribution for bryophytes (569 species) (411 species) and infertile, nutrient poor, environments and lichens (696 species) 1970 to 2015 (524 species) based on Ellenberg N scores
u a ator u a ator 1 0 1 0
120 120
100 100
0 0
0 0 e 1 70 100 e e 1 70 100 e 0 0
20 20
0 0 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 erti e en iron ent species nferti e en iron ent species r op tes ic ens State of Nature Report 2019 41
THE RESPONSE from farming-related diffuse and empower the rural community pollution and Nitrate Vulnerable to act as stewards of the river. Zone regulations impose additional FOR NATURE Moninea Bog, Northern Ireland protection measures in many areas (for example, they cover around 55% Moninea Bog, an Area of Special The marked reductions in many of English agricultural land). Scientific Interest (ASSI) and Special classes of polluting emissions Area of Conservation (SAC), is a has been driven by broad- CASE STUDIES lowland raised bog in the south west of Northern Ireland, which scale legislative control, often Catchment Sensitive Farming following coordinated action is especially important for its high Since 2006, the Catchment Sensitive cover of Sphagnum moss species across the UK and the rest of Farming (CSF) partnership has worked and the presence of all three native 14 Europe . Sulphur emissions with over 20,000 farmers, covering a sundew species. In 2007, a field from coal-fired power stations third of the farmed area of England study by the Centre for Ecology & and industry in the UK, which to improve water quality. Workshops, Hydrology showed that ammonia caused “acid rain” and damaged farm events and one-to-one advice from neighbouring farm operations ecosystems across northern are targeted in areas designated was causing severe direct damage as high priority for agricultural to the site’s vegetation, including Europe, have been cut by pollution. Topics covered by the algal slime on trees and bleaching of 6 97% since the 1970s . Further programme include fertilizer and mosses. Following a reduction in the reductions in sulphur emissions pesticide management; soil health level of farm operations in 2009/2010, are expected when a mandatory and structure; silage, slurry and fuel further investigation in 2017 found 0.5% cap of sulphur content in oil regulations; and Nitrate Vulnerable that there was already substantial shipping fuel comes into force Zones. Field officers also provide help recovery on the site. The results are and advice with grant applications now being prepared for publication, on 1 January 202015. for farm infrastructure upgrades but already provide an example The reduction of NOx has been part and capital works. In target areas that measures to reduce ammonia of government clean air strategies monitored since Phase 1, nutrient, emissions can be expected to deliver for many years, driven largely by sediment and faecal indicator substantial biodiversity benefits within concerns about public health impacts organism concentrations have five to 10 years. and greenhouse gas emissions. reduced by 5–22% and monitored Recently, measures to reduce pesticide concentrations (exceeding ammonia emissions from agriculture 0.1µg/l) by 34%17. and other sources have been adopted A key element of the programme or are under consideration across aims to develop local farmer–to- all UK countries (for example, the farmer learning networks. One BROAD-SCALE Department for Environment, Food example in the Evenlode catchment, and Rural Affairs (Defra)’s Clean Air LEGISLATIVE Oxfordshire, involves farmers Strategy 2019), driven by binding CONTROLS HAVE alongside the local community international targets to reduce measuring the effectiveness of CSF DRIVEN DOWN emissions by 8% by 2020 and 16% interventions through FreshWater by 2030 from a 2005 baseline16. EMISSIONS OF Watch, Earthwatch’s citizen science All current UK AES now contain options MANY POLLUTANTS. project. The data collected encourage or mandatory cross‑compliance better catchment management obligations to protect watercourses
Photo: David Genney Solorina crocea Drivers of change
WOODLAND MANAGEMENT
The area covered by woodland in the UK continues to increase from very low levels a century ago, but its integrity is under threat from invasive plants, pests and diseases. Nature in woodland is under pressure from a lack of management, overgrazing by deer, increasing levels of recreational disturbance and nitrogen pollution. Numbers of many woodland birds and butterflies continue to decline. Of particular importance due to their high nature value and restricted range, the Atlantic oak and hazel woods of the UK’s western coasts and Scotland’s Caledonian pine forests have both suffered severe loss and fragmentation. Ancient woodlands across the UK have been lost through conversion to plantation forestry and face continued threat from infrastructure and housing development. Addressing the problems facing woodland and trees of the wider countryside is increasingly recognised as a major conservation issue, which is the focus of a wide range of ambitious consortium projects involving both research and conservation action.
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE Woodland area in the UK has The UK woodland butterfly Area of woodland increased since 1998. indicator has fallen by 50% sustainably managed, since 1990. about 44% of the total.
4 120 50
40 3 80 30 (1990 = 100) 2 20
Index 40 o e tare 1 o e tare 10
0 0 0
Photo: David J Slater (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 43
PRESSURES UK woodland cover increased by during the 1970s3 while Ash dieback 9% between 1998 and 2018 and is and Acute Oak Decline are currently ON NATURE currently estimated at 3.17 million ha. seriously affecting three of our most Scotland has seen the largest area common and widespread tree species. increase (156,000ha), while Northern The pathogen Phytophthora ramorum Looking back in history Ireland had the greatest proportional mainly affects Larch within plantations woodland cover in the UK increase (39%) but remains the least but is known to infect other tree and declined gradually, largely wooded UK country. Conifers account shrub species; its arrival has led to to make way for agriculture. for 51% of the UK’s woodland area, widescale preventative felling. varying from 26% in England to 74% in Estimated at 15% in England Increasing deer numbers (both Scotland2; much of this is commercial at the time of the Domesday native species such as Roe and plantation of non-native tree species. survey, it had fallen to non-natives such as Muntjac), have Ancient woodland, highly important a heightened impact on woodland 5% by the end of the First in terms of biodiversity value and and its dependent wildlife as they World War. In 1919, the supporting a wide range of specialist reduce natural regeneration and alter species is estimated to cover only Forestry Commission was woodland structure through increased around 2.4% of UK land and the lack established to provide a grazing and browsing4. Recreational of an up-to-date inventory hampers strategic timber reserve use, particularly in woodland close to its protection. and, assisted by policy urban areas, has detrimental impacts incentives to encourage Woodland area by country, 1998 to 2019 on soils, invertebrates and flora through trampling and compression5. private planting, the area of 0 Disturbance associated with an woodland increased rapidly. 5 increasing variety of leisure activities 0 Although well below the adversely affects wildlife, including European average of 37%1, 2 5 birds and mammals6. A changing woodlands now cover around 2 0 climate in combination with invasive 1 5 and native pests and pathogens 13% of UK land. However, o e tare non-native conifers such 1 0 form a complex and interacting set 0 5 of threats that will favour some tree as Sitka Spruce dominated 0 0 species, while making conditions early restocking, and with 1 2005 2010 2015 201 worse for others. Species’ distributions ng an a es cot an ort ern re an limited tree species, age are expected to alter as a result, with diversity and high-density The pressures affecting woodland, evidence already pointing to a decline planting, this benefited and trees in the wider countryside, are in the abundance and distribution 7 only a narrow range of diverse and dependent on location of woodland specialist lichens . and species. Changes in management wildlife, and eliminated Population trend for Muntjac deer – have had major effects. Historic UK Breeding Bird Survey Index, species that depended on rotational coppice systems were 1995 to 2018 habitats on which these replaced by clear fell and replanting woods were planted on. during the 20th century, then followed 50 With growing recognition by a recent move to continuous cover 00 250 of the conservation value of systems, often with very limited management. Many woods have 200 1 5 100 native woodland, many new become fragmented, intersected 150 woods and replantings now e by roads and development that 100 use diverse tree mixes or degrade habitat and form barriers 50 to wildlife movement. Increasingly, allow natural regeneration 0 and follow sustainable the prevalence of tree disease is a 1 5 2000 2010 201 Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals management practices, in serious concern. Dutch elm disease resulted in the loss of 20 million trees accordance with the UK Forestry Standard.
Photo: Norman Russell (rspb-images.com) 44 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Agricultural management Climate change Hydrological change Urbanisation INNS, pests and pathogens Pollution Woodland management THE STATE OF NATURE
Despite the overall expansion Breeding woodland birds in the UK, 1970 to 2017 in the area covered by u a e ator woodland, woodland species 1 0 continue to decline, as 120 evidenced by the UK woodland 100 bird indicator which fell by 0 1 70 100
25% between 1970 and 2017. 0 e e Declines are most pronounced in 0 woodland specialists such as Lesser 20
Spotted Woodpecker, Spotted 0 Flycatcher and Willow Tit, and 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 suggested causes include a decline in enera ists 12 oo an ir s 7 pecia ists 25 o rce ttps go go ern ent statistics i ir pop ations in t e appropriate woodland management, changes in tree species composition UK Biodiversity Indicator: Change in widespread butterflies in woodland in the UK, and loss of landscape connectivity. 1990 to 2018 Woodlands acquire species at different stages of maturity, with u a e ator (24 species) o ter S ort ter 1 0 201 201 201 specialist bird species generally 120 100% occupying woods over 80 years old, 100 and with a high level of structural 0% diversity, while generalist species can 0 0% exploit younger woodland8. 1 0 100 0 The long-term decline in the UK 0% e e 0
woodland butterfly indicator, which of species Percentage 20% includes well-known species such 20 as Common Blue, Marbled White 0 0% and Meadow Brown, is thought 1 0 2000 2010 201 Increase Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Little change to be due to reduced sympathetic Decrease Source: jncc.gov.uk/ukbi-C6 management and a decline in open spaces within woods. Photo: Colin Wilkinson (rspb-images.com) Pedunculate Oak
Ancient woodland covers just 2.4% of the UK. State of Nature Report 2019 45
THE RESPONSE The importance of maintaining, increasing and enhancing woodland FOR NATURE for nature conservation alongside a range of ecosystem services is widely recognised in a number of Grants are available to ambitious consortium projects across encourage new woodland the UK. Cairngorms Connect aims planting and the sustainable to enhance habitats, species and management of existing ecological processes over 600km2 of Scotland’s Cairngorms National Park, woodland. For example, Photo: Richard Revels (rspb-images.com) funding is available under Rural including Caledonian pinewoods and montane willow communities13. Ash dieback Development Programmes In England, the Woodland Trust is Ash dieback (caused by the fungus to deliver local biodiversity leading a consortium project to plant Hymenoscyphus fraxineus) is one of objectives (for priority habitats 50 million new trees over 25 years to several invasive tree diseases recorded and priority species), water create a “Northern Forest”, spanning in the UK recently that has the the country from Hull to Liverpool14. objectives (to improve water potential to cause major ecological, Launched in 2019, the online Woodland quality or help reduce flood social and economic impacts. With Wildlife Toolkit15 provides woodland risk) and climate change an estimated 126 million trees within managers with a one-stop resource to 9,10 woodland and 60 million in the wider mitigation or adaptation . inform about distributions of important countryside, Ash is the UK’s third As the figure below shows, the area wildlife, assess woodland condition and most common tree17. First recorded of woodland managed sustainably create appropriate management plans. on imported saplings during 2012, (which includes measures relating to the disease has spread rapidly to all maintaining biodiversity, ecological, CASE STUDIES four UK countries. Recent analysis economic and social functions) has has shown 955 species, ranging remained level, at around 43% (44% from bryophytes to mammals, are in 2019), over the last decade. The associated with Ash, of which 45 are Scottish Government has a stated obligate (only occurring on Ash) and a aim to increase woodland cover from further 62 are highly associated18,19. around 18% to 21% of Scottish land area by 203011 although much of this The disease is now well established, will be non-native planting, limiting and the economic cost has been its biodiversity value. In Wales the estimated to be in the order of latest Government strategy states an £15 billion20. There are many ambition to create 100,000ha of new, Photo: Mike Read (rspb-images.com) uncertainties over the prognosis for well-located woodland by 2030 to native Ash woodlands; mature trees help Wales meet its carbon emission Celtic Rainforest Project die slowly and most populations reduction targets12. Planting targets The Celtic rainforests – Atlantic show some level of tolerance; this has can deliver the greatest benefits if woodlands in Ireland and the UK been shown to be strongly heritable. they ensure new woodland is in the with an open woodland structure, While a worst-case scenario would right place and not compromising mild and humid conditions, and rich see loss of a high proportion of Ash, other valuable habitats; priority is plant assemblages – comprise a large lessons from other epidemic tree given to creating both new native proportion of Europe’s rare temperate diseases suggest that maintaining a and new mixed woodlands that can rainforest habitat. In the UK they are wide genetic base and reducing other deliver multiple benefits. threatened by invasive non-native stressors will maximise tolerance. 20 plants (particularly Rhododendron), Guidance focuses on ameliorating UK Biodiversity Indicator: UK area of poor grazing regimes, a lack of the potential impacts and encouraging forestry land certified as sustainably ecological functioning by retaining managed, 2001 to 2019 management and atmospheric nitrogen deposition16. By tackling invasive plants, existing Ash trees, encouraging 50 developing restoration techniques and natural regeneration of Ash and other 5 demonstrating best practice, the Celtic native species, reducing herbivore 0 Rainforest Project aims to increase impacts and reducing competition 5 from INNS. Research has sought to 0 resilience, enhance ecosystem function establish which other tree species 25 and return woods to a favourable are able to support Ash-associated 20 conservation status across four areas of 15 north and mid-Wales. This ambitious EU species and several, including Oak, 10 LIFE-funded project runs from 2018 to Elm and Beech (where native), 5 can support at least half21 Percentage of woodland area certified of woodland area Percentage 2025 and involves a range of statutory . 0 2001 2005 2010 2015 201 and NGO partners, led by Snowdonia o rce ncc go i 1 National Park Authority. Conservation
WORKING FOR NATURE: CONSERVATION IN THE UK
The preceding pages have reviewed the biggest drivers of change acting on the UK’s nature, how these pressures have changed over recent years and their impact on wildlife, both in the past and now. We have also given examples of some of the inspiring conservation action taken in response to these pressures. Here we look at how conservation acts as a force to help nature, to mitigate against the worst human impacts on nature and to nurture recovery from decades or even centuries of pressure.
Photo: Malcolm Hunt (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 47
An analysis of drivers of change, continued declines in reported in State of Nature biodiversity in response 2016, estimated that 19% of to farmland management the total impact (17% positive, (see page 20) – but we also 2% negative) on nature in recent know that nature‑friendly decades arose from a wide array farming, supported of conservation activities such by government‑funded AES, can as nature-friendly farming, deliver a range of on‑the‑ground habitat management and benefits for wildlife. The key, the creation of new wildlife it appears, is a matter of scale habitat. This demonstrated and resources. The collective that the conservation response to the pressures on response can work, and is nature is helping, and should backed up by a number of be celebrated, but declines in well-evidenced examples of nature are continuing. conservation success (see Here, we give a brief overview conservationevidence.com). of just some of the approaches Harder to assess is the extent used in the conservation of the to which the state of nature UK’s wildlife, and the challenges would be worse without this we face in trying to improve conservation action. We know, the state of nature. for example, that there are Photo: Colin Wilkinson (rspb-images.com)
CONSERVING SPECIAL PLACES The UK has a long heritage of UK Biodiversity Indicator: Extent of UK or hydrology, and in some cases preserving special places, with the nationally and internationally important management must evolve in response world’s first nature reserve declared in protected areas, 1950 to 2019 to an improved understanding of
West Yorkshire in 1821. As pressures 0 the habitat or species’ requirements. on the wider environment have At the same time, reserves must be increased, with the widespread loss of 25 able to welcome in people, and thus habitats such as heathland, wetlands 20 balance the needs of both visitors and and ancient woodland, such reserves the wildlife they come to experience. 15 have become ever-more important. The State of Nature partnership 10 CASE STUDY is collectively responsible for te t i ion ectares 5 Redgrave and Lopham Fen in Suffolk approaching 5,000 individual nature 0 is the largest remaining calcareous reserves, with a combined area over 1 0 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 1 50 201 valley fen in England, but decades five times the size of Greater London. n an t sea ota o rce ncc go i 1 of water abstraction and nutrient In addition, the designation of sites enrichment caused huge degradation and landscapes of high nature value Protection is only part of the story: to the site. Restoration work, as ASSIs or Sites of Special Scientific nature reserves and protected funded by the EU and led by the Interest (SSSIs), Special Areas of areas require careful and nuanced Suffolk Wildlife Trust, relocated the Conservation (SACs) and SPAs provides management to enable species abstracting borehole, removed 77ha special legal protection to prevent and communities to flourish. In of encroaching scrub, and scraped damaging activities and thus conserve 2019, the proportion of protected 23ha of fen completely clear to important habitats and species. There sites assessed as being in favourable enable recovery. Forty-two ponds has been a massive increase in the condition was 43% for SACs, 50% were created to help the threatened area of designated land and sea in for SSSIs and 52% for SPAs, with Fen Raft Spider. The rewetted fen the UK, owing to the designation of the majority of non-favourable holds 270 plant species and a rich inshore and offshore Marine Protected sites assessed as “unfavourable- invertebrate community; extinction Areas (MPAs) since 2013, although recovering”. Very few habitats are of the Fen Raft Spider has been designation, of itself, does not ensure stable and most require management avoided and it is now expanding effective conservation. of grazing levels, woodlands successfully in the new habitat. 48 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
RESTORING LANDSCAPES The need to think big to turn around the fortunes of nature has been increasingly well recognised; such thinking that was crystallised in Professor Sir John Lawton’s 2010 report, Making space for nature1, which called for “more, bigger, better, joined” wildlife sites. Vitally, this extends conservation thinking beyond reserves, to the need to reduce fragmentation – whereby nature is stuck in isolated islands in a hostile sea of intensively managed countryside – by creating corridors between sites for wildlife to flow through, or stepping stones to help species jump across. In addition, Lawton called for “buffers” around Photo: David Wootton (rspb-images.com) wildlife sites, softening the intensive CASE STUDY Conservation are working with management that often runs up Great strides are being made local and national government to to reserve boundaries. Finally, to introduce such approaches, protect, restore, expand and link wet Lawton’s call for “better” needs to and demonstrate partnership grassland habitats across 2,000km2 be addressed. The management of working between government, of the Lough Erne Basin, home to large areas of potentially wildlife-rich NGOs, businesses, farmers and threatened wader populations and semi-natural habitat, such as in local communities. For example, rare plants such as the Fen Violet the UK’s uplands, is unsympathetic in Northern Ireland, NGOs including and Irish Lady’s-tresses Orchid. to biodiversity. the RSPB, Ulster Wildlife and Butterfly
FOCUSING ON SPECIES Lady’s Slipper Orchid While conservation policies to of coordinated and targeted action in address the pressures on nature, at least part of their UK range as part delivered across landscapes, will of species recovery projects (SRPs). help, for some species this will not Most of these had received little or no be sufficient. Many of the most conservation action aimed explicitly celebrated conservation successes at recovering their populations2. of recent years – the return of the Pine However, there are imbalances in Marten to Wales, the restoration of the targeting of such efforts. While the breeding range of Red Kites, the conservation action targeted at one establishment of Lady’s Slipper Orchid species can help others – for example, at 11 sites in Northern England – have reedbed creation for Bitterns is likely been the consequence of targeted to have benefited a wide range of action, based on robust science taxa, including Water Voles and and conservation best practice. the Reed Leopard moth3, and agri- Programmes such as Back from environment options intended to the Brink, in England, have brought boost rare farmland birds such as Steve Knell (rspb-images.com) numerous partners together to target Stone-curlew have benefits for a range this group making up just 9.5% of action for priority species, including of taxa, including threatened arable the terrestrial and freshwater species the Lesser Butterfly Orchid, Barberry plants4 – our invertebrates and plants identified as priorities. A further 26% Carpet Moth and Ladybird Spider. are clearly receiving less specific of species with SRPs are invertebrates attention than mammals and birds. (mainly butterflies), despite this group A review of the 1,063 terrestrial and This contrasts with growing evidence representing 39% of priority species, freshwater species listed as priorities that insects are showing rates of and only 13% of plant and fungi on the UK Biodiversity Action Plan decline that may be greater than species were identified as having had (BAP) – which has now been replaced other taxonomic groups. Of those SRPs, despite this group making up by conservation policies at the species that have been the subjects 52% of all species listed as UK BAP devolved country level – found that of SRPs, 61% are vertebrates, despite priority species2. only 114 of these have been the focus State of Nature Report 2019 49
BROADER ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY Our impact on the UK’s land and seascapes is pervasive – the impact of climate change is felt everywhere, three-quarters of land is affected directly by farming policies, 33% of quota managed fish stocks are harvested unsustainably, urbanisation is widespread. So, clearly, we need policies that ensure that the need for space to live, work and play, food production, and use of other natural resources is met sustainably, in a way that allows nature to flourish. Photo: Colin Wilkinson (rspb-images.com) We have talked, for example, are vital to ensure healthy marine the UK’s progress towards the global about how policies to encourage ecosystems (page 63). 2020 targets (Aichi targets) on pages wildlife-friendly farming can be 90–91. As the parties to the CBD begin integrated with food production and It is well recognised that policies to discuss a post-2020 framework, we the needs of nature (page 21), and to protect biodiversity and the wait to see whether this will contain how legislation to control acidifying environment bring huge benefits policies, and associated goals, that will pollution has enabled the recovery to human well-being, from clean encourage the transformative change of some bryophytes and lichens air and water, healthy soils for food which the recent Intergovernmental (page 41). At sea, policies that prevent production, and the health and Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity the overexploitation of vulnerable well-being impacts that result from and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) report fish stocks, encourage fishing connection with nature. Globally, stated was required to avoid global techniques that minimise bycatch these issues are recognised by the declines in nature from continuing. and habitat damage, and protect the UN’s Sustainable Development most important areas from fishing Goals5 and by the CBD. We discuss
RESOURCES FOR CONSERVATION Ultimately, our ability to act UK Biodiversity Indicator: Expenditure on biodiversity in the UK, 2000/01 to 2016/17 to conserve the UK’s nature is te o 00 0 0 0 0 constrained by resources. In 2017/18, 0 0 an estimated £456 million of UK 700 public sector funding was spent on 00 0 0 0 022 biodiversity in the UK. This funding 500
201 17 prices 0 01 has been declining, by 29% over the 00 0 02 last five years, and by 34% since a 00 er e ta e of er e ta e high point in 2008/09. As a proportion o 200 0 01 of GDP this represents a fall of 42% 100 from 0.038% to 0.022%. It should be 0 0 00 noted, however, that the lower level of 2000 01 2005 0 2010 01 2017 1 public sector funding for international P ic sector s P ic sector as % of P biodiversity conservation (£205 million o rce ncc go i 2 in 2017/18), including that in the UK’s OTs, has risen by 111% over the last The increase in NGO spending on go into collecting the biodiversity five years. conservation provides evidence monitoring data upon which the State By contrast, spending on for increased public concern for of Nature reports rely, every year. biodiversity in the UK by NGOs the state of nature, and the value So, although financial investment is with a focus on biodiversity and/ which they place on it, as does the crucial, as are government policy and or nature conservation, while not rapid increase in volunteering to legislation, we must remember that matching government investment, help nature conservation (page 10). the most successful conservation has increased in recent years. It Volunteers donate an immense action arises from partnerships, reached £239 million in 2017/18, resource to conservation in the UK; across governments, charities, having increased by 24% over for example, we have estimated that business, landowners and individuals the previous five years. around 7,500,000 volunteer hours working together. Marine
MARINE KEY FINDINGS
From seabirds and marine mammals at the top of the marine food web to plankton at the bottom, there have been large spatial and temporal changes in species’ abundance and distribution in UK seas in recent decades1. Monitoring the marine environment is a more logistically challenging task than monitoring terrestrial habitats. Species data are collected across large areas, but geographic coverage varies and long time series are only available for a more limited set of taxa. Monitoring is carried out for seabirds at breeding colonies around the UK and for marine mammals and fish stocks in the Greater North Sea and Celtic Seas. Other aspects of marine nature are monitored in relation to specific drivers of change in the marine environment. Pressures interact with each other and, in some cases, impacts are difficult to disentangle, often having synergistic and cumulative effects. For this reason, following our key metrics of the state of marine nature, we present metrics for taxonomic groups associated with specific drivers, namely climate change and fisheries, to give an overall picture of the state of marine nature.
Photo: Paul Sawer (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 51
The UK Marine Strategy1 The abundance indicators below use Greater North Sea 6,7 provides a framework for data from two trawl surveys for a • Demersal species indicator shows protecting the UK marine small proportion of the hundreds a statistically significant increase of of demersal fish species that live environment while allowing 58% over the long term (1983–2017) on or near the sea floor (e.g. Cod, and non-significant trend of -5% over sustainable use of marine Haddock, Saithe). Very little is the last 10 years. resources. The update in 2019 known about the vast majority of • Over the long term 11% of species unmonitored and unregulated fish provides a status assessment of showed strong or moderate populations. The Celtic Seas (based marine biodiversity and drivers decreases and 78% showed on 11 species) and the Greater North of change, closely related to strong or moderate increases; Sea (based on nine species) indicators broader geographic assessments 11% showed little change. both show increases in average 2,3 across the North East Atlantic . abundance as follows: Change in average species’ abundance – We draw on these assessments Celtic Seas Greater North Sea demersal fish in the State of Nature 2019 • Demersal species indicator shows u a e ator (9 species) marine section. a statistically significant increase of 00 133% over the long term (1985–2016) MARINE FISH – CELTIC SEAS 00 and a non-significant increase of 22%
AND GREATER NORTH SEA 1 100 over the last 10 years. 200 The abundance of marine fish and the e • Over the long term 27% of species 100 composition of marine communities showed strong or moderate have been influenced by commercial 0 decreases and 64% showed strong 1 1 0 2000 2010 2017 n icator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals fishing and climate change. Over or moderate increases; 9% showed the long-term period for which little change. data are available (1980s to 2017), Data for pelagic fish species that live increases are evident as a result of Change in average species’ abundance – in the water column (e.g. Herring, warming sea temperatures which Celtic Seas demersal fish Blue Whiting and Mackerel) indicate have enabled a large proportion of u a e ator (11 species) increases in average abundance in smaller-bodied pelagic fish species 00 both the Celtic and the Greater North (e.g. Sardine and Sprat) to increase Seas over the same period. Groundfish 00 in abundance4. Through the 1980s surveys are less reliable for schooling and 90s fishing pressure led to 1 5 100 200 pelagic species and therefore the declines in a number of larger-bodied e direction of trend is more appropriate 100 species such as Cod5 (page 59). to report than the average magnitude 0 of change. Over the last 10 years, however, 1 5 1 0 2000 2010 201 improved fisheries management n icator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals has allowed some commercially fished species to increase from very low baselines.
Photo: Hans-Petter Fjeld Cod 52 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Marine key findings Climate change Fishing Other
BREEDING SEABIRDS The last comprehensive census was in UK Biodiversity Indicator: Breeding seabirds in the UK 1998–2002 and reported over 8 million u a e ator 1 species o ter S ort ter seabirds breeding in Great Britain and 1 2015 2010 2015 Ireland annually8. The latest census, 120 100%
Seabirds Count, is underway, and 100 0% will conduct a full survey of nearly 0 12,000 known breeding colonies. It 0% will provide a comprehensive update 1 100 0 on the status of all 25 seabird species 0% e e 0 of species Percentage breeding in the UK. In order to 20% dedicate time to the census, updates 20 of the annual Seabird Monitoring 0 0% Programme report have been put 1 1 0 2000 2010 2015 Strong increase Moderate increase on hold for two years, but the most n icator Little change o rce ncc go i 5 Moderate decrease recent update of the Seabird Indicator Strong decrease is presented here. showed moderate increases; 46% Regional differences are apparent Since 1986, the Breeding Seabird showed little change. Over the short for seabird populations, particularly Indicator for 13 species declined by term, between 2009 and 2014, 54% of those linked to the impact of climate 22% and by 6% between 2009 to 2014. species showed strong or moderate change and fisheries, and declines Between 1986 and 2015, 31% of decreases and 38% showed strong appear stronger in the Greater North species showed strong or moderate increases; 8% showed little change. Sea than the Celtic Seas and the decreases in abundance and 23% English Channel9,10,11,12.
MARINE MAMMALS Marine mammals, particularly Seals are easier to survey as they haul and in west Scotland (an area which cetaceans, are challenging to monitor, out on land to moult (Harbour Seal) holds over 20% of UK Harbour Seals). but our knowledge of their abundance or breed (Grey Seal) and consistent Elsewhere in the Celtic Seas there is and distribution is growing. Since monitoring has been carried out insufficient data to assess status. 1994, there have been three large- regularly for both species around The wide-ranging nature of these scale surveys to estimate cetacean UK coasts since at least the 1990s marine mammals means that abundance in European waters, and 1980s respectively15. Trends influences outside of the survey the most recent in 2016 yielding have been assessed between 1994 area may affect abundance and abundance estimates for nine and 2014 for the UK Marine Strategy distribution. Marked distributional cetacean species that regularly occur update16, which reports annual changes have been recorded in in UK waters. There is, however, only increases in Grey Seal numbers, but Harbour Porpoise; previously found sufficient data to calculate trends trends for Harbour Seals vary. Since primarily in the northern parts of the for three species in the North Sea 1994, Harbour Seal abundance has North Sea, the centre of their range (Harbour Porpoise, White-beaked decreased in colonies on the north has shifted southward14,16. Dolphin and Minke Whale). While and east coasts of Scotland but the areas surveyed are not wholly increased on the east coast of England consistent between surveys and confidence in trends is low, numbers Photo: Ben Andrew (rspb-images.com) of all three species appear to have Grey Seal remained stable13,14. For the other six species for which trends are not available, abundance estimates were similar to or larger than previous estimates for comparable areas. State of Nature Report 2019 53
PLANKTON – THE BASE Phytoplankton Colour Index, Abundance indicator for small and large OF THE FOOD WEB English Channel copepods in the northern North Sea
00 The base of the marine food web is 1 0 formed by widely varied groups of 250 1 0 1 0 organisms, including phytoplankton 200 (photosynthetic plant-like microscopic 120 150 100 (1980 = 100)
organisms) and zooplankton (animal 1 0 100 0 100 plankton including copepods e 0 e e and larvae of some commercially 50 0
20 important species of crabs and 0 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 0 lobsters), which are sensitive to 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 Indicator Smoothed trend Confidence intervals changes in nutrients, salinity Indicator Smoothed trend Confidence intervals and temperatures. a opepo s arge opepo s Similarly, in the English Channel the Plankton communities respond PCI is 95% higher in the last decade Abundance indicator for small and large rapidly to environmental changes, and 18% higher in the last five years. copepods in the English Channel making them a good indicator of change in marine ecosystems Changes in diatoms and dinoflagellates 1 0 although attributing observed change are associated with changes to 1 0 1 0 to specific drivers can be difficult. trophic pathways and differing roles 120 in the carbon cycle19. Increases in the Plankton communities are undergoing 100 directional change and trends in English Channel contrast with periods 1 0 100 0 of decrease and overall stability 0 plankton lifeforms (organisms with e the same functional traits, meaning in the northern North Sea. 0 that they occupy a similar niche or 20 Abundance indicator for diatoms and 0 feed in a similar way) imply change in 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 dinoflagellates in the northern North Sea 17 Indicator Smoothed trend Confidence intervals plankton community functioning . a opepo s arge opepo s 1 0 Changes in phytoplankton and 1 0 Over many decades, the abundance of zooplankton abundance vary by 1 0 planktonic larvae – for example, of fish sea area and by group. Data are 120 and crustaceans – has increased in available to calculate an indicator of 100
(1980 = 100) most areas associated with increasing phytoplankton biomass, using a proxy 0 0 temperatures. Although the total measurement of ocean colour from e 0 abundance of large copepods is the Phytoplankton Colour Index (PCI)18 20 more variable, the composition has and relative abundance indicators 0 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 changed to an increasing dominance for phytoplankton (total diatoms and Indicator Smoothed trend Confidence intervals of more temperate species as a result dinoflagellates) and for zooplankton Diatoms Dinoflagellates of climatic change, highlighting the (small and large copepods) since 1958. need to retain taxonomic resolution in Graphs on this page show examples Abundance indicator diatoms and total monitoring programmes to effectively of this variability, with contrasting dinoflagellates in the English Channel identify the drivers of change. patterns between the northern North 1 0
Sea and the English Channel. 1 0 RELATED DRIVER OF CHANGE 1 0 Phytoplankton Colour Index, 120 p54 Marine – Climate change Northern North Sea 100
1 0 100 0
00 0 e e
0 250 20
200 0 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017
150 Indicator Smoothed trend Confidence intervals 1 0 100 Diatoms Dinoflagellates 100 e e
50 Small copepods are key prey for larval 0 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2017 fish and tend to dominate the Indicator Smoothed trend Confidence intervals zooplankton in the southern and central North Sea and so are key Over the most recent decade the PCI trophic links in these areas. Declines for the northern North Sea is 67% in small copepods in the North Sea higher than in the 1960s, and over the have been linked to changes in last five years is 29% higher than the primary productivity20. mid to late 2000s. Marine
CLIMATE CHANGE AND OCEAN ACIDIFICATION
Our seas are shaped by complex and interacting climatic factors as a result of human activity and the large oceanographic climatic systems which occur in the marine environment over decadal cycles. Our understanding of specific mechanisms continues to improve and there is clear evidence that climate change is causing rising temperatures which are affecting currents, mixing and salinity as well as increased acidification of the seas. Marine ecosystems are consequently impacted through direct and indirect effects on the distribution and abundance of species groups, including plankton, fish, seabirds and marine mammals, as well as on entire habitats – from the intertidal zone to the deepest parts of the seas.
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE Eight of the 10 warmest Ocean processes have been Building resilience in years for UK sea surface affected and large‑scale marine systems will temperature have shifts in distribution help mitigate the effects occurred since 2002. revealed throughout of climate change on
2.0 the marine food web. vulnerable species. 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 -0.5 -1.0 -1.5 -2.0 ffere e fro fro ffere e -2.5
Photo: Ernie Janes (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 55
The impacts of climate change Time series of average annual sea surface temperatures in °C for UK coastal waters, 2 outlined earlier in this report expressed as anomalies relative to the 1981 to 2010 average focused on terrestrial species 2 0 and habitats. All elements 1 5 of the marine ecosystem are 1 0 highly interconnected and 0 5 climate change causes knock-on 0 0 effects from primary producers 0 5 through the food web to 1 0
1 5 predators and even habitats. fro ffere e 2 0
2 5 ENVIRONMENTAL 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 nn a a e 10 ear r nning ean CHANGES
Understanding how the temperature, has increased since the 1970s. of the 20th century, putting salinity and pH of our seas are Conversely, salinity in deep waters in increasing pressure on intertidal changing is critical, as they all play the same region decreased between habitats and increasing the risk of an important role in marine 1960 and 2000, remaining stable in severe flooding and coastal erosion5. 3 ecosystem functioning. more recent years . • Seasonal stratification, which • Long-term records show a warming • Acidification, caused by the uptake restricts the extent of mixing trend in UK waters, despite short- of CO2, has reduced the pH of waters between shallow, warmer waters and term natural variability. On average, around Europe, apparently more deeper, cooler waters, is occurring coastal sea surface temperatures rapidly so in UK waters than in the earlier on average and lasting have been 0.6°C warmer in the most North Atlantic as a whole. This has longer6. Stratification influences recent decade compared to the the potential to adversely affect plankton growth rates, bloom 1961–1990 average1. organisms that require calcium timing and species composition carbonate. Acidification is also and distribution, so changes to the The blue bars show the annual of particular concern as it could timing and strength of mixing have anomalies relative to the 1981–2010 further reduce the rate at which CO impacts on the distribution and average, shown as the grey horizontal 2 is absorbed from the atmosphere, abundance of marine animals that line, and the blue line shows the thus aggravating climate change4. depend on plankton for their food. 10-year running mean. • On average, the sea level has • The salinity of surface waters risen by 16cm since the start to the north and west of the UK
Photo: Nick Upton (rspb-images.com) 56 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Marine key findings Climate change Fishing Other
RESPONSES THROUGH Colder-water species, Calanus fish species through availability of finmarchicus, moving polewards food to larval stages of fish23. Impacts THE FOOD WEB of climate change on Cod recruitment via plankton may explain the apparent slow recovery from overfishing and PHYTOPLANKTON underline that despite recovery in fish Phytoplankton are at the base of the stocks, future fisheries management marine food web. Phytoplankton needs to consider climate effects growth and production can be on stock productivity. affected by various factors, including Being replaced by warmer-water nutrient availability, temperature and TOP PREDATORS species, Calanus helgolandicus, light levels. Phytoplankton biomass, moving northwards Species at the top of the food web, as presented in the PCI7 (page 53), such as large fish, seabirds and has been used as a proxy for primary marine mammals, are susceptible to production in a number of studies8,9. the changes in distribution and timing Long-term increases in phytoplankton of seasonal events for plankton and biomass of 21% and 13% have been fish species they rely on for food. reported in the coastal and open Sandeels are an important trophic North Sea, respectively, between the link in the food web, being a key prey 1980s and early 2000s8. More recently species for these predators. There however, estimates of primary FISH is now good evidence that declines production in the North Sea indicate in the abundance and nutritional a declining trend as well as changes Marine fish populations have been quality of Sandeels has reduced the in species composition and timing influenced by commercial fishing, and breeding success and populations of seasonal events, with knock-on in addition, climate change has led of seabirds such as Kittiwake24,25,26,27. 16,17 effects on zooplankton abundance to distributional changes at rates The cascade of mechanisms are and fish recruitment9. up to three times faster than those still being investigated but include 18 detected for terrestrial species . the impact of fishing on Sandeel ZOOPLANKTON A large part of the increase in populations as well as increasing abundance of fish species described in Copepods (small planktonic sea surface temperature, the timing this report has been due to improved and strength of ocean stratification, crustaceans) make up a large fisheries management, allowing some proportion of the zooplankton and in mismatch in reproductive commercially fished species to recover timings with availability of prey28. biomass and play a key role in from low baselines. At the same time, converting energy from primary 70% of the demersal species studied Photo: Clement Bardot producers up the food web. around the UK have responded Warming temperatures have driven to warming sea temperatures by northward shifts in the distribution of changes in abundance across their zooplankton in the North East Atlantic, distribution19. Specifically, this has from the 1960s to the late 1980s, led to increases in the populations bringing smaller warm-water copepod of smaller-bodied, non-commercial 10,11 species into UK waters . species, such as Boarfish in the Celtic An example of this has been the Seas20,21. For pelagic fish, there is northward shift in the relative evidence of community change from proportions of two closely related cold-water assemblages (Herring and copepod species, the cold-water Sprat) in the 1960s–80s to warmer- Calanus finmarchicus and the warmer- water assemblages (Mackerel, water relative C. helgolandicus (see Sardine and Anchovy) from the 1990s map on this page). The implications of onwards, although changes in the these shifts are widespread, not least distribution of prey, also affected by because of changes to community climate change, may have played a composition but also because role as well21,22,17. seasonal patterns of production and Disentangling the drivers of change in overall abundance vary between the marine environment is complex. these species. This has consequences The impact of warming seas varies for predators of plankton, including geographically and by species, and 12 fish , which in turn can impact on by interactions between species. species at higher trophic levels, such The mismatch of the timing of life 13,14,15 as seabirds . history events between predators and prey has the potential to impact
Boarfish State of Nature Report 2019 57
Deep-diving seabirds such as RESPONSE and animals, and store carbon that Guillemot and Puffin have also been otherwise would be released into the adversely affected, with declines seen FOR NATURE atmosphere and contribute to climate at colonies around the North Sea27, change effects. most conspicuously in the Northern Alongside overarching policies, Managing vulnerable habitats Isles28. Surface feeding seabirds, or commitments and action to species that depend on them, such as Saltmarsh: over 45,000ha of minimise climate change impacts terns, Kittiwakes and Arctic Skuas, are saltmarsh around the UK coast (by reducing CO2 emissions to limit likely to be more sensitive to changes delivers the natural benefits of carbon temperature rise to no more than to prey as a result of increasing sequestration and coastal protection, 1.5°C) the focus has been to seek sea surface temperatures. Indeed, and supports a wide variety of species. to build natural resilience in marine southerly colonies in Europe have However, saltmarsh is threatened ecosystems through: already been abandoned or show by sea-level rise. Site-based • Protecting and recovering sites, substantial declines29. adaptive management plans include habitats and species. interventions such as managed The impact of climate change on • Creating a well-managed network realignment to enhance resilience34. marine mammals remains poorly of habitats to aid the movement of understood30. Changes most likely Maerl beds: calcareous red seaweeds species affected by climate change. to be detected will be shifts in that form maerl beds, providing • Reducing the impact of distribution of species at the edge of homes for diverse communities other pressures such as their range as water warms. Species of plants and animals. They are unsustainable fishing32. such as the Striped Dolphin may vulnerable to changes in pH, affecting extend their range polewards into To achieve these things the UK skeleton formation, and changes in UK waters, while the more northerly Government has supported the work temperature affecting growth and distributed White-beaked Dolphin may of the UK Marine Climate Change reproduction. Reducing harm from increasingly shift out of UK waters31. Impacts Partnership (MCCIP), which bottom trawling and reducing impacts includes scientists, government, from freshwater run-off will improve agencies and NGOs, to provide advice their resilience35. on climate change impacts and a Horse mussel beds: large, long-lived sound evidence base on which to build and slow-growing bivalve mussels climate change adaptation plans. can build up over time to create The MCCIP has published a series structurally complex reefs sustaining of report cards33 on how to manage communities of barnacles, scallops protected species or habitats known and crabs. As they are very slow to to be vulnerable to climate change recover after disturbance, reducing impacts. Conservation of these or removing human pressures species and habitats will support is the most effective method marine communities, or plants of increasing resilience36.
Photo: Kevin Sawford (rspb-images.com) Kittiwake Marine
FISHERIES
Fish populations are complex and precious resources: they are of immense value to the fishing industry and provide food and employment for many people, but they are also an integral part of the marine food web and are vital for the survival of many other species, including seabirds, seals and cetaceans. As well as directly affecting fish populations, fishing activities have wider impacts on marine species and habitats, including physical damage to the seabed caused by bottom contacting fishing gear and bycatch of seabirds and marine mammals. Bycatch also includes non‑target fish species, which in turn introduces the issue of discarding unwanted catch at sea. In recognition of this, restrictions on fishing practices, effort and equipment use are set, ideally based on scientific evidence, to reduce the environmental damage caused by fishing. Good monitoring information must be available to ensure that decision-making is underpinned by a sound evidence base and takes due account of the trends and status of the marine ecosystem as a whole. Ecosystem-based fisheries management is therefore fundamental to securing the urgent and necessary recovery of marine nature.
PRESSURE STATE RESPONSE Fishing activity – 33% of quota Demersal fish communities The UK has a commitment to managed fish stocks are are recovering from meet GES for fish and other harvested unsustainably. overexploitation in the past, marine wildlife and habitats but Good Environmental by 2020. Status (GES) has not yet been achieved in either the Greater North Sea or the Celtic Seas.
Photo: Chris Gomersall (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 59
Marine fish and shellfish SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES are harvested around the The UK also has a legal commitment to fish sustainably by 2020 and the UK, representing the most assessment of this relies on a measure of the maximum average long-term widespread direct human catch that can be taken from a population without reducing the ability of pressure in UK waters1. Fish that population to reproduce itself, termed the Maximum Sustainable Yield stocks of commercial interest (MSY). The official UK Government indicator shows that the percentage of fish stocks fished at or below levels considered to be capable of producing span international boundaries; MSY has increased from 7% in 1990 to 49% in 2017, down from a maximum currently nine nations operate of 54% in 2013, and 33% of quota managed fish stocks are still harvested fisheries in the Greater North unsustainably. The UK administration’s latest assessment of progress towards Sea2 and 14 in the Celtic Seas3. Good Environmental Status (GES) under the Marine Strategy Regulations5 When fish communities are confirmed GES will not be met by 2020 for fish, commercial fish and shellfish, heavily fished, the larger, and benthic habitats. more profitable fish are UK Biodiversity Indicator: Proportion of marine fish (quota) stocks of UK interest removed and the size-mix of harvested sustainably the fish stocks is changed. 100
Smaller, less commercially S valuable, less reproductive 0 individuals become more 0 dominant, affecting the structure and stability of the 0 ecosystem4. Our abundance indicators for marine fish 20
species, both pelagic and to F with respect exploited interest 0 demersal, show signs of of marine fish (quota) stocks UK Proportion 1 0 1 5 2000 2005 2010 2017 recovery from a history Proportion e o Proportion a o e Proportion n no n o rce ncc go i 2 of overexploitation.
SIZE COMPOSITION OF FISH COMMUNITIES Indicators of the size composition Further evidence for recovery, subsequently to 12% in 2017. Increases of fish communities reflect long- specifically in the North Sea, is shown in the indicator could be driven by an term impacts of fishing pressure. by the Large Fish Index. The average increase in a few large commercial fish One such indicator, the Typical Length percentage of large fish in a catch species7 and in future is likely to be Indicator6, reveals deterioration declined through the 1980s and 90s, affected by climate-related changes of the size structure of the fish to a low of 2% in 2001, but increased in species’ distributions8. communities in the North Sea and Celtic Seas between the 1980s and UK Biodiversity Indicator: Proportion of large fish (equal to or larger than 50cm), 2000s, such that these communities by weight, in the North Sea, 1983 to 2017 are now dominated by small-bodied 20 fish. Since 2010 this indicator varies spatially but demersal fish 15 and elasmobranch (shark and ray) communities have shown signs 10 of recovery and the pelagic fish
community shows fluctuating trends. (>= 50cm) fish large The indicator remains low compared 5 to the observed size structure in of at e t er e ta e the early 1980s, and is at record low 0 1 1 0 2000 2010 2017 levels for pelagic and demersal fish n icator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals in the south-eastern North Sea. Source: jncc.gov.uk/ukbi-D1a 60 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Marine key findings Climate change Fishing Other EXTENT OF PHYSICAL DAMAGE
The most widespread impacts on seafloor habitats occur as a result of frequent use of bottom contacting gear. Physical disturbance can affect seafloor habitats adversely, with shifts Percentage area (%) High disturbance (categories 5–9) in benthic community composition Low disturbance (categories 0–4) No habitat data being reported9. These shifts are driven Disturbance levels by the replacement of larger, long- 0 Low disturbance 1 lived, slow-reproducing species with 2 3 small, fast-growing species. 4
5 In the absence of long-term 6 7 monitoring datasets to assess the 8 9 High disturbance status of marine seafloor species directly, a modelled approach GSHHG world shore line – Available under GNU Lesser General Public License combining habitat sensitivity with at www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/shorelines/gshhs.html. impacts from fishing vessels over 12m in length using bottom contacting Between 2010 and 2015, the most recent assessment indicates that pressure gear has been used to produce a and disturbance caused by fishing activities are widespread within UK waters, 10 disturbance map (see opposite) . occurring to some degree in 57% of the cells. High-disturbance categories (5–9) In this way habitats may be classified accounted for 31% to 75% of the area of assessed UK sub-regional seas, the most as highly disturbed (categories 5–9), disturbed regions being the southern Celtic Seas and the English Channel. either because they are heavily fished or are highly sensitive. Photo: Laurie Campbell (rspb-images.com) The assessment does not take into account trawling activity prior to 2010 nor the current activity of smaller vessels, so disturbance may be underestimated in some areas. Pressure is modelled evenly across each grid cell so smaller-scale spatial variation in fishing activity may not be represented accurately, which could have an effect on the estimate of overall disturbance.
BYCATCH AND ENTANGLEMENT Bycatch (the catching of non-target is assessed to be above precautionary Seabird bycatch hotspots have been species) can be a serious issue for thresholds in relation to population identified in areas around the UK some species. The most common size, suggesting “considerable where coastal gill nets and other interactions between cetaceans and conservation concern”19. Despite this, static fishing gear are used, and fishing gear in the UK involve small Grey Seal populations in the Celtic also in demersal longline fisheries cetaceans like Harbour Porpoise and Seas are increasing, thus suggesting off the west coast of Scotland11,12. Common Dolphin. It is estimated that wider population mixing between A risk assessment identified that the 1,500 small cetaceans and 400–600 Scottish populations than previously seabirds most sensitive to bycatch seals are caught as bycatch each thought18. Additional information include species of conservation year11,12,13, as well as an increasing on bycatch mortality of cetaceans concern, such as Puffins and Shags19. number of cases of Humpback and comes from strandings: around 800 Minke Whale entanglement off cetaceans strand around the UK coast Scotland from ropes to the surface every year, and between 1990 and from pots on the seabed14,15,16. 2017, 17% of Harbour Porpoise, 43% of Common Dolphin and 36% of Minke Annual bycatch mortality for Harbour Whale strandings were determined as Porpoise17, Grey Seal18 and Common being the result of bycatch16. Dolphin13 in the Celtic Seas and for Humpback Whales around Scotland15 State of Nature Report 2019 61
RESPONSE and especially gear modification SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES by introducing higher visibility While there have been improvements FOR NATURE netting (an innovation of one of the in the sustainability of fisheries over fishermen), has drastically reduced the last decade with North East the bycatch of auks but other areas Atlantic trends for fishing pressure REDUCING BYCATCH of concern have been identified24. declining and biomass increasing, The UK has international commitments DISCARD BAN these positive trends have been to reduce cetacean bycatch to as close challenged in recent years due to 20 to zero as possible and yet bycatch A fundamental change in fisheries a number of factors, including the of several species remain at levels of management has been to tackle the advent of the discard ban being considerable conservation concern. practice of discarding unwanted fish phased in during 2015–19. Urgent Current activities include coordinated at sea, in some regions accounting action was advised in the early 2000s stakeholder-led approaches to for up to 80% of a catch. Not only was to avoid the collapse of the Cod and identify practical, affordable, and this seen as an unacceptable waste associated fisheries and harm to the effective mitigation and monitoring of protein with potential economic marine environment32, and while methods are being developed. These impacts, but it had significant improvements have been made we include acoustic and light deterrents, unintended and negative impacts on are once again dealing with the near modifications to equipment to improve some fish stocks as well as distorting collapse of Cod stocks in the North selectivity and timed closures based marine food webs25 (which may have Sea33. It is clear more needs to be 16,21 on real-time monitoring data . included supporting increases in done to ensure all UK fish stocks are some discard-scavenging seabirds Currently between 0.5% and 5% of diverse, resilient and attain biomass such as Northern Fulmar). The UK fishing activity is monitored at levels that maintain full reproductive practice was widely condemned sea, which varies by activities16. capacity. Healthy stocks are vital for a and measures under the Common Observer programmes are the main resilient and profitable fishery and for Fisheries Policy introduced a discard source of monitoring data, but other wider marine health. ban for commercially harvested stocks data sources, including cameras, The UK has a commitment to meet which was phased in between 2015 acoustic and satellite options, Good Environmental Status (GES) for and 201926. could be used more effectively to fish and other marine wildlife and improve monitoring. However, serious concerns exist that habitats and the pressures impacting the ban is not being implemented and Where gill net vessels are equipped upon them by 2020. The recent enforced properly27,28 and that this with acoustic deterrents known as update of the UK Marine Strategy could result in overfishing, given levels “pingers”, bycatch rates of Harbour Part 1 concluded that GES had been of unaccounted mortality29. Evidence Porpoise in UK waters have been achieved for four pressures (e.g. of the continued practice of discarding much lower, with no clear evidence eutrophication and contaminants), despite the ban was provided by of habituation, reducing porpoise was partially achieved for underwater the DiscardLess project in 2018, bycatch by around 15%, to 1,468 noise and four components of stating that “…according to the 2017 individuals in 201421. biodiversity and was not achieved data reported to ICES (International for three pressures and three These problems have been known Council for the Exploration of the Sea), components of biodiversity (including for over 20 years, and conservation discards have remained high and both fish and commercial stocks). strategies are being developed for landings of undersized fish … have Sustainable fisheries management cetaceans in each of the UK countries remained negligible, even for the fish requires consideration of the broader and in 2018 Defra, with the support stocks already fully covered by the impacts on habitats, species and of the Devolved Administrations, landing obligation that year”30. commissioned Joint Nature trophic interactions, and while these Best practice avoidance measures to Conservation Committee (JNCC) to have started to be taken into account reduce the number of unwanted fish develop a UK Plan of Action (PoA) on through management measures, caught, alongside comprehensive Seabird Bycatch, in order to “deliver including through protected areas, remote electronic monitoring a coherent approach to understand progress is slow and often falls short with cameras, are vital to avoid and where necessary reduce seabird of the ideal. Monitoring and data overfishing. This will ensure the ban bycatch in UK fisheries”. The UK PoA, collection also remains poor, with 12% is implemented and will also improve 34 which is still a work in progress, of stocks being of unknown status , our understanding of the scale of is in accordance with UK and EU including nearly all elasmobranch the problem and provide accurate regulations22,23. Some best practice (shark and ray) stocks; understanding information on the health of fish already exists, e.g. in the Filey Bay of catches is poor due to low levels stocks in order to inform sustainable (Yorkshire) inshore gill-net fishery for of effective monitoring at sea. management and protection Sea Trout and Salmon, a combination of vulnerable species31. of a new by-law, regular monitoring, 62 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Marine key findings Climate change Fishing Other
PRESSURES ON (69%) had the highest plastics load was still observed in 7% of assessed with Scottish Islands the lowest, areas – mainly in south-eastern parts MARINE NATURE but still at 58%. of the North Sea and in some coastal waters of the Celtic Seas. Discharges POLLUTION: NOISE of chemicals from the oil and gas Fishing and climate change have the industry decreased by 40% between most widespread impacts on marine Since 2015, data exist on the levels 2009 and 201411. wildlife, but more localised effects of impulsive (short, sharp) sound come from a range of human activities from seismic surveys for oil and gas There are concerns about in the marine environment and these exploration, explosions and pile accumulation of persistent organic can be categorised into two main driving, as well as some naval sonar. pollutants in food webs; one particular categories: 1) pollution, including In parts of the northern North Sea group of chemicals, polychlorinated marine plastics as well as noise and seismic surveys may have occurred biphenyls (PCBs), have been reported contaminants, and 2) development, on 146 days in 20159. Such impulsive at toxicologically significant levels in including aggregate extraction, port noise may cause changes in the 40% of UK-stranded porpoises and activities and renewable energy behaviour of marine mammals, for shown to threaten long-term viability developments (e.g. windfarms). Our example by causing the temporary of Killer Whale populations. While understanding of the impact of many displacement of Harbour Porpoises10. other similar chemicals have declined of these pressures on populations is following international bans, PCBs limited. The spatial distribution and POLLUTION: CONTAMINANTS stopped declining in 1998. intensity of these activities is important AND EUTROPHICATION to consider in order to identify DEVELOPMENT: ENERGY hotspots which could be linked to Pintail potential environmental pressures.
POLLUTION: MARINE PLASTIC
Photo: Oliver Smart (rspb-images.com) Photo: Ray Kennedy (rspb-images.com) Eutrophication, which is caused by excessive amounts of nitrogen and Oil and gas production declined from Harbour Seal phosphorus entering the water, a peak in 1999 due to decreasing Photo: Mark Hamblin (rspb-images.com) results in algal blooms which can reserves12. In line with international impact on other organisms, deplete The issue of plastics in our seas targets to reduce climate change, oxygen in the sea and reduce overall has recently come to the fore and there has been a substantial increase water quality. Contamination of the United Nations Environment in renewable energy developments marine waters with a range of Programme has listed it as a critical in UK waters and offshore wind hazardous substances has reduced problem1. Incidents of entanglement now represents two-thirds of new in recent years and the worst point 13 and ingestion of plastics by marine installation energy capacity . There is sources of pollution have been animals have been widely reported2 increasing research into the cumulative addressed, including a marked and our understanding of the scale impact and long-term effects of reduction in the frequency of oil at which microplastics are found windfarm developments, with concerns spills. However, agricultural run-off in the oceans is growing3,4. One about collision risk for seabirds into marine habitats remains an issue long-running study of accumulated and displacement of seabirds and in some local areas and eutrophication 14,15 plastics in the stomachs of Fulmars, cetaceans from foraging grounds . a widespread seabird that forages exclusively at sea, goes some way to show trends in marine litter. In the 93% OF BEACHED EUTROPHICATION North Sea, 93% of beached Northern FULMARS IN THE NORTH WAS OBSERVED Fulmars investigated between 2010 and 2014 had ingested some plastic, SEA HAD INGESTED IN 7% OF with an average of 33 particles SOME PLASTIC, ASSESSED AREAS. 5 per bird . This is an increase from WITH AN AVERAGE OF fewer than 10 particles per bird in the 1970s and 80s6,7,8. The English 33 PARTICLES PER BIRD. Channel (68%) and East of England State of Nature Report 2019 63
RESPONSE areas and safety exclusions zones In response, voluntary management around offshore windfarms, are measures across c22km2 started in the FOR NATURE considered to provide a contribution early 2000s, and Lyme Bay Reefs are to the Scottish MPA network for now a 236km2 MPA and SAC. Bottom vulnerable marine ecosystems contact fishing was ended on the MARINE PROTECTED and specific species, Blue Ling and reef in 2011 and the area is managed AREA NETWORK Sandeels19. However, overall these in a collaboration between the local The UK has signed up to international areas would not make a sufficient fishing industry, conservationists and agreements to establish an contribution to making up the scientists to provide benefits for both 20 ecologically coherent network of shortfall in the MPA network . fishing and conservation. well managed Marine Protected The effectiveness of MPAs in European While the full recovery of marine Areas (MPAs) to protect and enhance waters is less well reported than for communities can take many years23,24, complex ecosystems and to ensure tropical systems, so the monitoring within three years positive responses sustainable use so that the marine of sites closed to human activity, like were seen for species’ richness, environment is safeguarded for Lyme Bay, described below, has been total abundance and community future generations to enjoy. seen as a key element in the evidence composition25. Recovery was also Since 2016, additional sites have been base to direct UK and European reported for three indicator species, designated, including five Special marine conservation management. including the habitat-forming bryozoan, Areas of Conservation (SACs) for Ross Coral, which plays a key role in Harbour Porpoise, and management CONSERVATION AND formation of the reef and is known to approaches have been adopted in SUSTAINABLE FISHING provide the structurally complex habitat essential for juvenile fish26. many areas. As of May 2019, in total, Lyme Bay has been noted as being the UK network consists of 355 MPAs an area of “high species richness The fishing community benefited from which encompass 25% of UK waters16. that includes rare and threatened increased income from selling catches species”21, with high-biodiversity reefs However, management measures under a “Reserve Seafood” label, formed of mudstone, limestone and have been documented in 60% of and increased catches of crabs and chalk. Key species include the Pink Sea MPAs but only fully implemented in scallops, both of which are associated Fan, Ross Coral and the commercially 10% of sites17. In Scotland, 27 MPAs with the protected reef habitat. This is fished Great Scallop. have specific fisheries measures particularly noteworthy for scallops, landings of which have decreased in place and are being developed There has been concern for many over the same period elsewhere with the fishing industry and other years about effects of bottom-towed in the UK27. stakeholders for a further 12 MPAs18. fishing gear on these habitats and Other area-based measures, including the long-term impact on the long- voluntary reserves, restricted fisheries lived, slow-growing reef species21,22.
Photo: Matthieu Sontag UK countries
ENGLAND
England’s landscapes have been modified by human activity for millennia. Ever since the clearance of the “wildwood”, its associated habitats and eradication of megafauna, biodiversity has undergone major changes. Few, if any, English habitats can be described as truly “wild”; however, human activity has modified and created the semi-natural habitats on which much of the current fauna and flora depend. Major changes to the landscape have happened through history; for example, the drainage of Fenland started in the 17th century. Through the 20th century the intensification of agriculture has led to loss and fragmentation of semi-natural habitats. Despite this, England still contains a range of internationally important habitats, such as its lowland heathland, ancient woodland and chalk grasslands in the south, the blanket bogs along the Pennines, the coastal estuaries and saltmarshes that provide vital foraging habitat for wintering waterbirds, and the sea cliffs and offshore islands that support internationally important numbers of breeding seabirds.
KEY FINDINGS 1% 5% 35% 46% 13% decline in average decline in average of species have of species show of species are species’ abundance. species’ distribution. decreased in abundance. strong changes. threatened. Our indicator of average Our indicator of average More species have shown England’s wildlife is Of 7,615 species in species’ abundance in species’ distribution in strong or moderate undergoing rapid change; England that have England of 241 terrestrial England, covering 5,942 decreases in abundance the proportion of species been assessed using and freshwater species terrestrial and freshwater (35%) than increases defined as showing strong IUCN Regional Red List (mainly birds) shows species over a broad (31%) since 1970; likewise changes in abundance, criteria, 13% have been little change since 1970; range of taxonomic more species have either increasing or classified as threatened however, butterflies groups, has fallen by 5% decreased in distribution decreasing, rose from with extinction from show significant declines since 1970, and is 1% (31%) than increased 38% over the long term to Great Britain. in abundance, while lower than in 2005. (24%) since 1970. 46% over the short term. the indicators for birds and mammals show significant increases.
Photo: Andrew Mason (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 65
COMBINED ABUNDANCE INDICATOR BASED ON ENGLAND-SPECIFIC TRENDS FOR BIRDS (171 SPECIES), BUTTERFLIES (55 SPECIES) AND MAMMALS (15 SPECIES) It is not appropriate to compare indicator trends between countries as data from different taxonomic groups have been used.
a a u a e ator (241 species) o ter S ort ter on the magnitude of population 1 70 201 200 201 All (241) All (238) change, over the long and the 120 100% short‑term periods.
100 0% • Over the long term, 35% of species showed strong or moderate declines 0 0% and 31% showed strong or moderate 1 70 100 0 increases; 34% showed little change. 0% e e 0 of species Percentage • Over the short term, 46% of species
20% showed strong or moderate declines 20 and 29% showed strong or moderate 0 0% increases; 25% showed little change. 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 Strong increase Moderate increase • Over the long term, 38% of species Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Little change Moderate decrease showed a strong change in Strong decrease abundance (either increase or decrease). Over the short term The abundance indicator for 241 The white line with shading shows this rose to 46% of species. terrestrial and freshwater species, the smoothed trend and associated for which England-specific data 95% CI, the blue line shows the Using a different, binary are available, shows a statistically underlying unsmoothed indicator. categorisation of species with non-significant decline in average The bar chart shows the percentage positive and negative trends: abundance of 1% (95% CI -7% to of species within the indicator • Over the long term, 51% of species +4%) between 1970 and 2016. Over that have increased, decreased showed negative trends and 49% this long-term period the smoothed (moderately or strongly) or shown showed positive trends; over the indicator fell by 0.03% per year. Over little change in abundance. short term, 59% of species showed our short-term period, the decline Within multispecies indicators like negative trends and 41% showed was a statistically non-significant these there is substantial variation positive trends. 3%, a rate of 0.29% per year. between individual species’ trends. There was, however, no significant To examine this, we have allocated difference in the rate of change species into trend categories based between the long and the short term.
ENGLAND-SPECIFIC TRENDS IN ABUNDANCE FOR BIRDS, BUTTERFLIES AND MAMMALS
a rou a u a e ator • The abundance indicator for 1 0 55 butterfly species starts in 1976 1 0 and overall shows a statistically
120 significant decline in average
100 abundance of 23% (CI -39% to -6%).
1 70 100 0 Over the short term, the indicator
0 was 15% lower in 2016 compared e e to 2006. 0
20 • The abundance indicator for 0 15 mammal species starts in 1998 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 and overall shows a statistically Birds (171) Butterflies (55) Mammals (15) significant increase in average Unsmoothed indicator abundance of 21% (CI +17% to Based on smoothed trends created was 2% higher in 2016 compared to +25%). Over the short term, the using England-specific data: 2006. The increase in this indicator indicator was 2% higher in 2016 • The abundance indicator for 171 bird is driven by the recovery of species compared to 2006. species starts in 1970 and overall from very low numbers, conservation shows a statistically significant successes and colonising species, increase in average abundance as well as increasing numbers of 23% (CI +18% to +28%). Over of wintering waterbirds. the short term, the indicator 66 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
England Northern Ireland Scotland Wales
CHANGE IN SPECIES’ DISTRIBUTION IN ENGLAND
a o u a ator 5 2 species o ter S ort ter The occupancy indicator for 5,942 1 70 2015 2005 2015 terrestrial and freshwater species, 5 2 5 2 120 100% for which England-specific trends are 100 available, shows a decline in average 0% distribution of 5% between 1970 and 0 2015. In 2015 the indicator was 1% 0% lower than in 2005. Because species 1 70 100 0 0% tend to decline in abundance before e 0 of species Percentage they disappear from a site, this change 20% of 5% could reflect more severe 20 underlying abundance declines that 0 0% 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 Strong increase we are currently unable to quantify. Moderate increase n icator 0% cre i e inter a s Little change The bar chart shows the percentage of Moderate decrease Strong decrease species within the indicator that have increased, decreased (moderately strong or moderate increases; or decrease). Over the short term or strongly) or shown little change 45% showed little change. this rose to 45% of species. in distribution (measured as the proportion of occupied sites). • Over the short term, 39% of species Using a different, binary categorisation: showed strong or moderate • Over the long term, 57% of species To examine the variation in species’ decreases and 32% showed strong showed negative trends and 43% distribution trends, we allocated or moderate increases; 28% showed showed positive trends; over the trends into categories based on the little change. magnitude of distribution change. short term, 57% of species showed • Over the long term, 23% of negative trends and 43% showed • Over the long term, 31% of species species showed a strong change positive trends. showed strong or moderate in distribution (either increase decreases and 24% showed
NATIONAL RED LIST ASSESSMENTS FOR ENGLAND ENGLAND-SPECIFIC IUCN RED LIST ASSESSMENTS Here we break down the IUCN Red List assessments for Great Britain to show how the proportion of threatened species, based on the number assessed, varies In order to maximise comparability by broad taxonomic group in England. The bars show the percentage of assessed between taxonomic groups and species falling into each of the IUCN Red List categories. Species assessed as countries, this report focuses on IUCN Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable are formally classified as Red List assessments undertaken at threatened and therefore at risk of extinction. a Great Britain or whole Ireland level; Percentage of species threatened = (CR + EN + VU)/(total number assessed – DD – RE). however, several taxonomic groups The number of species assessed is shown in brackets. have been assessed for extinction risk just within England. These show that: ere n ang ere e ar e as t o n ner e ata n erte rates 11 tinct or egiona r itic a • Out of 1,859 vascular plant taxa ere n ang ere e a e rea
nt ficie nt assessed, 36 have been classed as rn ce rn
erte rates 277 te ne extinct and a further 370 (21%) of
ngi extant species, for which sufficient 1 2 an ic ens data are available, are formally
P ants 2 2 classified as threatened and therefore at risk of extinction
ota 7 15 from England.
0% 25% 50% 75% 100% • Out of 48 extant terrestrial mammals er e ta e of e e assessed, for which sufficient data are available, 12 (27%) are Of the 7,615 species found in England Of the extant terrestrial and formally classified as threatened that have been assessed against freshwater species found in England, and therefore at risk of extinction the IUCN Regional Red List criteria, assessed using IUCN Regional Red List from England. 971 (13%) of the extant species, criteria, 330 plants (15%), 154 fungi for which sufficient data are available, and lichens (12%), 105 vertebrates are formally classified as threatened (40%) and 382 invertebrates (11%) are and therefore at risk of extinction classified as being at risk of extinction from Great Britain (the scale at which from Great Britain. Red List assessments are made). State of Nature Report 2019 67
PRESSURES AND RESPONSES Nature continues to be under can benefit priority farmland birds5 There are many landscape-scale pressure in England. Intensive and have knock-on benefits for certain initiatives active in England, funded management of agricultural land, wildlife groups; however, their impacts by NGOs, government agencies largely driven by policies and on other species remain unclear6,7. or through other sources, like the incentives since WW2, has been In 2017, the total area of land in all National Lottery Heritage Fund. identified as the most significant higher-level or targeted AES was Examples include the Great Fen, factor driving species’ population 1.4 million ha, which represents an a 50-year vision to link two fenland change in the UK1. As agricultural land increase of 20% over the last decade3. reserves in Cambridgeshire; Moors constitutes 69% of England’s area2, However, in order to offset ongoing for the Future, which aims to restore these changes have had a major declines in the UK Government’s and conserve upland habitats in the detrimental impact on its biodiversity. Farmland Bird Indicator (FBI), it has Peak District and South Pennines; By 2017, the England farmland bird been estimated that 26–33% of FBI regional forest projects; and the index had fallen 55% below its 1970 populations would need to be subject Wallasea Island Wild Coast Project, level, while farmland butterflies to AES-type management5. the UK's largest-ever coastal wetland have declined by 10% on average restoration project. An ambitious The creation of the EU’s LIFE since 19903. collaborative project Back from the programme brought benefits to Brink was launched in 2017 and Just 9% of England is wooded. This England’s wildlife; for example, the aims to save 20 of England’s most represents a 45% increase since 1945, major wetland habitat creation, threatened species from extinction but most of this expansion has been restoration and management and help a further 200. through the planting of non-native undertaken through two LIFE projects conifers4. Our woodland wildlife is saw Bitterns increase from 11 Defra launched its 25-year under pressure. In 2016, the breeding booming males in 1997 to 181 in 2018. Environment Plan in 20188. This sets woodland bird indicator for England This habitat creation also benefited out the government’s ambitions was 24% lower than in 1970, while the colonising wetland species, including to help the natural world regain indicator for woodland butterflies has invertebrates such as the Fen and retain good health in England, fallen by 58% since 19903. Wainscot and Marsh Mallow moths, including the creation or restoration as well as wildlife more generally. The of 500,000ha of wildlife-rich habitat Agri-environment schemes (AES) Seabird Recovery LIFE Project in the outside the protected site network. represent the main policy mechanism Isles of Scilly has recently successfully for reversing widespread declines of eradicated rats from St Agnes, and farmland wildlife. Research has shown both Manx Shearwater and European that a targeted approach, such as the Storm-petrel have once again bred Higher Level Stewardship scheme successfully on the island. (active between 2005 and 2015),
Photo: Michael Harvey (rspb-images.com) UK countries
NORTHERN IRELAND
Northern Ireland’s landscape is dominated by agricultural land, which makes up around 75% of the total area1. This farmed environment is criss-crossed with a range of special habitats resulting from the wet and mild climate. There are internationally significant areas of blanket bog and large inland and coastal water bodies, including Lough Neagh, the largest freshwater lake in the British Isles, which supports around 100,000 wintering waterbirds, and myriad lakes, fens and raised bogs. Northern Ireland holds species found nowhere else in the UK, including the Irish Hare, Irish Damselfly, Irish Whitebeam, Cryptic Wood White and Pollan. With 650km of coastline, the sea loughs, estuaries and marine environment are a significant component of Northern Ireland’s biodiversity.
KEY FINDINGS 66% 38% 43% 11% increase in average species’ decline in average species’ decline in average species’ of species are threatened. abundance of breeding birds. abundance of wintering abundance of butterflies. Of 2,450 species in Northern waterbirds. Our indicator of average species’ Our indicator of average species’ Ireland that have been assessed abundance in Northern Ireland Our indicator of average species’ abundance in Northern Ireland of using IUCN Regional Red List of 41 breeding bird species has abundance in Northern Ireland nine butterfly species has fallen criteria, 11% have been classified increased by 66% since 1994. of 36 wintering waterbird species by 43% since 2006. as threatened with extinction has fallen by 38% since 1988. from Ireland as a whole.
Photo: Andy Hay (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 69
NORTHERN IRELAND-SPECIFIC TRENDS IN ABUNDANCE FOR BREEDING BIRDS, WINTERING WATERBIRDS, BUTTERFLIES AND MAMMALS Due to poor taxonomic coverage of • The abundance indicator for 41 a statistically significant decline available data, a single combined breeding bird species starts in 1994 in average abundance of 38% abundance indicator was not created and overall shows a statistically (CI -44% to -33%). Over the short for Northern Ireland; however, significant increase in average term, the indicator was 27% lower smoothed abundance indicators were abundance of 66% (95% CI -45% in 2016 compared to 2006. calculated for four separate species to +87%). Over the short term, the • The abundance indicator for nine groups. These were created using indicator shows little change in butterfly species starts in 2006 Northern Ireland-specific data for all average abundance, being 1% lower. and overall shows a statistically species, except for three of the four • The abundance indicator significant decline in average bat species which used published for 36 wintering waterbirds species abundance of 43% (CI -67% to -20%). trends for all Ireland. starts in 1988 and overall shows • The abundance indicator for five
Nort er re a rou a u a e ator mammal species (four bat species
200 and Rabbit) starts in 1998 and overall
1 0 shows a statistically significant 1 0 increase in average abundance of 1 0 91% (CI +71% to +111%). Over the 120 short term, the indicator was 30% 1 100 100 higher in 2016 compared to 2006. 0 e e 0
0
20 0 1 1995 2000 2005 2010 201
Wintering waterbirds (36) Breeding birds (41) Butterflies (9) Mammals (5) Unsmoothed indicator
No occupancy-based indicator is currently available for Northern Ireland.
Photo: David Wootton (rspb-images.com) 70 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
England Northern Ireland Scotland Wales
NATIONAL RED LIST ASSESSMENTS FOR NORTHERN IRELAND Here we break down the IUCN Red List assessments for the whole of Ireland to show Of the 2,450 species found in how the proportion of threatened species, based on the number of assessed, varies Northern Ireland that have been by broad taxonomic group in Northern Ireland. The bars show the percentage of assessed using the IUCN Regional Red assessed species falling into each of the IUCN Red List categories. Species assessed List criteria, 272 (11%) of the extant as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable are formally classified as species, for which sufficient data are threatened and therefore at risk of extinction. available, are formally classified as Percentage of species threatened = (CR + EN + VU)/(total number assessed – DD – RE). threatened and therefore at risk of The number of species assessed is shown in brackets. extinction from Ireland as a whole (the scale at which Red List assessments ere n ang ere e ar e as t o n ner e ata tinct or egiona r are made). n erte rates 1 itic a ere n ang ere e a e rea Of the extant terrestrial and freshwater nt ficie nt rn ce rn
erte rates 51 te ne species found in Northern Ireland, assessed using IUCN Regional P ants 1 Red List criteria, 140 plants (10%), 11 vertebrates (22%) and 121 ota 2 50 invertebrates (14%) are classified as 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% being at risk of extinction from Ireland er e ta e of e e as a whole.
BIRDS OF CONSERVATION CONCERN IN IRELAND There has also been an all-Ireland in population and range, population List. The number of Red-listed species bird assessment, which means that size, localisation and international increased by 12 and Amber-listed Northern Ireland’s birds have been importance, as well as global and species by five since the previous assessed alongside those of the European status. Species are placed review in 2007. New additions to the Republic of Ireland. The most recent on the Green, Amber or Red List, last Red List include six duck species, Birds of Conservation Concern in indicating an increasing level of as well as a suite of passerines Ireland 2014–20192 uses different conservation concern. that have undergone population criteria from the IUCN Red List, declines and/or range contractions. Of the 185 species assessed in an assessing each species that breeds Populations of breeding waders all-Ireland context, 37 (20%) were or overwinters against a set of continue to decline and the long-term placed on the Red List, 90 (49%) on the objective criteria. These criteria future for these species is uncertain. Amber List and 58 (31%) on the Green include historical decline, trends
Photo: Andy Hay (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 71
PRESSURES AND RESPONSES The dominance of farmland within affecting heathland4. Northern diversity on moorland or grassland the Northern Ireland landscape Ireland is one of the least forested habitats10, but positive effects for some means its biodiversity is particularly regions in Europe and much of mammals11. Targeted prescriptions, vulnerable to change in agricultural what does exist (4.3% of land area) through the Countryside Management management. Over recent decades is made up of plantations of non- Scheme, have been shown to have there has been a large-scale move native Sitka Spruce. These have often a positive effect for some priority away from mixed farming to a been planted in unsuitable areas, farmland birds12. predominantly pastoral system, such as on blanket bog or in sensitive Northern Ireland holds several leading to the loss of semi-natural river catchments, and have had a important seabird colonies. Rathlin habitats, overwintering stubbles detrimental impact on important Island is the largest; however, and hedgerows1,3. More than 40% biodiversity. Only 0.04% of the land biodiversity here is threatened by of Northern Ireland’s land area now area comprises ancient woodland4,7. invasive non-native mammals and comprises improved grassland4. Agricultural intensification, driven the island has been identified as one These changes have put pressure by UK and European policy, has been of the high-priority islands in the UK on the natural environment and its identified as the most significant for eradication of vertebrate INNS13. biodiversity and have led to pollution factor driving the decline in species’ issues. Northern Ireland produces Northern Ireland has no National populations across the UK8. 12% of the UK’s ammonia emissions, Parks but Areas of Special Scientific Agri‑environment schemes (AES) mostly from agriculture, while only Interest (ASSIs) cover 7% of its total represent the main policy mechanism representing 6% of the land area, area; this figure incorporates Lough to turn around losses of farmland and has the greatest percentage of Neagh (395km2). Data published wildlife. Since 2018 there has been nitrogen-sensitive habitats exceeding by the Department of Agriculture, an increase of nearly 30,000ha in critical ammonia levels for both lower Environment and Rural Affairs higher-level AES in the country with and higher plants5. Large areas, (DAERA) show recent declines in both the launch of the new Environmental particularly in County Armagh and ASSI condition and the proportion Farming Scheme. Prior to this data County Down, suffer from excessive of protected terrestrial area under shows that only 5,000ha were in a levels of nitrogen pollution6 and less favourable management14. Within higher-level AES in 2017 representing than one-third of monitored river the marine environment, the total a 90% decline over the last 10 years9. water bodies in Northern Ireland were Marine Protected Area increased Studies have shown mixed results on at or above a good standard in 20151. from 269km2 in 2009/10 to 2,566km2 the impact of AES on biodiversity in in 2016/17. Management plans for Away from agricultural land, bogs Northern Ireland. Assessments of the the Northern Ireland MPA network are damaged by peat cutting and Environmentally Sensitive Areas scheme are being developed through the heavy grazing, with the latter also identified no benefits for the botanical EU funded Marine Protected Area Management and Monitoring
Photo: Andy Hay (rspb-images.com) (MarPAMM) project to bring these sites into favourable condition14, Puffin as only 4.48% of MPAs in Northern Ireland are currently considered to be under favourable management15. Conservation management plans are being produced for the Special Areas of Conservation network funded through the Northern Ireland Rural Development Programme and DAERA’s Environment Fund, and by NIEA. Two large EU-funded Interreg projects – Co-operation Across Borders for Biodiversity and Collaborative Action for the Natura Network were launched in 2017. Together these aim to produce 25 conservation action plans for designated sites, restore over 4,500ha of blanket bog and save threatened species including Curlew, Hen Harrier, Irish Damselfly, Marsh Fritillary and White-clawed Crayfish. UK countries
SCOTLAND
Scotland holds some of the most diverse landscapes in the UK. From the remote montane habitats of the UK’s highest peaks and the extensive expanses of blanket bog and upland heath to the West Atlantic oakwoods, Caledonian pine forests, lochs, coasts and seas, Scotland supports a wide variety of wildlife. The landscapes hold species found nowhere else in the UK, including the Wild Cat, Capercaillie and the endemic Scottish Primrose, Northern February Red Stonefly and Scottish Crossbill1. The marine environment is a critical component of Scotland’s natural history. The area within 12 nautical miles of the coast is greater than its total land area1. The deep seas around Scotland host the UK’s only underwater mountains, known as seamounts. Scotland is also recognised as being of international importance for its breeding seabird colonies2 and marine mammals1.
KEY FINDINGS 24% 14% 49% 62% 11% decline in the average decline in average of species have of species show of species are species’ abundance. species’ distribution. decreased in abundance. strong changes. threatened. Our indicator of average Our indicator of average More species have shown Scotland’s wildlife is Of 6,413 species in species’ abundance in species’ distribution in strong or moderate undergoing rapid change; Scotland that have Scotland of 352 terrestrial Scotland, covering 2,970 decreases in abundance the proportion of species been assessed using and freshwater species terrestrial and freshwater (49%) than increases defined as showing strong IUCN Regional Red List has fallen by 24% since species over a broad (28%) since 1994, likewise changes in abundance, criteria, 11% have been 1994. Moths show range of taxonomic more species have either increasing or classified as threatened significant declines in groups, has fallen by 14% decreased in distribution decreasing, rose from with extinction from abundance, while the since 1970, and is 2% (33%) than increased 45% over the long term to Great Britain. indicators for birds and lower than in 2005. (20%) since 1970. 62% over the short term. butterflies have remained broadly stable over time.
Photo: Mark Hamblin (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 73
SCOTLAND-SPECIFIC COMBINED ABUNDANCE INDICATOR BASED ON TRENDS OF MOTHS (175 SPECIES), BIRDS (143 SPECIES), BUTTERFLIES (25 SPECIES) AND MAMMALS (9 SPECIES) Due to poor taxonomic representation before the mid-1990s, the abundance indicator was created from 1994 onwards. It is not appropriate to compare between countries, as data from different taxonomic groups have been used.
S ot a a u a e ator (352 species) o ter S ort ter species into trend categories based on 1 201 200 201 All (352) All (344) the magnitude of population change, 1 0 100% over the long- and the short-term
120 periods. 0% 100 • Over the long term, 49% of species 0% 0 showed strong or moderate declines 1 100 and 28% showed strong or moderate 0 0%
e e increases; 24% showed little change.
0 of species Percentage 20% • Over the short term, 48% of species 20 showed strong or moderate declines 0 0 0% and 33% showed strong or moderate 1 2000 2010 201 Strong increase Moderate increase increases; 18% showed little change. Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Little change Moderate decrease • Over the long term, 45% of Strong decrease species showed a strong change The abundance indicator for 352 The white line with shading shows in abundance (either increase or terrestrial and freshwater species, the smoothed trend and associated decrease). Over the short term this for which Scotland-specific trends are 95% CI, the blue line shows the rose to 62% of species. available, shows a statistically significant underlying unsmoothed indicator. Using a different, binary decline in average abundance of 24% The bar chart shows the percentage categorisation of species with positive (95% CI -33% to -15%) between 1994 of species within the indicator and negative trends: and 2016. Over this long-term period that have increased, decreased • Over the long term, 60% of species the smoothed indicator fell by 1.2% (moderately or strongly) or shown showed negative trends and 40% per year. Over our short-term period, little change in abundance. showed positive trends; over the the decline was a statistically non- Within multispecies indicators like short term, 56% of species showed significant 12%, a rate of 1.3% per year. these there is substantial variation negative trends and 44% showed There was no significant difference in between individual species’ trends. positive trends. the rate of change between the long To examine this, we have allocated and the short term.
SCOTLAND-SPECIFIC TRENDS IN ABUNDANCE FOR BIRDS, MOTHS, BUTTERFLIES AND MAMMALS
S ot a rou a u a e ator • The abundance indicator for 200 25 butterfly species has been 1 0 broadly stable since 1979, with a 1 0 statistically non-significant increase 1 0 in average abundance of 9% 120
1 75 100 100 (CI -27% to +45%). Over the short
0 term, the indicator was 19% lower e e 0 in 2016 compared to 2006. 0 • The abundance indicator for nine 20 0 mammal species starts in 1998 1 75 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 and overall shows a statistically Birds (143) Moths (175) Butterflies (25) Mammals (9) significant decline in average Unsmoothed indicator abundance of 9% (CI -14% to -4%). Based on smoothed trends created • The abundance indicator for 143 bird Over the short term, the using Scotland-specific data: species starts in 1994 and has been indicator was 5% lower in 2016 • The abundance indicator for broadly stable with a statistically compared to 2006. 175 moth species starts in 1975 non-significant decline in average and overall shows a statistically abundance of 4% (CI -9% to 0%). significant decline in average Over the short term, the indicator abundance of 25% (CI -49% to -1%). was 7% lower in 2016 compared Over the short term, the indicator to 2006. was 10% lower in 2016 compared to 2006. 74 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
England Northern Ireland Scotland Wales
CHANGE IN SPECIES’ DISTRIBUTION IN SCOTLAND
The occupancy indicator for S ot a o u a ator 2 70 species o ter S ort ter 1 70 2015 2005 2015 2,970 terrestrial and freshwater 2 70 2 70 species, with Scotland-specific 120 100% data, shows a decline in average 100 0% distribution of 14% between 1970 0 and 2015. In 2015 the indicator was 0%
2% lower than in 2005. Because 1 70 100 0 species tend to decline in abundance 0% e e before they disappear from a site, this 0 of species Percentage 20% change of 14% could reflect larger 20 declines in underlying abundance that 0 0% we are currently unable to quantify. 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 Strong increase n icator 0% cre i e inter a s Moderate increase Little change The bar chart shows the percentage Moderate decrease of species within the indicator Strong decrease that have increased, decreased (moderately or strongly) or shown decreases and 20% showed strong in distribution (either increase no change in distribution (measured or moderate increases; 47% showed or decrease). Over the short term as the proportion of occupied sites), little change. this rose to 45% of species. based on set thresholds of change. • Over the short term, 37% of species Using a different, binary categorisation: showed strong or moderate To examine the variation in species’ • Over the long term, 62% of species decreases and 30% showed strong distribution trends, we allocated showed negative trends and 38% or moderate increases; 33% showed trends into categories based on the showed positive trends; over the little change. magnitude of distribution change. short term, 57% of species showed • Over the long term, 23% of • Over the long term, 33% of species negative trends and 43% showed species showed a strong change showed strong or moderate positive trends.
NATIONAL RED LIST ASSESSMENTS FOR SCOTLAND
Here we break down the IUCN Red List assessments for Great Britain to show Of the 6,413 species found in Scotland how the proportion of threatened species, based on the number of assessed, that have been assessed using the varies by broad taxonomic group in Scotland. The bars show the percentage of IUCN Regional Red List criteria, assessed species falling into each of the IUCN Red List categories. Species assessed 642 (11%) of the extant species, for as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable are formally classified as which sufficient data are available, threatened and therefore at risk of extinction. are formally classified as threatened Percentage of species threatened = (CR + EN + VU)/(total number assessed – DD – RE). and therefore at risk of extinction The number of species assessed is shown in brackets. from Great Britain (the scale at which Red List assessments are made). ere n ang ere e ar e as t o n ner e ata n erte rates 2 505 tinct or egiona r itic a Of the extant terrestrial and ere n ang ere e a e rea nt ficie nt
rn ce rn freshwater species found in Scotland,
erte rates 257 te ne assessed using modern IUCN Regional ngi 1 57 Red List criteria, 265 plants (13%), 153 an ic ens fungi and lichens (11%), 92 vertebrates
P ants 2 075 (37%) and 132 invertebrates (5%) are classified as being at risk of extinction ota 1 from Great Britain.
0% 25% 50% 75% 100% er e ta e of e e State of Nature Report 2019 75
PRESSURES AND RESPONSES Pressure on Scotland’s diverse stocks are showing signs of recovery. Caledonian forest remains today and landscapes has resulted in biodiversity Other pressures, such as those measures are in place to increase losses and gains. There is evidence associated with climate change, ocean this. Cairngorms Connect is an that some wildlife has fared better in acidification, marine plastics, fisheries, ambitious new partnership with a Scotland over recent decades than in offshore renewables and other 200-year vision to enhance habitats, the UK as a whole. The woodland bird developments, are still challenging and species and ecological processes and farmland bird indicators increased there is evidence of change in pelagic across the Cairngorms National Park. by 69% and 14%, respectively, between habitats and plankton communities. This focus on native tree species 1994 and 2017; while the all-species’ occurs elsewhere in Scotland, e.g. the INNS continue to impact habitats and butterfly indicator was classed as stable Central Scotland Green Network. native species across Scotland and between 1979 and 2017. However, new incursions continue to occur on Invasive species are being tackled the number of breeding seabirds its islands. Stoats, not native to the on some islands. The Shiant Isles, decreased by 38% between 1986 and Northern Isles, were found on Orkney home to around 10% of the UK’s 20162, with surface-feeders particularly in 2010 and rats have reinvaded Puffins, were declared rat-free in 2018 affected, and upland birds declined by Handa Island5,6. following a successful eradication 17% between 1994 and 20173. programme. The Orkney Native Agricultural land constitutes 68% of On land, pressures come from many Wildlife Project was launched in 2018 Scotland’s area7. Agri-environment sources, including agriculture, upland to eradicate the non-native Stoats and schemes (AES) represent the main management, land-use change, the EU-funded Biodiversity for LIFE policy mechanism to reverse habitat fragmentation, changes in project recently started to protect declining farmland wildlife. In 2017, grazing levels, pollution and invasive against further non-native incursions 1 million ha of Scotland were in a non-native species (INNS). Climate by producing biosecurity plans and higher-level AES8. Studies have shown change places additional burdens establishing rapid response hubs. AES do benefit some wildlife groups, on Scotland’s wildlife and sometimes particularly when targeted to specific Over the last 10 years there exacerbates the impacts from other species such as Corncrake. These has been a significant change in pressures. Northern species that targeted management prescriptions marine management, with the directly or indirectly depend on cooler also benefit wider biodiversity1,9. introduction of marine planning climates for survival, e.g. Mountain However, general monitoring of and progress towards completing Ringlet, Cross Whorl Snail and biodiversity responses to AES in the Scottish Marine Protected Dotterel, are particularly vulnerable. Scotland has been poorly resourced Area network11. Some species, including several relative to other UK countries. butterflies, appear to be expanding north due to a warming climate4. The area of woodland in Scotland has more than doubled since the 1940s, Scotland’s seas are also subject to a and now covers 19% of the land area. range of pressures. Progress has been Much of this increase is due to the made on improving water quality, planting of non-native conifers1,10. contaminants and eutrophication Just 6% of the highly fragmented in coastal waters and some fish
Photo: Richard Revels (rspb-images.com) Mountain Ringlet UK countries
WALES
From the mountains of Snowdonia and the Brecon Beacons, through enclosed farmland dominated by livestock production, and down the numerous wooded valleys to the estuaries and sea, Wales holds a diverse range of habitats and wildlife. The Welsh Sessile Oak woodlands, regarded as part of the “temperate rainforests” of Europe, hold rich communities of bryophytes, lichens and fungi, while the mountains host rare invertebrates, including the Snowdon Leaf Beetle, and arctic-alpine plants such as Snowdon Lily1. The Welsh coastline stretches for over 2,000km. The islands off Pembrokeshire, Anglesey and the Llŷn Peninsula hold seabird colonies of global significance, including the world’s largest Manx Shearwater breeding colony and the UK’s fourth largest gannetry2. Cardigan Bay supports one of the larger semi- resident populations of Bottlenose Dolphin found in the UK.
KEY FINDINGS 52% 10% 30% 46% 8% decline in the average decline in average of species have of species show of species are species’ abundance of species’ distribution. decreased in strong changes. threatened. butterflies. Our indicator of average distribution. Wales’ wildlife is Of 6,500 species in Wales Our indicator of average species’ distribution in More species have shown undergoing rapid change; that have been assessed species’ abundance in Wales, covering 2,977 strong or moderate the proportion of species using IUCN Regional Wales of 33 butterfly terrestrial and freshwater decreases in distribution defined as showing strong Red List criteria, 8% species has fallen species over a broad (30%) in Wales than changes in distribution, have been classified as by 52% since 1976; range of taxonomic have increased (23%) either increasing or threatened with extinction however, widespread groups, has fallen by 10% since 1970. decreasing, rose from from Great Britain. breeding birds, wintering since 1970, and is 6% 24% over the long term to waterbirds and mammals lower than in 2005. 46% over the short term. (just seven species) show significant increases.
Photo: Drew Buckley (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 77
WALES-SPECIFIC ABUNDANCE INDICATORS FOR BREEDING BIRDS, WINTERING WATERBIRDS, BUTTERFLIES AND MAMMALS
a e rou a u a e ator • The abundance indicator for 200 37 wintering waterbird species 1 0 starts in 1970 and overall shows 1 0 a statistically significant increase in 1 0 average abundance of 30% (CI +13% 120
1 70 100 100 to +46%). Over the short term, the
0 indicator was 20% lower in 2016 e e 0 compared to 2006. 0 • The abundance indicator for 20 0 33 butterfly species starts in 1976 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 201 and overall shows a statistically Breeding birds (83) Wintering waterbirds (37) Butterflies (33) Mammals (7) significant decline in average Unsmoothed indicator abundance of 52% (CI -69% to -34%). Due to poor taxonomic coverage of abundance of 37% (95% CI +31% Over the short term, the indicator available data, a single combined to +43%). Over the short term, the was 14% lower in 2016 compared abundance indicator was not created indicator was 10% higher in 2016 to 2006. for Wales; however, smoothed compared to 2006. The increase • The abundance indicator for abundance indicators were calculated, in this indicator is driven by the seven of 40 mammal species in using Wales-specific data, for four recovery of a few species from Wales (six bat species and Rabbit) separate species groups. very low numbers, conservation starts in 1998 and overall shows • The abundance indicator for 83 successes and colonising species; a statistically significant increase common and widespread breeding importantly, we have insufficient in average abundance of 43% (CI bird species starts in 1994 and data on some declining species to +31% to +55%). Over the short term, overall shows a statistically include them in the indicator. the indicator was 20% higher in 2016 significant increase in average compared to 2006.
CHANGE IN SPECIES’ DISTRIBUTION IN WALES
a e o u a ator 2 77 species o ter S ort ter 1 70 2015 2005 2015 • Over the long term, 30% of species 2 77 2 77 showed strong or moderate 120 100% decreases and 23% showed strong 100 0% or moderate increases; 47% showed
0 little change. 0% • Over the short term, 39% of species 1 70 100 0 showed strong or moderate 0% e e 0 of species Percentage decreases and 30% showed strong
20% or moderate increases; 30% showed 20 little change. 0 0% 1 70 1 0 1 0 2000 2010 2015 Strong increase • Over the long term, 24% of Moderate increase n icator 0% cre i e inter a s Little change species showed a strong change Moderate decrease in distribution (either increase or Strong decrease decrease). Over the short term this The occupancy indicator for The bar chart shows the percentage rose to 46% of species. 2,977 terrestrial and freshwater of species within the indicator Using a different, binary species, with Wales-specific that have increased, decreased categorisation of species with positive data, shows a decline in average (moderately or strongly) or shown and negative trends: distribution of 10% between 1970 no change in distribution (measured • Over the long term, 59% of species and 2015. In 2015 the indicator was as the proportion of occupied sites), showed negative trends and 41% 6% lower than in 2005. Because based on set thresholds of change. showed positive trends; over the species tend to decline in abundance To examine the variation in species’ short term, 57% of species showed before they disappear from a site, distribution trends, we allocated negative trends and 43% showed this change of 10% could reflect trends into categories based on the positive trends. more severe underlying abundance magnitude of distribution change. declines that we are currently unable to quantify. 78 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
England Northern Ireland Scotland Wales
NATIONAL RED LIST ASSESSMENTS FOR WALES
Here we break down the IUCN Red List assessments for Great Britain to show • Out of 1,316 lichens assessed, how the proportion of threatened species, based on the number of assessed, 22 have been classed as extinct varies by broad taxonomic group in Wales. The bars show the percentage and a further 208 (18%) of extant of assessed species falling into each of the IUCN Red List categories. species, for which sufficient data are Species assessed as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable available, are formally classified as are formally classified as threatened and therefore at risk of extinction. threatened and therefore at risk of Percentage of species threatened = (CR + EN + VU)/(total number assessed – DD – RE). extinction from Wales. The number of species assessed is shown in brackets. • Out of 850 bryophytes assessed, six have been classed as extinct ere n ang ere e ar e as t o n ner e ata n erte rates 2 0 tinct or egiona r itic a and a further 146 (18%) of extant ere n ang ere e a e rea
nt ficie nt species, for which sufficient data are rn ce rn erte rates 2 te ne available, are formally classified as threatened and therefore at risk of ngi 1 0 an ic ens extinction from Wales.
P ants 2 05 • Out of 225 rust fungi assessed, seven have been classed as extinct
ota 500 and a further 41 (20%) of extant species, for which sufficient data 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% er e ta e of e e are available, are formally classified as threatened and therefore at risk Of the 6,500 species found in Wales WALES-SPECIFIC IUCN of extinction from Wales. that have been assessed using the RED LIST ASSESSMENTS • Out of 44 extant terrestrial mammals IUCN Regional Red List criteria, In order to maximise comparability assessed, for which sufficient data 523 (8%) of the extant species, for between taxonomic groups and are available, 13 (32%) are formally which sufficient data are available, countries, this report focuses on IUCN classified as threatened and are formally classified as threatened Red List assessments undertaken at therefore at risk of extinction and therefore at risk of extinction a Great Britain or whole Ireland level; from Wales. from Great Britain (the scale at which however, several taxonomic groups Red List assessments are made). have been assessed for extinction risk Of the extant terrestrial and just within Wales. These show that: freshwater species found in Wales, • Out of 1,467 plants assessed, assessed using IUCN Regional Red List 38 have been classed as extinct criteria, 202 plants (10%), 97 fungi and a further 256 (18%) of extant and lichens (8%), 86 vertebrates species, for which sufficient data (36%) and 138 invertebrates (5%) are are available, are threatened with classified as being at risk of extinction extinction from Wales. from Great Britain.
Photo: Graham Eaton (rspb-images.com) State of Nature Report 2019 79
PRESSURES AND RESPONSES As elsewhere in the UK, nature in Again, this has had benefits, such as The EU Celtic Rainforests LIFE project Wales is under pressure. Management increases in area and condition of started in 2018 and plans to improve of agricultural land has been identified some priority habitat and reduced the conservation status of this key as the most significant factor driving habitat fragmentation, as well as woodland habitat, through the species’ population change in the evidence of increases in generalist control of invasive species and the UK3. With 88% of the Welsh land area woodland and upland breeding implementation of active woodland utilised for agriculture, nature across birds, but areas of concern remain. management, grazing and restoration. the uplands and lowlands has been, These include declines in dwarf shrub Wales’ extensive mountains and and remains, vulnerable to change in heath and the abundance of priority uplands make an important farming practices such as grassland bird species9. contribution to its landscape. and moorland management, Around 11% of Wales’ land (including The Cambrian Mountains have been livestock type and stocking densities, much land under agricultural selected as part of the European and a reduction in mixed and management) is within protected sites Endangered Landscapes Programme. arable farming. More than 90% of for nature, but assessments show that Summit to Sea is a five-year project semi‑natural grassland habitats in the majority are not in good condition working with farmers and the local Wales have been lost since the 1930s4. or well managed for the wildlife community to bring about ecological, Agri-environment schemes (AES) that depends on them. The Welsh farming and economic benefits in represent the main policy mechanism Government’s Natural Resources mid-Wales, from the Pumlumon to reverse the declines in farmland Policy recognises the importance of massif down the Dyfi Valley and into wildlife. In 2017, 3,500km2 of Wales well-managed protected sites, at the Cardigan Bay10. was in a higher-level scheme (ESA, centre of resilient ecological networks, The Welsh marine environment Tir Cymen, Tir Gofal or Glastir to delivering nature’s recovery as well is under pressure and the Welsh Advanced), a 21% decline over as providing benefits for people. Government has an obligation the previous decade5. Woodland cover in Wales has to establish a network of Marine Evidence to date suggests that Welsh quadrupled to 15% since a low point Protected Areas (MPAs). To date, 139 AES have only been partly successful of 4% in 1918. Most of this increase MPAs have been designated, covering in achieving their biodiversity goals. has been due to the post-World War II 69% of Wales’ inshore waters11, but A recent study points towards Tir planting of non-native conifers. Only more work is needed to ensure Gofal (1999–2012) having positive 48% of woodlands are considered these areas are properly managed impacts on wider bird populations6. native and just 14% are classed as for nature. Over recent decades However, other research has pointed ancient and semi-natural. Woodland invasive rats have been eradicated towards limited positive benefits for condition is negatively impacted by from several Welsh islands and a new arable plants, grassland fungi, bats, grazing pressures from domesticated Biodiversity for LIFE project funded butterflies, Water Voles and Brown and wild animals (which can be by the EU aims to protect seabirds Hares7,8. Tir Gofal was superseded too little or too much), as well as from future predator incursions by by Glastir Advanced in 2012. invasive species, pests and diseases4. producing biosecurity plans for UK islands, including five in Wales.
Bottlenose Dolphins UK Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies
THE UK OVERSEAS TERRITORIES AND CROWN DEPENDENCIES
The United Kingdom’s responsibilities go far beyond the immediate shores of its constituent countries. The three Crown Dependencies (CDs) lie close to home, while 14 Overseas Territories (OTs) are scattered around the globe. Together they support populations of species of global significance, some found nowhere else on earth.
KEY FINDINGS
Over At least 32,000 1,549 45 10% 40% species have been species are endemic to species have become of species are of sharks, rays and recorded across the OTs, the OTs. 30% of these are globally Extinct across threatened with skates, 36% of reptiles but the actual number found on St Helena alone. the OTs and CDs. Most global extinction. and amphibians, 11% of of species present is are historic, but three Of the 5,898 OT and CD mammals, 8% of birds estimated to exceed species have formally species that have been and 2% of bony fish 100,000 species. been assessed as globally assessed for the global found across the OTs Extinct in the 21st century. IUCN Red List, 10% are and CDs are classified as A further 15 species classed as threatened threatened and therefore are classified as and therefore at risk of at risk of global extinction. Possibly Extinct. global extinction.
Photo: Alastair Wilson (rspb-images.com) Wandering Albatross State of Nature Report 2019 81
UNIQUE, GLOBALLY number is estimated to exceed The CDs support a range of wildlife IMPORTANT WILDLIFE 100,000 species. Many of the OTs not found in the UK countries. are isolated oceanic islands, and Due to their more southerly location, The OTs and CDs hold wildlife as a result they typically hold high the Channel Islands have a higher populations of global importance. numbers of endemic species. At least diversity of some wildlife groups, From the wild sub-Antarctic islands of 1,549 have been documented to date, particularly reptiles and amphibians. the South Atlantic, to the rainforests with 30% found on St Helena alone1. As islands, the marine environment is of the Caribbean and the tropical This compares to 348 known endemic an important element of all the CDs. islands of the remote Pacific, they species in Great Britain2. The OTs in hold many unique species and wildlife There are numerous examples the South Atlantic and Antarctic are concentrations found nowhere else of long-term biological studies across of global importance for their seabird in the world. the OTs and CDs; however, there is colonies and contain one third of the currently insufficient information So far 32,216 native species have been world’s albatrosses and a quarter available to create multispecies recorded across the OTs; however, of its penguins1. indicators, as shown for the UK information is patchy, and the actual and some of its component countries.
GLOBALLY THREATENED SPECIES IN THE OTs AND CDs Here we show the percentage of species found across the OTs and CDs that have Three species were formally assessed been allocated to each of the IUCN Red List categories. All birds and most of the as globally Extinct in the 20th century, mammals, amphibians, reptiles and bony/cartilaginous fish have now been globally and three have been added so far assessed for the IUCN’s Red List. More assessments are needed to better understand this century. A further 15 species the true status of other wildlife groups. are currently classified as Critically 3 Percentage of species threatened = (CR + EN + VU)/(total number assessed – DD – RE). Endangered (Possibly Extinct) . The number of species assessed is shown in brackets. Five thousand eight hundred and ninety-eight OT and CD species o a n angere (Globally) Near Threatened (NT) o a east oncern species 5 (Globally) Extinct/Extinct in the Wild (RE) o a ritica n angere o a nera e (Globally) Data Deficient (DD) have now been assessed against the IUCN global Red List criteria. Bony fish 2 15 Of these, 560 (10%) of extant
ir s 50 species, for which sufficient data are available, are classified as
a a s 150 threatened (Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable), and Reptiles and 11 amphibians therefore at risk of global extinction. arti agino s Of the different taxonomic groups, fish 110 40% of cartilaginous fish – sharks, 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% rays and skates – 36% of reptiles er e ta e of e e and amphibians, 11% of mammals, The IUCN’s Red List of Threatened species3. This documents the global 8% of birds and 2% of bony fish are Species represents the world’s most extinction of 45 species across the assessed as being threatened with comprehensive information source OTs. Most of these are historic (since global extinction. on the global conservation status of 1500 AD) but losses have continued.
Photo: Alastair Wilson (rspb-images.com)
Bird Island, South Georgia 82 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
These pages show the global status of wildlife found across the UK 6.3% OTs and CDs and a 15 selection of pressures and 5.6% conservation responses. 7.0% 14 6.0% Similar proportions of globally 4 4.8% 13 threatened species occur across 6.0% many of the OTs (<10%); however, 3 nearly one in five species on 12 4.4% St Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha are formally 5.8% 6 assessed as being globally 2 5.4% threatened with extinction. 4.4% 5 7.7% 7
1
7.8% 5.1% 10 8
The size of the circles denotes 18.3% the proportion of extant species assessed as globally threatened 11 with extinction on the IUCN Red 6.7% List (see Methods, page 96). 9
Gough Island mouse eating seabird chick King Penguin
Photo: Ben Dilley Photo: Ben Dilley Photo: Roger Tidman (rspb-images.com)
1 The UK and its OTs are together 11 Gough Island, within Tristan da 10 South Georgia, one of the world’s responsible for the fifth largest area of Cunha, is one of the most important last great wildernesses, was officially ocean in the world. The Pitcairn Islands global seabird colonies; however, declared rodent-free in 2018, following Exclusive Economic Zone covers an introduced mice are having a the largest global eradication of its area of 834,000km² and was declared a devastating impact on native wildlife. type. Introduced rats were having no-take MPA in 2016 as part of the Recent estimates put the total number a devastating effect on seabirds Blue Belt programme (see page 84). of seabird eggs/chicks lost annually to and other wildlife. mouse predation at 1,739,000, including 15 The Isle of Man is a hotspot for Basking the Critically Endangered Tristan Shark activity around the British Isles. Albatross5. Gough has been rated Here researchers are fitting this globally as the island with the third greatest Vulnerable species with satellite tags need of eradication action globally6, to better understand their movements and an ambitious project is now in and the pressures they face4. development (see goughisland.com). State of Nature Report 2019 83
Number of species
7.4% OT/CD (Globally) Extinct (Globally) Extinct in the Wild (Globally) Critically Endangered (Globally) Endangered (Globally) Vulnerable number of Total species assessed for the global IUCN Red List
16 1 Pitcairn Islands 1 1 10 36 645
2 Cayman Islands 1 20 25 41 1,570
3 Turks and Caicos Islands 7 21 42 1,525
4 Bermuda 5 1 31 16 39 1,313
5 British Virgin Islands 13 27 46 1,681
6 Anguilla 1 7 16 39 1,472
7 Montserrat 10 14 40 1,522
7.4% 8 Falkland Islands 1 1 15 15 424
9 British Antarctic Territory 2 3 92 17 South Georgia and the South 10 6 7 264 Sandwich Islands
St Helena, Ascension and 11 36 2 58 50 49 955 Tristan da Cunha
12 Gibraltar 3 9 33 790
13 Bailiwick of Jersey 1 8 9 30 824
14 Bailiwick of Guernsey 1 8 6 28 789
15 Isle of Man 1 6 7 26 652
16 Cyprus Sovereign Base Areas 3 12 22 547
17 British Indian Ocean Territory 1 11 78 1,258
Black-browed Albatross Turks and Caicos Rock Iguana 11 St Helena’s wildlife has developed in extreme isolation and supports at least 502 endemic species. Much of its threatened wildlife is associated with the island’s cloud forest1. Only small isolated fragments of this habitat remain. A Darwin Plus-funded project is underway and aims to secure the future of this rare habitat and its endemic invertebrates.
Although it is extinct on mainland Photo: Ben Dilley Photo: Sarah Havery 13 UK, the globally Near Threatened 14 Black-backed Meadow Ant still occurs 10 OTs support some of the world’s 3 The Caribbean OTs hold 17 Critically on Jersey and Guernsey. Here the largest albatross colonies. Incidental Endangered reptiles. The Turks and species is threatened by habitat loss, bycatch in global fisheries represents Caicos Rock Iguana is only found on changes in management and invasive the main threat to these birds and a few small isolated offshore islands species. Action is being taken to ongoing declines in three albatross and is suffering further losses due to maintain and, where possible, increase species on South Georgia have been habitat changes and invasive species. the remaining populations. One such identified7. The Albatross Task Force8 A three-year partnership project, project is the reintroduction of grazing has dramatically reduced bycatch by up funded by the Darwin Initiative, on Guernsey’s south coast. The species to 99% in some areas and is engaging aims to help secure the species’ is just about to be legally protected with the Japanese and Taiwanese high future by establishing effective in Jersey. seas fleets, which have the highest controls and biosecurity around overlap with South Georgia albatross, remaining populations. to further reduce these impacts. 84 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
THE BLUE BELT The Blue Belt programme is one of Key environmental assets protected Work by the Joint Nature Conservation the largest conservation initiatives within the Blue Belt programme Committee (JNCC), in partnership ever undertaken: the UK Government include the largest coral atoll on with OT governments and UK-based provided almost £20 million for long- earth, the Atlantic’s second largest consultancy Environment Systems, term protection for 4 million km2 Green Turtle nursery and the world’s has modelled storm surge episodes in of ocean across the OTs between only known aggregation of male Caribbean OTs and used pre- and post- 2016–2020. Large-scale MPAs have and female Whale Sharks, plus the hurricane satellite data to specifically already been designated around biggest single penguin colony on the identify the role of mangroves in St Helena, the British Indian Ocean planet. A key enabling factor for the mitigating surge impacts on local Territory, the Pitcairn Islands, and development of large-scale MPAs has communities and infrastructure. South Georgia & the South Sandwich been satellite surveillance, which can In addition to identifying where Islands, with further protections being help deter illegal fishing vessels. mangroves have played this scheduled for Ascension (2019) and mitigating role, “opportunity spaces”, Tristan da Cunha (2020). HABITAT RESTORATION where it might be possible to OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE UK OTs Over 1.76 million km2 of these re-establish a particular habitat, have MPAs have been designated as The extreme 2017 hurricane events in been identified, to help enhance IUCN Category I fully protected the Caribbean provided clear evidence the resilience of the natural capital “no-take zones”, while other areas of the functional, humanitarian on the island. This technique has permit some sustainable use of and economic value of the natural been applied to Anguilla to identify marine resources. The fundamental environment in mitigating inland mangrove restoration possibilities approach of the Blue Belt programme flooding and coastal zone storm and assess the potential role of newly is to work with OT governments surges. These events highlighted the established mangroves in reducing and communities to ensure local importance of not only protecting the risk of flooding, to make the case priorities for marine conservation coastal and inland vegetation but for restoration for economic and management are adopted, and that also actively intervening to restore disaster resilience purposes. local capacity is built for monitoring key habitats. This is particularly true This trend to intervene to restore and management. Considerable of coastal mangrove systems that and extend important habitats in the research is underway to set knowledge reduce the impacts of hurricane- OTs is critical to reverse the pattern baselines and to develop appropriate generated storm surges. of degradation and loss. management plans.
Photo: RSPB
Pitcairn Island State of Nature Report 2019 85
INVASIVE SPECIES & THE UK OTs Introduced INNS are one of the in Tristan da Cunha, while introduced The removal of invasive species primary threats to biodiversity across plants are invading terrestrial habitats is a major undertaking, but many the OTs and have been implicated in the Falkland Islands. control and eradication schemes in the global extinction of some of are underway. The most significant A variety of approaches are being their endemic species. Estimates recent achievement is the clearance of used to address this threat, starting of the impacts of invasive mice on rodents from South Georgia. Here, the with the vital work of preventing Gough Island World Heritage Site spread of other non-native species, further introductions by strengthening put the number of seabird chicks/ such as plants, is also being tackled. biosecurity. An EU BEST-funded eggs predated at 1.7 million per three-year biosecurity project has Fundraising and planning for an year, but this figure could exceed been raising public awareness in attempt to restore Gough Island 3 million. Feral cats threaten the the Caribbean territories, while a in 2020 continues, to prevent the Critically Endangered Turks and UK Government project has drafted extinction of the Tristan Albatross Caicos Rock Iguana, while feral pigs model biosecurity legislation for and Gough Bunting. At a cost of over have been recorded digging up territory governments to consider £9 million, this is one of the largest turtle nests in Montserrat. It is not and has undertaken a comprehensive conservation interventions planned only invasive mammals that pose a programme of horizon-scanning and across the OTs. significant threat – introduced insects pathway analysis across all the OTs. threaten the only native tree species
Two endemic bird species, the St Helena Plover The Fin Whale, which has been recorded in the and Montserrat Oriole, were down-listed from seas around 13 OTs1, was down‑listed from Critically Endangered to globally Vulnerable by globally Endangered to Vulnerable on the the IUCN, due to conservation action; however, IUCN Red List in 2018. The global population threats to both species continue3. has approximately doubled since the 1970s, but numbers remain well below pre-industrial whaling levels3.
Four of St Helena’s endemic plants, including Five Caribbean OTs’ reptiles, including the the St Helena Tea Plant, have been up-listed to Sombrero Ameiva, have been up-listed to Critically Endangered globally on the IUCN Red Critically Endangered globally on the IUCN List since 2015. These species are threatened Red List since 2013. All these species are being by habitat fragmentation and very few affected by introduced non-native species3. individual mature plants remain3.
The endemic St Helena Giant Earwig was declared The St Helena endemic She Cabbage Tree globally Extinct in 2014, with the last confirmed was up-listed to Extinct in the Wild in 2015 adult seen in 1967. Habitat degradation and the following the death of the last wild specimen impact of non-native species is thought to have in 2012. Some cultivated specimens have been contributed to its demise3. replanted in semi-wild situations3.
Photo: Roger S Key
THE GOOD THE BAD NEWS NEWS 86 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
CONNECTION TO NATURE
As wildlife populations decline there is increasing concern about people’s willingness to act to reverse this. While social, cultural and political factors influence attitudes and behaviour, and there is a recognised gap between people’s values and actions, one reason for this lack of engagement is considered to be disconnection Photo: Tony Hamblin (rspb-images.com) from nature: “Simply put, CONNECTION TO NATURE DESCRIPTION humans don’t protect what they “Connection to nature” describes an Sometimes referred to as nature 1 don’t know and value.” individual’s relationship with nature connectedness or relatedness, it is often Insights from disciplines such as and their perception of belonging discussed in terms of disconnection psychology and sociology indicate the to the wider natural community4. and reconnection4. Connection is a complex and importance of people’s “connection to Research has focused on the how, multidimensional characteristic. nature” (henceforth “connection”) for where and why of connection: types Connection is not developed just motivating behaviour to help. The State of experience that develop connection, through contact and simply getting of Nature 2016 report highlighted that, relationship with place or psychological people outside does not mean they while there was regional variation, most response creating the connection6. will grow a wildflower meadow or UK children had lower connection than Most research is on the latter6, with petition for nature5. Instead, connection desired for motivating conservation connection expressed as involving 2,3 is made up of emotional, cognitive behaviour . While the future relies on feelings of freedom, safety7, sense and behavioural aspects – feelings children, teenage and adult connection of identity8,9, enjoyment, oneness, about nature, knowledge and actions. must be considered for addressing empathy and responsibility7,9–11. conservation issues now.
WHY IS PEOPLE’S CONNECTION IMPORTANT FOR NATURE? One approach for changing someone’s behaviour on a subject is to give that subject personal, emotional value. Increasing people’s awareness and concern can help instigate actions supporting nature, as recognised by international conservation targets (e.g. Aichi 1). Low connection leaves people with little attachment to what is, or was, present. Consequently, people may not notice biodiversity loss, or, in what’s known as “shifting baseline syndrome”, only recognise loss within their experience rather than what has gone before12. By connecting people, the hope is they will be engaged by current nature, concerned by the Photo: Tom Simone (rspb-images.com) declines and more motivated to act, directly or indirectly, for example While values do not always match higher likelihood of conservation through supporting stronger behaviour, in children, higher levels behaviours, such as reducing electricity government action. of connection are related to greater use13, and more positive attitudes likelihood of helping nature3. In adults, towards interventions, for example higher connection is also related to integral swift bricks in homes14. State of Nature Report 2019 87
WHO TO CONNECT TO NATURE – RESEARCH SO FAR Previously, connection was thought However, research from Australia16 Females have higher connection fixed in childhood, with studies showed that current experiences scores than males, and connection examining how childhood experiences also increase adult connection. Given dips in teenage years18 (see relate to adult behaviours. For this potential flexibility in adulthood figure). Thus, developing different example, how outdoor learning is connection we need to understand interventions for different life stages practiced, its purpose and setting more about connection variation to may improve lifetime connection can influence how an ethic of care for develop successful interventions. In and behaviour. nature or understanding of natural the UK population, connection differs processes is developed15. by gender and age17.
Predicted Connection to Nature Index 5 0 (CNI) scores for ages 5–75 years from generalized additive models (GAMs). CNI 5 scores ranged from 1 to 5 0 N S ore 5
0
2 5 0 20 0 0 0 e e a e a e 0% cre i e inter a s
HOW DO WE DEVELOP CONNECTION? FUTURE DIRECTIONS – UNDERSTANDING, MONITORING Evidence is building on promising emotion, give meaning, showcase AND EVALUATION FOR mechanisms for developing nature’s beauty, include contact and CONSERVATION SUCCESS connection. One way of initially develop compassion connect people connecting people is by engaging to nature22. RSPB research on adults them with nature in their lives. People found that, as well as those creating often value green spaces because emotion or meaning, activities that of cultural benefits19. Health and involved different senses, included well-being benefits can motivate learning and heightened compassion people to take part in nature activities. also increased participant’s intention For example, relaxation is a strong to act for nature23. Drawing people’s driver for people feeding birds20 attention to details in nature and and pleasant green spaces can repeated engagement, key elements Photo: Mark Hamblin (rspb-images.com) increase community cohesion21. of The Wildlife Trusts’ 30 Days Wild campaign, help sustain people’s Understanding how to influence University of Derby research connection and maintain behaviour4. human behaviour is a priority for recommends that activities that create conservation. Detailed investigation into what works to connect different audiences across their lifetimes will help long-term conservation action. Measurement of population level trends, for example in England through Natural England’s Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment surveys24, are necessary to evaluate large‑scale effects. Overall, improving understanding about the relationship between connection and action, how connection varies and consequences for behaviour, is vital for conservation success. 88 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
MONITORING THE The efforts of volunteers reflect the The Biological Records Centre (BRC) long-standing interest in natural curates the datasets compiled by STATE OF NATURE: history in the UK, which can be traced many NRSS, which can be used to back to the expertise of naturalists map the ranges of species and identify WHO, WHAT such as Gilbert White in the late 18th important sites and regions. While AND WHY? century and John Ray a century before structured monitoring schemes remain him. Many highly respected experts the “gold-standard”, recent statistical on the identification and ecology developments that account for This State of Nature 2019 report, of specific taxonomic groups are recording biases5,6 mean we are now and those published in 2013 and volunteers with decades of experience able to use these data to detect trends 2016, attempt to assess the state and expertise, without whom in the occurrence of species over several of the UK’s nature based on a recording schemes would not exist. decades. These trends play a pivotal synthesis of the best available role in the State of Nature reports, WHAT DO THEY DO? allowing us to report changes in a broad biodiversity data. This would not spectrum of the country’s wildlife. be possible without the huge Broadly speaking, biological data and the schemes that govern its collection effort put into the recording and UK Biodiversity Indicator: Records added can be divided into two categories. to the NBN, 2004 to 2019 monitoring of wildlife, most of it Firstly, there are structured surveys 250 done by volunteers. that are conducted at predefined sites using a set methodology – 200 WHO HELPS MONITOR such as in the Wider Countryside THE UK’S WILDLIFE? Butterfly Survey (WCBS)3. Data 150 from surveys such as the WCBS are While professional scientists and 100 conservationists collect much submitted to survey coordinators, valuable data on biodiversity in the increasingly using online forms. Data i ions Nu er of re or 50 UK themselves, this is outweighed by are analysed using well-established statistical approaches to produce 0 the huge contribution of volunteers an ar an ar an ar a annual trends in abundance, with 200 2010 2015 201 who submit records and take part in o rce ncc go i 1 structured surveys on a vast range corrections made to account for of wildlife. It has been estimated that biases such as when survey coverage Data from many sources, including the 18,700 volunteers are involved in is greater in some regions than BRC, are made available through the structured monitoring schemes that others. The robust design and National Biodiversity Network’s (NBN) cover bats, birds, butterflies and plants quality assurance procedures of such database, the NBN Atlas. The NBN alone, and the financial value of their schemes mean they produce high- Atlas launched in 2017 and, at the time contribution has been estimated at quality assessments, and datasets time of writing, holds a remarkable £20.5 million per annum1 that can be used for numerous . In addition, 223,027,119 species’ occurrence research purposes. as many as 70,000 volunteers submit records, covering 45,448 species in records to national recording schemes The other category is “unstructured” 824 datasets, accessed through the and societies (NRSS)2, or to local biological records – observations of NBN Atlas7 – and this figure continues environmental records centres (LERCs), species at a given time and place to grow rapidly, with jumps caused by for a great range of taxonomic groups. that were not collected as part of a the input of new datasets (see above). While we do not have precise data on structured survey. This means that However, this is still incomplete, trends in the extent of this volunteer the methods used and the data with not all data flowing smoothly effort, we know that the contributions collected may vary, and there may be from surveys, recording schemes, of time by volunteers (including but not uncontrolled biases associated with the consultancies, scientists and LERCs to limited to monitoring) to conservation data, for example because observers the NBN. Furthermore, an unknown organisations are estimated to have choose where to go, and so may favour but undoubtedly huge volume of data increased by 46% since 2000. wildlife-rich sites, and are more likely remains in observers’ notebooks, to submit records of rare and special UK Biodiversity Indicator: Index of photo libraries, social media feeds volunteer time spent in selected UK species than more commonplace ones. or simply as fading memories. conservation organisations, 2000 to 2017 However, such ad-hoc records cover a huge range of species for which Small Tortoiseshell 1 0
1 0 there are insufficient resources, or
1 0 expert recorders, to run a structured
120 scheme. There are over 90 national
100 recording schemes covering a wide 4 0 range of taxonomic groups as diverse as slime moulds, stoneworts and e 2000 100 e 0
0 leaf‑mining moths.
20
0 Photo: Sue Kennedy (rspb-images.com) 2000 2005 2010 2017 o rce ncc go i 2 State of Nature Report 2019 89
WHY IS THIS identify which species most urgently developers about sensitive sites require conservation attention. and special species. Given the squeeze on resources MONITORING Finally, by combining data across for conservation, such prioritisation species, we can look at broader SO IMPORTANT? is essential for ensuring resources patterns in nature – such as shown are used efficiently. by the State of Nature headlines, and Monitoring builds our knowledge Furthermore, repositories of species in the UK Government’s biodiversity of the natural world, and underpins data are essential tools for spatial indicators8. Trends in wildlife can our efforts to conserve it, and to planning and defending wildlife from tell us about the health of the halt and reverse declines in nature. inappropriate development. Datasets environment more widely, and what Measures of abundance and/or on the NBN Atlas and those held by impact human activities are having on distribution, particularly those LERCS can aid the identification of the it. The reporting of the UK’s progress derived from standardised repeated most valuable sites for wildlife, and in meeting international targets for measurements, allow trends to be be used to inform Nature Recovery biodiversity and sustainability (see calculated and species’ status to be Network maps. This would enable page 90) relies heavily on volunteer- determined. Formal assessments reserve designation, the targeting of collected biodiversity data. such as IUCN Red Lists, which use the conservation management such as best available data to place species AES and woodland grant schemes, in categories of threat using a suite and inform local authorities and of standardised criteria, are used to Photo: Ben Andrew (rspb-images.com) 90 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
PROGRESS TOWARDS a global assessment of progress, and tells readers about the UK’s Global Biodiversity Outlook 5, which progress towards them, adding to the INTERNATIONAL is expected to be published in June text in the UK’s sixth national report 2020. This will be the final report on to the CBD4. COMMITMENTS: collective global progress over the THE AICHI TARGETS last decade, and will signal whether LOOKING FORWARD – national actions have been sufficient 2020 AND BEYOND to halt biodiversity loss by 2020. 2020 is a crucial year – a new set of Unfortunately, recent predictions1 SAVING NATURE GLOBALLY global targets will be negotiated, there suggest that the majority of the Aichi Recent reports1 have shown that is expected to be an uplift in national Biodiversity Targets are unlikely to be humankind is failing to halt the loss of commitments to tackle climate change met at a global scale. biodiversity globally, which continues and it will be a key milestone for the at an alarming rate. The demands UN Sustainable Development Goals7. THE UK’S CONTRIBUTION TO of land-use conversion and other These moments and commitments THE GLOBAL PICTURE pressures now mean that very few have the potential to deliver increased habitats on earth are untouched by The UK’s sixth national report to action and ambition for nature, and people, and 1 million species are at the CBD4 was submitted in March to strengthen the connections and risk of extinction1. The recent global 2019 and drew upon a huge range solutions between the synergetic report of the Intergovernmental of information, such as the UK’s issues of nature, climate change and Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity Biodiversity Indicators5 (which feature sustainable development. and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)1 heavily in the State of Nature 2019 issued stark warnings, including that: report), as well as many other robust • Nature and its vital contributions scientific sources. The report assessed to people, which together embody that the UK is on track to meet five of the 20 targets. Although progress has biodiversity and ecosystem THE UK functions and services, are been seen towards another 14, this deteriorating worldwide. has not been sufficient to meet the GOVERNMENT HAS targets; one target was not assessed. • Direct and indirect drivers of ASSESSED THAT THE In addition to this UK reporting, the change have accelerated during Scottish Government has published COUNTRY IS ON the past 50 years. regular reports on Scottish progress TRACK TO MEET FIVE • Goals for conserving and sustainably 6 towards the targets . OF THE 20 AICHI using nature and achieving sustainability cannot be met by The Aichi Biodiversity Targets are TARGETS BY 2020. current trajectories, and goals often multifaceted, ambiguous, hard for 2030 and beyond may only be to assess objectively, and sometimes achieved through transformative lack clear mechanisms for measuring changes across economic, social, progress. In the UK, governments, political and technological factors. advised by the country nature conservation bodies, are responsible The Convention on Biological Diversity for reporting progress against the 2 (CBD) is a global treaty, opened targets to the Secretariat of the CBD. for signatures in 1992, intended to There have been disagreements tackle this crisis. The 10-year Strategic between government and some NGO 3 Plan for Biodiversity was adopted State of Nature partners regarding in October 2010, and includes five both the interpretation of data and strategic goals underpinned by 20 of the targets themselves, perhaps global biodiversity targets – the Aichi inevitably given these conditions. Biodiversity Targets, named after the It is notable, however, that these Japanese prefecture in which they differences centre on a minority were agreed. Parties to the CBD and of the 20 Aichi targets. other multilateral environmental agreements use these targets to The text on the opposite page focuses set priorities, develop action plans on those targets which are central to and establish national targets, and actions to help biodiversity in the UK, are expected to report on their and thus the UK’s contribution towards progress at regular intervals. The the global effort to help biodiversity. most recent of these national reports Much of the content of State of Nature (the sixth) is being used to create 2019 is relevant to these targets, State of Nature Report 2019 91
Extinction of threatened species: “By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained.” The State of Nature 2019 shows that 15% of the 8,418 species assessed are regarded as threatened with extinction in Great Britain, although it is not known how this percentage has changed over time. The abundance of species identified as conservation priorities, including many of the species at greatest risk of extinction, has fallen to 40% of its 1970 value, and continues to fall in the short term (by 22% between 2011 and 2016). The status of species more widely continues to fall in response to a wide range of pressures, with a measure of species’ abundance down by 13% over the long term, and one of species’ distribution down by 5%. While this report demonstrates how targeted conservation action can prevent extinction, and gives examples of wonderful and inspiring successes, it is clear that more needs to be done to address the needs of threatened species and thus meet this target.
Sustainable management of marine living resource – see pages 58–61. Some UK fish stocks are showing signs of recovery in response to sustainable fisheries measures, but not all stocks are fished at sustainable levels, and issues such as bycatch and trawling damage to seabeds persist.
Sustainable agriculture, aquaculture and forestry – see pages 18–21, 26–27 and 42–45. Incentives, such as AES, have been developed to encourage the sustainability of agriculture, aquaculture and forestry in the UK. However, there has been a recent decline in the area of land under higher-level AES, and critically relevant indicators of wild birds show either no recovery from previous depletion (woodland) or continuing decline (farmland).
Pollution reduced – see pages 38–41. Legislative controls have led to dramatic reductions in pollution from point sources in recent decades. Diffuse pollution in air and water remains a key pressure impacting on the status of species and habitats. Some sources remain above safe levels, however, and their influence on sensitive habitats is still considerable.
Invasive alien species prevented and controlled – see pages 34–37. Systems have been developed, at a Great Britain and all-Ireland scale, to prevent colonisation by INNS, and some progress has been made in tackling established species. However, 10–12 new non-native species establish in Great Britain each year on average, and around one in 10 of these causes adverse impacts.
Protected areas increased and improved – see pages 47 and 63. The UK’s protected area network covers 25% of the UK’s land area and 24% of its sea area. On land, these totals include landscape designations which do not have the primary purpose of conserving biodiversity and ecosystem services. Terrestrial changes since 1995 mainly reflect the establishment of SACs and SPAs, plus the designation of two National Parks in Scotland in 2002/03. There has been a large increase in the extent of MPAs since 1995, but especially since 2010. The proportion of protected sites assessed as in favourable condition has remained stable (43% of SACs, 50% of SSSIs and 52% of SPAs, in 2019), with an increase in the percentage of site features which are recovering (31%, 35% and 27%, respectively); it is recognised that it will take a long time for species and habitats to recover to favourable condition.
Financial resources from all sources increased – see page 49. There has been a substantial short-term decline in public sector spending on biodiversity in the UK, which has fallen by 29%, from £641 million to £456 million, between 2012/13 and 2017/18. Over the same period, however, the UK’s expenditure on biodiversity internationally has increased by 111%, from £97 million to £205 million. 92 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
HOW TO INTERPRET WHAT DATA HAVE WE USED? • We present trends in abundance national monitoring schemes THIS REPORT (for 697 species) and occupancy and biological records. (for 6,654 species) for terrestrial and • Abundance trends are for native freshwater species across the UK, We have included this section species only, but, unless otherwise and trends in abundance (five taxa) to help you understand the stated, recent colonist and non- for marine species or species groups. different measures presented native species were included in the • Abundance trends are based on in the State of Nature 2019 occupancy trends. However, due to changes in the number of individuals the low number of these species, report and how they should be at a monitored site, a measure as a result of the time period and interpreted. For full details of that reflects a species’ population record number filtering, their impact the methods and how these size. Occupancy trends are based on the average trend lines is likely measures were calculated, on changes in the number of sites to be minimal1. where a species is present. This is a as well as caveats around • We present assessments of national measure that reflects the range of a interpretation, please refer to Red List status for 8,431 native species. species. It is usually measured as site • Details of our data sources and pages 94–97. occupation at a 1km2 scale. the species they cover are given • These trends came from a wide in the additional online material. range of sources, including
HOW ARE OCCUPANCY AND ABUNDANCE METRICS RELATED?
The status of species as measured National Red Lists assessment by abundance is considered a Key Endangered (EN) Near Threatened (NT) Least Concern (LC) key metric for conservation – Extinct or Regionally (RE) Critically Endangered (CR) Vulnerable (VU) Data Deficient (DD) providing information as to how species are faring and assessing 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% the effectiveness of conservation Percentage of species measures or the impact of particular pressures. However, such data are taxonomically limited and in contrast the volume of opportunistic species’ records2 extends the taxonomic, spatial and temporal coverage of species datasets and analyses. Recent statistical developments 0% 10% 20%25%30% 40% 50% 75% 100% have enabled greater use of these Percentage of species datasets for the estimation of species’ occupancy trends3,4,5. Occupancy and abundance trends are Extinction risk from Great Britain, Ireland or often related, and there is evidence globally. This is the percent of We summarised the Great Britain that they tend to operate in the same extant species, for which sufficient Red Lists to present the proportion of direction6,7. However, the relationship data are available, classified as species in each threat category overall, between the two measures of change Critically Endangered, Endangered and by different taxonomic groups. can be complex. In particular there or Vulnerable in the latest IUCN In each country we interpret existing is evidence that the magnitude of Red List assessments. Great Britain Red Lists, based on change in occupancy trends is smaller those species occurring in a particular UK Biodiversity Indicators than changes in abundance. This country, with the exception of is because many species can show Where appropriate, trend figures from Northern Ireland, where we used all- substantial variation in abundance the official UK Biodiversity Indicators10 Ireland Red List assessments. For the without disappearing from sites or are presented to complement the State OTs and CDs we summarised available occupying new ones. Additionally, of Nature 2019 analyses. The Priority global IUCN Red List assessments. for some species or species groups Species Indicator is made up of two abundance and occupancy trends Results reported for each parts: one showing change in species’ move in opposite directions, but this figure include: abundance and one showing change 8,9 is less common . • The overall percentage of species in species’ occupancy. All other species- assessed that are regarded based indicators shown are based as threatened with extinction on trends in abundance. State of Nature Report 2019 93
WHAT ARE THE GRAPHS TELLING ME?
u a e ator (697 species) o ter S ort ter The measures we present, at a UK 19 0 201 200 201 and individual country level, show All (697) All (687) 1 0 100 the following: 1 0 • Change over time – Species Indicator 0 120 –– The average change in the status 100 0
of species, based on abundance 19 0 100 0 or occupancy data. 0 0 e e Percentage of species Percentage
• Categories of change 0 20 –– The percentage of species in 20 each trend category e.g. strong 0 0 19 0 19 0 1990 2000 2010 201 Strong increase increase or little change. Moderate increase Indicator Smoothed trend 95% confidence intervals Little change Moderate decrease • Extinction risk Strong decrease –– An assessment of Red List status for each species occurring in that country. Please note that our measures are Results reported for each Results reported for each not directly comparable with those figure include: figure include: presented in the previous State of Nature reports because the current • Total percentage change in the • The percentage of species that report is based on an increased indicator over the long term and the showed strong or moderate number of species, updated methods short term. changes, and those showing little and, in some cases, different • Annual percentage change over the change, in each time period. data sources. long term and the short term. • The percentage of species showing strong changes (decreasing and Change over time – • To assess if species’ status had on increasing combined) in each Species Indicator average improved or otherwise in recent years, we compared the time period. These graphs show indicators based rate of change in each abundance • The overall percentage of species on the abundance data and occupancy indicator before the short-term with trends below or above zero in data separately. period to the rate of change during each time period, illustrated by the Species indicator graphs show the the short-term period. vertical line across the grey little change segment of the graph. average change in the status of Categories of change species based on either abundance Thresholds for assigning species’ Each species was placed into one of or occupancy data. The shaded areas trends to the five categories are five trend categories based on annual show the 95% confidence intervals given on page 96. A small number 100% percentage changes. around the indicator line for the of species did not have a short-term abundance trends and 90% credible assessment as data were unavailable intervals for the occupancy trends for recent years. (see page 96).
Bleeding Tooth Fungus WHAT TIME PERIOD DOES THIS REPORT COVER? We show abundance trends in species from 1970 to 2016 and occupancy trends from 1970 to 2015. We refer to this as our long-term period. Our short-term period runs from 2006 to 2016 or 2005 to 2015.
Photo: Mark Eaton 94 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
METHODS DATA COLLATION The occupancy time series were based on the opportunistic recording data We collated as many datasets as collected by NRS; a full list is available possible describing population The methods on this page in the additional online content. These change of native UK species in order schemes collect data on a vast array of describe the process used to to populate the population change taxonomic groups, from slime moulds collate measures of species’ metrics (see table on facing page to spiders. However, it can be difficult status and how these were and additional online content). Most to use datasets of opportunistic of these datasets contained species’ combined into three metrics: records to assess changes over time, time series derived from statistical as recording effort varies across the 1. A multispecies indicator, models, rather than raw counts UK and over time. which charts average species’ or observations. The majority of the species’ change over time. Population change was described occupancy time series included in either by changes in the relative 2. A Categorical Change our assessment were extracted from abundance of species (changes in the metric, which describes the Outhwaite et al. (2019)2, who used number of individuals) or the relative proportions of species in five hierarchical occupancy modelling in a occupancy of species (changes in the Bayesian framework3,4 to help control change categories based on number of sites where a species is biases. They modelled occupancy at a the direction and magnitude found, so effectively the change in 1km2 scale, and we retained species range of the species). The long-term of average annual change time series with a minimum of 10 period was 1970–2016 for abundance over the long-term and short- years of reliable estimates, based on time series and 1970–2015 for term periods. at least 50 records with no more than occupancy time series, due to a time a 10-year gap in records5,6. 3. A Red List metric, which lag in the collation and reporting of presents the proportion of biological data. The respective short- Raw occurrence records were modelled directly for this report for species at risk of extinction. term periods were 2006–2016 and 2005–2015. two taxonomic groups, mammals, The methods are based on using the methods described Data were derived from a wide range above, and vascular plants, using an those used in the second of sources; details of the datasets alternative approach, Frescalo State of Nature report and behind our analyses, and the species (details described on facing page). published subsequently in they cover, are given in the additional Burns et al. (2018)1. online material. In addition to datasets of species’ population change, we collated The species’ abundance time series national IUCN Red List assessments included in our assessment met (see table). the following criteria: • Two or more comparable estimates PROCESSING SPECIES DATA of a species’ abundance were made between 1960 and the present, with Within the collated dataset of a broad geographic coverage across abundance time series, a small the species’ UK range. number of time series had missing values, zero values or an end date • Results, or at least the methodology prior to 2016 and required minor for data collection and/or analysis, processing following the methods had been published. used for previous reports1. Data for • Start and end estimates for each any years prior to 1970 were removed. species were at least 10 years apart. Moth data If more than one dataset was available for a species, precedence was given to Data for 766 moth species were the most robust dataset, based on the analysed using data from Rothamsted survey method subject to the fewest Insect Survey light trap network. known biases, and maximising the The generalised abundance index sample size and time period covered. methodology proposed by Dennis et 7 If two or more datasets were of al. (2016) was used to produce UK similar quality and duration, then an abundance trends. Four hundred and average was calculated and used. thirty-two species produced reliable trends based on expert assessment of the underlying data and the analysis results8. State of Nature Report 2019 95
Summary of the total number of species and the number of species included in each of the UK species’ status metrics by taxonomic group. Sources for all contributing datasets are listed in the additional online content.
Number of species
Population change metrics Red List UK total
Taxonomic group Abundance Occupancy
FRESHWATER AND TERRESTRIAL
Birds* 171 241 244
Mammals** 25 20 46 49
Amphibians and reptiles 2 13
Insects*** 499 (butterflies and moths) 3,437** 2,773 23,947
Myriapods 50 92 169
Arachnids 402 639 1,560
Crustaceans 51 80
Molluscs 129 192 264
Bryophytes 569 1,055 1,056
Lichens 696 1,662 2,354
Non-lichenised fungi 153 15,195
Vascular Plants 1,351 1,527 1,577
Total 697 6,654 8,431
MARINE
Fish 11
Birds 13
Mammals 7
Zooplankton 4 species groups
Phytoplankton Colour Index 1 species group
Total 31 species and 5 species groups
* UK total is regularly occurring breeding and wintering species. ** A proportion of mammal species and moth species were included in both the abundance metrics and the occupancy metrics. See additional online material for species appearing in both metrics. *** Groups included: aculeates, bugs, beetles, caddisflies, dragonflies, flies, grasshoppers, lacewings, mayflies, moths and stoneflies.
Vascular plant data from this process provided estimates and standard deviation from the (means and standard deviations) GAM results were used to generate For vascular plants, the Botanical of a species’ frequency within each a distribution of estimates for each Society of Britain and Ireland is time period. One hundred generalised species’ year combination from the main source of high-quality additive models (GAMs) per species which 1,000 random samples were distribution data, with data holdings were then fitted to 100 random draws drawn. Estimates were then capped stretching back to the 19th century from a species’ frequency estimate (2, -2) to prevent disproportional and beyond. Here, we use data from distribution specified by the Frescalo contributions from species exhibiting 1930–2018 to derive broad time- means and standard deviations. extreme trends and rescaled onto period specific estimates of frequency This process enabled us to predict the occupancy scale (0 to 1). for 1,351 plant taxa. To achieve smoothed trends from the 100 GAM this, we divided this period into five Marine data fits for a species across all years, while broad time segments; four of these retaining a measure of uncertainty. Marine fish time series were based were retained for analysis, due to Finally, the estimated frequency in on two “bottom trawl” surveys: the fact that they were considered 1970 was taken as our baseline year, Greater North Sea International Otter to be largely unbiased with respect with subsequent values normalised Trawl Q1 and Celtic Seas Scottish to species’ relative frequencies due to this point. Otter Trawl Q1. These datasets to Atlas-focused recording activity. have been tidied and refined We then applied the “Frescalo” To combine these time series with by Marine Scotland10,11, giving algorithm9 to these data to adjust the occupancy time series from estimates of abundance per km2 for variable recording effort within other taxa they required conversion by length category for each species and across time periods. Outputs to the same scale. The mean in each survey visit. 96 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
Before creating the population change year. CI for each Species Indicator were expressed as a proportion of that metrics, for each survey as required we: created using bootstrapping across in the first year, with exceptions1. 16 • Summarised the average abundance species ; in each iteration (N=10,000) Each measure of total change was per km2 for each length category of a random sample of species was then converted to an annual average each species in each year in each selected with replication and the index rate of change, which was used to survey area. was recalculated. categorise species’ change. We placed each species into one of five trend • Summarised the average abundance We generated smoothed Species categories, defined as follows: per km2 for each species in each year. Indicators and associated CI using 17 • Strong increase: Annual change • Retained only species contributing a generalised additive model . We greater than or equal to +2.81%, to the first 99% of abundance per focus on the total and annual average the rate of change that would lead km2 and with a time series spanning change in the smoothed Species to population size or occupancy at least 10 years, in order to exclude Indicator in the results and also doubling or more over 25 years. rare or poorly sampled species. present the unsmoothed indicator. • Moderate increase: Annual change • Coded species as either “demersal” Occupancy indicators were created between +1.16% and +2.81%. or “pelagic”. using the methods developed for Indicator C4b of the UK Biodiversity • Little change: Annual change The Continuous Plankton Recorder Indicator suite6 and used the lambda between -1.14% and +1.16%. (CPR) Survey dataset provided data for method. This indicator is based • Moderate decrease: Annual change Calanus species but also for several on annual growth rates and the between -2.73% and -1.14%. zooplankton groups rather than credibility intervals are derived from for individual species. Similarly, the • Strong decrease: Annual change the posterior distribution of the PCI gives a representation of ocean less than or equal to -2.73%, the Bayesian occupancy models used to colour, which is considered a proxy rate of change that would lead to generate the estimates. of the phytoplankton biomass. This a population halving or more over means that additional considerations The annual average rate of change in 25 years. are required in order to interpret how each Species Indicator was calculated This categorisation was based on marine biodiversity is changing over based on the total change in the long the magnitude of change, not the time, as a single trend from the CPR term; the indicator value in its final statistical significance of that change. may encompass change in a range of year, and the short term; the change in Statistical significance is determined individual species. the indicator in its last 10 years. If the by interannual trend variance, which CI around the final estimate did not is influenced by sample size, and to PRODUCING OUR MEASURES OF contain 100, the long-term change was the actual interannual variation in SPECIES’ POPULATION CHANGE considered significant. If the CI around population change, which is determined the indicator values in the start and end Separate change metrics were created by species’ life history. This means that years did not overlap, the short-term based on the species’ abundance time statistical power varies between species change was considered significant. series and the species’ occupancy time and between taxonomic groups. It is series. Previously we have combined Testing for change over the common practice to use the magnitude these data types into a single metric period of the indicator and rate of population change, rather of change in line with other authors12. than statistical significance, in order Each abundance Species Indicator However, recent research has to categorise conservation status was assessed for change between indicated that the magnitude of these assessments. Thus, our values are two non-overlapping time periods. two measures of population change the best available estimates for each Each indicator was modelled using a may not be strongly correlated13,14. species, but we must acknowledge linear model of the form: in (index) Within the abundance and occupancy that many species’ trend estimates are ~ year + year: Period, where “Period” datasets the same species contributed highly uncertain. was a binary variable specifying the to the Species Indicator and the non-overlapping short-term and prior In addition, we presented a binary Categorical Change metric. (1970–2005) time periods1. split of the proportion of species with positive and negative trends, SPECIES INDICATORS CATEGORICAL CHANGE regardless of magnitude. To create the abundance Species For each species we calculated the Indicators, all individual species’ time IUCN RED LIST ASSESSMENTS total change then the average annual series were converted to species change over the entire long-term At a global level, the IUCN coordinates indices by expressing each annual period and the recent short-term the process of assessing which species estimate as a percent of the first year period – although in many cases the are threatened with extinction, and of the time series and the index was start and/or end years did not match has developed Red List assessment calculated as the geometric mean of 18 these years exactly. Total change criteria to make the process as the species indices15. Species indices was either a published modelled transparent and consistent as possible. starting after 1970 entered the index output or the estimate in a smoothed at the geometric mean value for that species index in the penultimate year State of Nature Report 2019 97
These criteria are based on a variety for England, Northern Ireland, monitored – the method, effort and of parameters, including the rate Scotland and Wales, but in some cases extent of surveying – can influence of change in species’ abundance or this was not possible. whether the results were suitable for occupancy, total population size, our analyses, and indeed the species’ We have produced abundance number of populations and an trend itself. population change metrics (Species assessment of threats. Indicators and Categorical Change Although some rare species are The IUCN’s Red List of Threatened metrics) across all species for targeted by specific schemes, many of Species represents the world’s most Scotland and England, but only at the monitoring schemes that produce comprehensive information source a taxonomic group level for Wales the datasets included in this report on the global conservation status and Northern Ireland. have a wide range geographically of species. but may not have sufficient sampling Occupancy change metrics density locally to pick up changes in Data downloaded from were produced using the same localised or particularly rare species. www.iucnredlist.org (21/07/2019) methodology as the UK level indicator As a result, trends for relatively were used to calculate the number of for England, Scotland and Wales. few of these species are reported. species assessed under the various Insufficient data were available to Our population change metrics threat category for each OT and CD. apply the approach to Northern may therefore be biased towards These were based on “Land Region” Ireland or to the species sub-groups the more common, widespread and queries for all OTs and CDs, with the used at the UK-wide scale. generalist species, as well as being exception of the Bailiwick of Jersey Equally, even when metrics have been biased towards certain taxonomic and Guernsey exclusive economic produced, it should be noted that the groups. The datasets also differ in zones, Isle of Man territorial waters, population change and distributional spatial coverage. For some species Cyprus Sovereign Base Areas and the change metrics for the constituent groups estimates are based only on British Antarctic Territory, which used countries were based on fewer species Great Britain and mammal estimates spatial queries19. and suffered from greater bias towards contain some Isle of Man sites. How threatened a species is may vary well-recorded taxa. These, however, represent relatively across its range, and often regional small differences in extent and are For national Red Lists, we used or national Red Lists are produced, likely to only influence the trends lists of species present in England, documenting which species are of localised species. Scotland and Wales to interpret the threatened at different spatial scales20. existing Great Britain Red Lists in a We use outputs from hierarchical We have brought together all the national context – this means that the occupancy models as this method has national Red Lists for Great Britain status of a species outside a nation shown to perform well at dealing with that have been produced using the may influence the Red List results common forms of bias encountered latest guidelines from the IUCN18,20. presented for that nation. In the case when analysing biological records4. For more details of the Red Lists of Northern Ireland, we have used As with all modelling approaches, used, please see the additional all-Ireland Red List assessments for there are several assumptions that online material. species occurring in Northern Ireland, should be met when using the as this allowed the consideration of a approach. Given the number of We summarised the global and broader taxonomic scope than data species included in the analysis, there regional Red Lists to present the from Northern Ireland alone. may be occasions where some of the percent of species in each category assumptions are not met, for example and the percent considered CAVEATS intense targeted surveys for certain threatened across all species, and species may not be fully accounted at different taxonomic levels. We The datasets presented in this report for in the detection model. However, followed recognised guidelines21 and are a summary of the information while the model may not be perfect used the best estimate (the mid-point) available. However, although they for all species, it is likely to be better when calculating the percent of extant cover many species, the datasets than a model that ignores variation species, for which sufficient data have not been selected to reflect a in detectability. are available, classified as globally representative sample of UK species, Threatened (CR + EN + VU)/(Number either within or between taxonomic Although official guidelines are used assessed – EX – DD). groups or habitats. This means to produce national Red Lists, there is that we should be cautious about room for variation in interpretation of COUNTRY-LEVEL REPORTING extrapolating findings beyond the these guidelines and so there are small species assessed. We do not have the same volume of differences in the way different authors information on species’ trends within We have put together datasets have compiled the national Red Lists the UK’s constituent countries as we collected using different methods, summarised here. This is particularly do for the UK as a whole. We have measured at a variety of spatial scales true in defining which species are attempted to repeat analyses, as and analysed using different statistical not threatened (of Least Concern). presented for the UK, in the sections techniques. How a species has been 98 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
17. Fuller RM (1987). The changing extent and 11. Mair L, et al. (2014). Abundance changes and REFERENCES conservation interest of lowland grasslands habitat availability drive species’ responses to in England and Wales: a review of grassland climate change. Nature Climate Change, 4: 127. surveys 1930–1984. Biological Conservation, 40: 12. Thackeray SJ, et al. (2010). Trophic level KEY FINDINGS AND RESULTS 281–300. asynchrony in rates of phenological change 1. Defra (2019). Total factor productivity of the 18. Baker DJ, et al. (2012). Landscape-scale for marine, freshwater and terrestrial agricultural industry 1973–2017. https://www. responses of birds to agri-environment environments. Global Change Biology, 16: gov.uk/government/statistics/total-factor- management: a test of the English 3304–3313. productivity-of-the-agricultural-industry. Environmental Stewardship scheme. Journal of 13. Pearce-Higgins JW & Green R (2014). Birds 2. Eaton et al. (2012). The state of the UK’s birds Applied Ecology, 49: 871–882. and climate change: impacts and conservation 2012. RSPB, BTO, WWT, CCW, NE, NIEA, SNH and 19. Merckx T, et al. (2012). Hedgerow trees and responses, Cambridge University Press. JNCC. Sandy, Bedfordshire. extended-width field margins enhance macro- 14. Franks SE, et al. (2018). The sensitivity of moth diversity: implications for management. breeding songbirds to changes in seasonal Journal of Applied Ecology, 49: 1396–1404. timing is linked to population change but DRIVERS OF CHANGE 20. Boughey KL, et al. (2011). Improving the cannot be directly attributed to the effects biodiversity benefits of hedgerows: how of trophic asynchrony on productivity. Global Introduction physical characteristics and the proximity of Change Biology, 24: 957–971. 1. Burns F, et al. (2016). Agricultural management foraging habitat affect the use of linear features 15. Martay B, et al. (2017). Impacts of climate and climatic change are the major drivers of by bats. Biological Conservation, 144: 1790–1798. change on national biodiversity population biodiversity change in the UK. PloS one, 11: 21. MacDonald MA, et al. (2019). Have Welsh trends. Ecography, 40: 1139–1151. e0151595. agri-environment schemes delivered for 16. Bell JR, et al. (2015). Long-term phenological focal species? Results from a comprehensive trends, species accumulation rates, aphid Agricultural management monitoring programme. Journal of Applied traits and climate: five decades of change in 1. Burns F, et al. (2016). Agricultural management Ecology, 56: 812–823. migrating aphids. Journal of Animal Ecology, and climatic change are the major drivers of 22. Batáry P, et al. (2015). The role of agri- 84: 21–34. biodiversity change in the UK. PloS one, 11: environment schemes in conservation and 17. Britton AJ, et al. (2009). Biodiversity gains and e0151595. environmental management. Conservation losses: evidence for homogenisation of Scottish 2. Defra (2018). National Statistics – Agriculture in Biology, 29: 1006–1016. alpine vegetation. Biological Conservation, the United Kingdom 2017. https://www.gov.uk/ 23. Johns CA (1879). British birds in their 142: 1728–1739. government/statistics/agriculture-in-the-united- haunts, Society for Promoting Christian 18. Rothero G, et al. (2011). Climate change and kingdom-2017 Knowledge. London. its consequences on bryophyte-dominated 3. Boatman ND, et al. (2007). Impacts of 24. Bulman CR, et al. (2012). Conserving the Marsh snowbed vegetation. In: Marrs SJ, et al. (Eds) agricultural change on farmland biodiversity in Fritillary in Dorset: Lessons from 15 years of The Changing Nature of Scotland, TSO Scotland, the UK. Biodiversity under threat: 1–32. landscape-scale conservation. In: Ellis S, Bourn Edinburgh. 435–440. 4. Wilson JD, et al. (2009). Bird conservation and NAD and Bulman CR (ed) Landscape-scale 19. Morecroft MD, et al. (2009). The UK agriculture, Cambridge University Press. conservation for butterflies and moths: lessons Environmental Change Network: Emerging 5. Defra (2019). Total factor productivity of the from the UK. Butterfly Conservation, Wareham, trends in the composition of plant and animal agricultural industry 1973–2017. https://www. Dorset, 24–29. communities and the physical environment. gov.uk/government/statistics/total-factor- Biological Conservation, 142.12: 2814–2832. productivity-of-the-agricultural-industry. Climate change 20. Ockendon N, et al. (2014). Mechanisms 6. Defra (2019). The British survey of fertiliser 1. IPBES (2019). Summary for policymakers of the underpinning climatic impacts on natural practice – fertiliser use on farm crops for crop global assessment report on biodiversity and populations: altered species interactions are year 2018. https://assets.publishing.service. ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental more important than direct effects. Global gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/ Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Change Biology, 20: 2221–2229. attachment_data/file/806643/fertiliseruse- Ecosystem Services. IPBES secretariat, 21. Pearce-Higgins JW, et al. (2017). A national-scale report2018-06jun19.pdf. Bonn, Germany. https://www.ipbes.net/ assessment of climate change impacts on 7. Goulson D, et al. (2018). Rapid rise in toxic load system/tdf/ipbes_7_10_add-1-_advance_0. species: assessing the balance of risks and for bees revealed by analysis of pesticide use in pdf?file=1&type=node&id=35245. opportunities for multiple taxa. Biological Great Britain. PeerJ, 6: e5255. 2. Burns F, et al. (2016). Agricultural management conservation, 213: 124–134. 8. Fera (2018). https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/ and climatic change are the major drivers of 22. Thomas CD, et al. (2012). Protected areas pusstats/myindex.cfm. biodiversity change in the UK. PloS one, 11: facilitate species’ range expansions. e0151595. 9. Defra & National Statistics (2018). Wild bird Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, populations in the UK, 1970 to 2017. https:// 3. Kendon M, et al. (2018). State of the UK Climate 109: 14063–14068. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ 2018. International Journal of Climatology. 23. Hiley JR, et al. (2013). Protected areas act as uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ 39 (Suppl. 1): 1–55. establishment centres for species colonizing the file/754432/UK_Wild_birds_1970-2017_ 4. Fung F, et al. (2018). UKCP18 Factsheet: Sea Level UK. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological FINAL__002_.pdf. Rise and Storm Surge. Met Office Hadley Centre, Sciences, 280: 2012–2310. 10. Chamberlain DE, et al. (1999). Effects of habitat Exeter. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/ 24. Gillingham et al. (2015). The effectiveness type and management on the abundance of content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/research/ of protected areas to conserve species skylarks in the breeding season. Journal of ukcp/ukcp18-fact-sheet-sea-level-rise-and- undertaking geographic range shifts. Biological Applied Ecology, 36: 856–870. storm-surge.pdf. Journal of the Linnean Society, 115: 707–717. 11. Siriwardena GM, et al. (2008). Farmland birds 5. Murphy JM (2019). UKCP18 Land Projections: 25. Natural England (2010). Project Information and late winter food: does seed supply fail to Science Report November 2018 (Updated March Note – Cumbria BogLIFE, Bringing Cumbria’s meet demand? Ibis, 150: 585–595. 2019). https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/pub/data/ Raised Bogs to Life. http://www.iucn-uk- weather/uk/ukcp18/science-reports/UKCP18- 12. Kuijper DPJ, et al. (2009). Decline and potential peatlandprogramme.org/sites/www.iucn-uk- recovery of the European grey partridge (Perdix Land-report.pdf. peatlandprogramme.org/files/Cumbria%20 perdix) population—a review. European journal 6. Met Office (2019).UKCP18 Science Overview Boglife%20Project%20Leaflet.pdf. of wildlife research, 55: 455–463. Executive Summary January 2019. https://www. 26. RSPB (2019). Nature helps our fight for a safe metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/content/assets/ 13. Shrubb M (2007). The Lapwing. T & A.D. climate. https://arcg.is/098uiD. metofficegovuk/pdf/research/ukcp/ukcp18- Poyser. London. 27. Evans C, et al. (2017). Implementation of an overview-summary.pdf. 14. SNH (2018). Index of abundance for Scottish emission inventory for UK peatlands. Report to the 7. Walther GR (2010). Community and ecosystem terrestrial breeding birds, 1994–2017. https:// Department for Business, Energy and Industrial www.nature.scot/information-hub/official- responses to recent climate change. Strategy, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, statistics/official-statistics-terrestrial- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Bangor, 88pp. https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/ breeding-birds. B-Biological Sciences, 365(1549): 2019–2024 assets/documents/reports/cat07/1904111135_ 15. Vanbergen AJ & Initiative tIP. (2013). Threats to 8. Morecroft MD & Speakman L (2015). Biodiversity UK_peatland_GHG_emissions.pdf. an ecosystem service: pressures on pollinators. Climate Change Impacts Summary Report. 2nd edition. Living With Environmental Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 11: Hydrological change 251–259. Change, Swindon. 1. Wilson JD, et al. (2009). Bird conservation and 9. Thackeray SJ, (2016). Phenological 16. Storkey J, et al. (2011). The impact of agricultural et al. agriculture, Cambridge University Press. intensification and land-use change on the sensitivity to climate across taxa and trophic 2. Robinson M & Armstrong AC (1988). The extent levels. 535: 241–245. European arable flora.Proceedings of the Royal Nature, of agricultural field drainage in England and Society B: Biological Sciences, 279: 1421–1429. 10. Mason C, et al. (2015). Geographical range Wales, 1971–80. Transactions of the Institute of margins of many taxonomic groups continue to British Geographers: 19–28. shift polewards, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 115: 586–597. State of Nature Report 2019 99
3. Shrubb M (2003). Birds, scythes and combines: 4. Department for Transport (2019). Road length 6. Senn HV, et al. (2019). Distinguishing the victim a history of birds and agricultural change, statistics. https://www.gov.uk/government/ from the threat: SNP-based methods reveal the Cambridge University Press. statistical-data-sets/road-length-statistics-rdl. extent of introgressive hybridization between 4. Stewart A & Lance A (1983). Moor-draining: 5. Scotland’s Environment (2019). Indicator 13: wildcats and domestic cats in Scotland and a review of impacts on land use. Journal of sealing. https://www.environment.gov.scot/ inform future in situ and ex situ management Environmental Management. our-environment/state-of-the-environment/ options for species restoration. Evolutionary 5. Leicester University (2015). Press Release – ecosystem-health-indicators/resilience- Applications, 12: 399–414. State of our countryside: Land use map of the indicators/indicator-13-soil-sealing/. 7. Broome A & Mitchell R (2017). Ecological United Kingdom reveals large-scale changes in 6. Hitchins SP & Beebee TJC (1998). Loss of genetic impacts of ash dieback and mitigation methods. environment. https://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/ diversity and fitness of common toadBufo Forestry Commission Research Note, 29. press/press-releases/2015/june/state-of-our- bufo in populations isolated by inimical habitat. 8. Daszak P, et al. (2003). Infectious disease and countryside-land-use-map-of-the-united- Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 11: 269–283. amphibian population declines. Diversity and kingdom-reveals-large-scale-changes-in- 7. Baldock KC, et al. (2019). A systems approach Distributions, 9: 141–150. environment. reveals urban pollinator hotspots and 9. Spitzen-van der Sluijs A, et al. (2013). Rapid 6. Oldham RS & Swan MJS (1997). Pond loss and conservation opportunities. Nature Ecology & enigmatic decline drives the fire salamander amphibians; historical perspective. In: Boothby J, Evolution, 3: 363. (Salamandra salamandra) to the edge of (Ed.), British Pond Landscapes Action for Protection 8. Rose R, et al. (2000). Changes on the heathlands extinction in the Netherlands. Amphibia-Reptilia, and Enhancement, The Pond Life Project. John in Dorset, England, between 1987 and 1996. 34: 233–239. Moores University, Liverpool. 3–16. Biological Conservation, 93: 117–125. 10. Williams F, et al. (2010). The economic cost of 7. Wood PJ, et al. (2003). Pond biodiversity and 9. McKinney ML (2008). Effects of urbanization invasive non-native species on Great Britain. habitat loss in the UK. Area, 35: 206–216. on species richness: A review of plants and CABI Proj No VM10066: 1–99. 8. Environment Agency (2008). Water resources animals. Urban Ecosystems, 11: 161–176. 11. Bellard C, et al. (2016). Alien species as a in England and Wales – current state and future 10. Baldock KC, et al. (2015). Where is the UK’s driver of recent extinctions. Biology Letters, pressures. https://webarchive.nationalarchives. pollinator biodiversity? The importance of urban 12: 20150623. gov.uk/20140329213237/http://cdn.environment- areas for flower-visiting insects.Proceedings 12. GB Non-native species secretariat (2017). GB agency.gov.uk/geho1208bpas-e-e.pdf. of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, non-native species report card 2017. http://www. 9. European Commission (2019). Introduction to the 282: 2014–2849. nonnativespecies.org/downloadDocument. EU Water Framework Directive. http://ec.europa. 11. Bellamy CC, et al. (2017). A spatial framework cfm?id=1116. eu/environment/water/water-framework/info/ for targeting urban planning for pollinators 13. Roy HE, et al. (2014). GB Non-native Species intro_en.htm. and people with local stakeholders: A route Information Portal: documenting the arrival 10. Environment Agency (2018). The state of the to healthy, blossoming communities? of non-native species in Britain. Biological environment: water quality. https://assets. Environmental Research, 158: 255–268. invasions, 16: 2495–2505. publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/ 12. Mathews F, et al. (2018). A review of the 14. Martin A & Richardson M (2017). Rodent system/uploads/attachment_data/file/709493/ population and conservation status of British eradication scaled up: clearing rats and mice State_of_the_environment_water_quality_ mammals, Natural England. from South Georgia. Oryx: 1–9. report.pdf. 13. Wilson E & Wembridge D (2018). The State 15. Maclean JE, et al. (2018). Understorey plant 11. Defra & National Statistics (2018). Wild bird of Britain’s Hedgehogs 2018. People’s community composition reflects invasion populations in the UK, 1970 to 2017. https:// Trust for Endangered Species and British history decades after invasive Rhododendron assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/ Hedgehog Preservation Society, https:// has been removed. Journal of Applied Ecology, uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/ www.hedgehogstreet.org/wp-content/ 55: 874–884. file/754432/UK_Wild_birds_1970-2017_ uploads/2018/02/SoBH-2018_final.pdf. 16. Gallardo B & Aldridge DC (2015). Is Great FINAL__002_.pdf. 14. Plummer KE, et al. (2019). The composition Britain heading for a Ponto–Caspian invasional 12. Outhwaite CL, et al. (in prep). Complexity of of British bird communities is associated meltdown? Journal of Applied Ecology, 52: 41–49. biodiversity change revealed through long-term with long-term garden bird feeding. Nature 17. GB Non-native species secretariat (2019). trends of invertebrates, bryophytes and lichens. Communications, 10: 2088. Check, Clean, Dry Campaign. http://www. 13. UK NEA (2011). The UK National Ecosystem 15. Lintott P & Mathews F (2018). Reviewing the nonnativespecies.org/checkcleandry/. Assessment: Synthesis of the Key Findings. evidence on mitigation strategies for bats in 18. Creative Research (2018). Survey of Attitudes, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. buildings: informing best-practice for policy Knowledge and Behaviour in Relation to Non- 14. Dunbar MJ, et al. (2010). River discharge makers and practitioners. native Species. Report of findings. https:// and local-scale physical habitat influence 16. Stott I, et al. (2015). Land sparing is crucial for secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/nonnativespecies/ macroinvertebrate LIFE scores. Freshwater urban ecosystem services. Frontiers in Ecology downloadDocument.cfm?id=1709. Biology, 55: 226–242. and the Environment, 13: 387–393. 15. Vaughan IP & Gotelli NJ (2019). Water quality 17. BCT (2018). Guidance Note 08/18 Bats and Pollution improvements offset the climatic debt for artificial lighting in the UK Bats and the Built 1. Plantlife (2017). We need to talk about nitrogen. stream macroinvertebrates over twenty years. Environment series. https://www.theilp.org.uk/ https://www.plantlife.org.uk/uk/our-work/ Nature Communications, 10: 1956. documents/guidance-note-8-bats-and- policy/nitrogen. 16. SNH (2015). Beavers in Scotland: a report to the artificial-lighting/. 2. JNCC (2018). Environmental Pressures: Air Scottish Government. SNH, Inverness. Pollution. http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-1426. 17. Jones S & Campbell-Palmer R (2014). The Scottish Invasive non-native species, 3. European Commission (2019). Introduction to the Beaver Trial: The Story of Britain’s First Licensed pests and pathogens EU Water Framework Directive. http://ec.europa. Release into the Wild. Scottish Wildlife Trust and 1. Defra (2015). The Great Britain invasive non- eu/environment/water/water-framework/info/ Royal Zoological Society of Scotland, Edinburgh. native species strategy. https://www.gov.uk/ intro_en.htm. 18. Moran D & Lewis AR (2014). The Scottish Beaver government/publications/the-great-britain- 4. Environment Agency (2018). The state of the Trial: socioeconomic monitoring, final report. invasive-non-native-species-strategy. environment: water quality. https://www.gov. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report 2. Roy HE, et al. (2012). Non-Native Species in uk/government/publications/state-of-the- No. 799. Great Britain: establishment, detection and environment. reporting to inform effective decision making. 5. Shardlow M (2017). Neonicotinoid Insecticides in Urbanisation Report to Defra, NERC Centre for Ecology British Freshwaters. Buglife, Peterborough. 1. Miro A, et al. (2018). Links between ecological & Hydrology. 6. Defra (2019). Emissions of air pollutants in the UK, and human wealth in drainage ponds in a fast- 3. Fraser EJ, et al. (2015). Range expansion of an 1970 to 2017. https://www.gov.uk/government/ expanding city, and proposals for design and invasive species through a heterogeneous statistics/emissions-of-air-pollutants. management. Landscape and Urban Planning, landscape – the case of American mink in 7. Preston C, et al. (2002). New Atlas of the 180: 93–102. Scotland. Diversity and Distributions, 21: 888–900. Flora of Britain & Ireland. Oxford University 2. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 4. Piotrowska MJ, et al. (2018). Planting exotic Press, Oxford. Population Division, United Nations (2018). relatives has increased the threat posed by 8. Fox R, et al. (2014). Long-term changes to the World Urbanization Prospects: The 2018 Revision. Dothistroma septosporum to the Caledonian frequency of occurrence of British moths are https://population.un.org/wup/Country- pine populations of Scotland. Evolutionary consistent with opposing and synergistic effects Profiles/. Applications, 11: 350–363. of climate and land-use changes. Journal of 3. Burns F, et al. (2016). Agricultural management 5. Ennos R, et al. (2019). Is the introduction of Applied Ecology, 51: 949–957. and climatic change are the major drivers novel exotic forest tree species a rational of biodiversity change in the UK. PloS one, response to rapid environmental change? 11: e0151595. – A British perspective. Forest Ecology and Management, 432: 718–728. 100 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
9. Hall J, et al. (2019). Trends Report 2018: Trends 12. Welsh Government (2018). Woodlands for Wales 7. Moriarty M & Greenstreet S (2017). Celtic Sea in critical load and critical level exceedances in – The Welsh Government’s Strategy for Woodlands Scottish Quarter 1 Otter Trawl Groundfish Survey the UK. CEH report to Defra under contract and Trees. https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/ Monitoring and Assessment Data Products, AQ0843 Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, publications/2018-06/woodlands-for-wales- 10.7489/1957–1. Bangor, UK. https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/assets/ strategy_0.pdf. 8. Mitchell IP, et al. (2004). Seabird populations of documents/reports/cat09/1905230854_Trends_ 13. Cairngorms Connect. http://cairngormsconnect. Britain and Ireland. T & AD Poyser, London. Report_2018.pdf. org.uk/. 9. Cook ASCP, et al. (2014). Indicators of seabird 10. ZSL (2016). Conservation of Tidal Thames 14. Woodland Trust. The Northern Forest – our vision. reproductive performance demonstrate the Fish through the Planning Process. Guidance https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/about- impact of commercial fisheries on seabird Document. Zoological Society of London, London. us/woodland-creation/the-northern-forest- populations in the North Sea. Ecological 11. JNCC (2019). Surface water status indicator B7. our-vision/. Indicators, 38: 1–11. https://jncc.gov.uk/our-work/ukbi-b7-surface- 15. Woodland Wildlife Toolkit. https:// 10. Lauria V, et al. (2013). Regional variation in water-status/. woodlandwildlifetoolkit.sylva.org.uk/. the impact of climate change: evidence that 12. Pescott OL, et al. (2015). Air pollution and its 16. Celtic Rainforest Project. https://www. bottom-up regulation from plankton to seabirds effects on lichens, bryophytes, and lichen- snowdonia.gov.wales/looking-after/life-celtic- is weak in parts of the Northeast Atlantic. feeding Lepidoptera: review and evidence rainforests-project. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 488: 11–22. from biological records. Biological Journal of the 17. Clark J & Webber J (2017). The ash resource and 11. Carroll MJ, et al. (2015). Effects of sea Linnean Society, 115.3: 611–635. the response to ash dieback in Great Britain. temperature and stratification changes on 13. Ellis CJ & Coppins BJ (2019). Five decades of Dieback of European ash: 228–237. seabird breeding success. Climate Research, decline for old growth indicator lichens in 18. Mitchell RJ, et al. (2017). Challenges in 66.1: 75–89. Scotland. Edinburgh Journal of Botany, 1–13. assessing the ecological impacts of tree 12. Carroll M, et al. (2017). Kittiwake breeding 14. UNECE (2019). The United Nations Economic diseases and mitigation measures: the case of success in the southern North Sea correlates Commission for Europe. A common framework Hymenoscyphus fraxineus and Fraxinus excelsior. with prior sandeel fishing mortality.Aquatic for transboundary cooperation on air pollution. Baltic Forestry, 23: 116–140. Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, https://www.unece.org/environmental-policy/ 19. Littlewood NA, et al. (2015). Invertebrate species 27.6: 1164–1175. conventions/envlrtapwelcome/the-air- at risk from Ash Dieback in the UK. Journal of 13. Hammond PS, et al. (2017). Estimates of cetacean convention-and-its-protocols/the-convention- insect conservation, 19: 75–85. abundance in European Atlantic waters in summer and-its-achievements.html. 20. Mitchell R, et al. (2014). Ash dieback in the UK: 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard 15. International Maritime Organisation (2019). a review of the ecological and conservation surveys. Wageningen Marine Research. Sulphur 2020 – cutting sulphur oxide emissions. implications and potential management 14. Pinn E, et al. (2018). Cetacean abundance and http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/ options. Biological Conservation, 175: 95–109. distribution: wide-ranging cetaceans. UK Marine Pages/Sulphur-2020.aspx. 21. Ennos R, et al. (2019). Is the introduction of Online Assessment Tool, available at: https:// 16. Defra (2019). Clean Air Strategy 2019 – Policy novel exotic forest tree species a rational moat.cefas.co.uk/biodiversity-food-webs-and- paper. Defra, London. https://assets.publishing. response to rapid environmental change? marine-protected-areas/cetaceans/abundance- service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/ – A British perspective. Forest Ecology and and-distribution-of-cetaceans-other-than- uploads/attachment_data/file/770715/clean-air- Management, 432: 718–728. coastal-bottlenose-dolphins/. strategy-2019.pdf. 15. SCOS (2018). Scientific Advice on Matters Related 17. Natural England (2015). Catchment Sensitive to the Management of Seal Populations: 2018. Farming Evaluation Report. CONSERVATION Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) Special Committee on Seals. Woodland management Working for nature: conservation 16. Mitchell I, et al. (2018). Changes in the abundance 1. The Food and Agriculture Organization (2015). in the uk and distribution of seals. UK Marine Online Global Forest Resources Assessment 2015. Rome. 1. Lawton J, et al. (2010). Making space for nature: Assessment Tool, available at: https://moat. 2. Forest Research (2018). Woodland Statistics. a review of England’s wildlife sites and ecological cefas.co.uk/biodiversity-food-webs-and- https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools- network. Defra, London, UK. marine-protected-areas/seals/abundance-and- distribution/. and-resources/statistics/statistics-by-topic/ 2. Ambler C (2018). Evaluating Effectiveness in woodland-statistics/. UK Conservation: Taxonomic Variation in the 17. McQuatters-Gollop A, et al. (2019). Plankton 3. Gibbs J, et al. (1994). Dutch elm disease in Prevalence and Success of Species Recovery lifeforms as a biodiversity indicator for regional- Britain. Research Information Note – Forestry Projects. Unpublished MSc. Thesis, Imperial scale assessment of pelagic habitats for policy. Authority Research Division. College London. Ecological Indicators, 101: 913–925. 4. Gill RM & Fuller RJ (2007). The effects of deer 3. Brown A, et al. (2012). Bitterns and bittern 18. Richardson AJ, et al. (2006). Using continuous browsing on woodland structure and songbirds conservation in the UK. British Birds, 105: 58. plankton recorder data. Progress in Oceanography, 68: 27–74. in lowland Britain. Ibis, 149: 119–127. 4. MacDonald MA, et al. (2012). Effects of agri- 5. Littlemore J & Barker S (2001). The ecological environment management for stone curlews 19. OSPAR (2017). Changes in Phytoplankton and response of forest ground flora and soils on other biodiversity. Biological Conservation, Zooplankton Communities. https://oap.ospar. to experimental trampling in British urban 148: 134–145. org/en/ospar-assessments/intermediate- assessment-2017/biodiversity-status/habitats/ woodlands. Urban Ecosystems, 5: 257–276. 5. United Nations (2019). Sustainable changes-phytoplankton-and-zooplankton- 6. Marzano M & Dandy N (2012). Recreationist Development Goals Knowledge Platform. communities/. behaviour in forests and the disturbance www.sustainabledevelopment.un.org/. of wildlife. Biodiversity and Conservation, 20. Capuzzo E, et al. (2018). A decline in primary 21: 2967–2986. production in the North Sea over 25 years, 7. Ellis CJ & Coppins BJ (2019). Five decades of MARINE associated with reductions in zooplankton decline for old growth indicator lichens in abundance and fish stock recruitment.Global Scotland. Edinburgh Journal of Botany, 1–13. Marine key findings Change Biology, 24: e352–e364. doi:10.1017/S0960428619000088. 1. UK Marine Monitoring and Assessment Strategy Climate change and ocean 8. Whytock RC, et al. (2018). Bird-community (2019). https://moat.cefas.co.uk/introduction-to- responses to habitat creation in a long-term, uk-marine-strategy/. acidification large-scale natural experiment. Conservation 2. European Commission, Marine Strategy 1. MCCIP (2019). Marine Climate Change Impacts: Biology, 32: 345–354. Framework Directive 2008/56/EC, European 10 year report card. http://www.mccip.org.uk/ 9. Forestry Commission (2018). Guidance note: Commission (2008). http://www.msfd.eu/. impacts-report-cards/full-report-cards/2017- Create Woodland: Overview. https://www.gov.uk/ 3. OSPAR Intermediate Assessment (2017). 10-year-report-card/climate-of-the-marine- guidance/create-woodland-overview. https://oap.ospar.org/en/osparassessments/ environment/temperature/. 10. NRW (2018). Guidance note: Glastir intermediate-assessment-2017. 2. Kendon M, et al. (2019). State of the UK climate Woodland Creation Planners’ Guide. 4. Simpson SD, et al. (2011). Continental shelf-wide 2018. International Journal of Climatology, https://cdn.naturalresources.wales/ response of a fish assemblage to rapid warming 39: 1–55. media/687441/gn002-glastir-woodland- of the sea. Current Biology, 21: 1565–1570. 3. Dye SR, et al. (2013). Climate change impacts on creation-planners-guidance-english. 5. Cook RM, Sinclair A & Stefansson G (1997). the waters around the UK and Ireland: Salinity. pdf?mode=pad&rnd=131871143210000000. Potential collapse of North Sea cod stocks. MCCIP Science Review 2013, 60–66. 11. Scottish Government (2017). Draft Climate Nature, 385(6616), 521. 4. Williamson C, et al. (2017) Ocean acidification. Change Plan: The Draft Third Report on Policies 6. Moriarty M & Greenstreet S (2017). Greater MCCIP Science Review 2017, 1–14. and Proposals 2017–2032. Edinburgh. http:// North Sea International Otter Trawl Quarter 1 www.gov.scot/ Resource/0051/00513102.pdf. Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Products, 10.7489/1922–1. State of Nature Report 2019 101
5. Fung F, et al. (2018). UKCP18 Factsheet: Sea Level 26. Frederiksen M, et al. (2013). Climate, copepods 9. Rijnsdorp AD, et al. (2018). Estimating sensitivity Rise and Storm Surge. Met Office Hadley Centre, and seabirds in the boreal Northeast Atlantic – of seabed habitats to disturbance by bottom Exeter. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/binaries/ current state and future outlook. Global Change trawling based on the longevity of benthic content/assets/metofficegovuk/pdf/research/ Biology, 19(2), 364–372. fauna. Ecological Applications, 28: 1302–1312. ukcp/ukcp18-fact-sheet-sea-level-rise-and- 27. Carroll MJ, et al. (2015). Effects of sea 10. Vina-Herbon, et al. (2018). Extent of physical storm-surge.pdf. temperature and stratification changes on damage to predominant seafloor habitats. UK 6. Sharples J, et al. (2013). Impacts of climate seabird breeding success. Climate Research, Marine Online Assessment Tool, available at: change on shelf sea stratification,MCCIP Science 66.1: 75–89. https://moat.cefas.co.uk/biodiversity-food- Review 2013, 67–70. 28. MacDonald A, et al. (2015). Climate driven webs-and-marine-protected-areas/benthic- 7. Richardson AJ, et al. (2006). Using continuous trophic cascades affecting seabirds around the habitats/physical-damage/. plankton recorder data. Progress in British Isles. Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. Annu. Rev 53: 11. ICES WGBYC (2017). Bycatch of small cetaceans Oceanography 68: 27–74. 55–80. and other marine animals – Review of national 8. McQuatters-Gollop A, et al. (2015). The 29. JNCC (2016). Seabird Population Trends and reports under Council Regulation (EC) No. Continuous Plankton Recorder survey: How can Causes of Change: 1986-2015 Report (http:// 812/2004 and other published documents. long-term phytoplankton datasets contribute to jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-3201). Joint Nature Published 11 September 2018 by c.eu https:// the assessment of Good Environmental Status? Conservation Committee. Updated doi.org.10.17895/ices.pub.45142. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 162: 88–97. September 2016. 12. Northridge S, et al. (2017). Disentangling the 9. Capuzzo E, et al. (2018). A decline in primary 30. Evans PG & Bjørge A (2013). Impacts of climate causes of protected-species bycatch in gillnet production in the North Sea over 25 years, change on marine mammals. MCCIP Science fisheries.Conservation Biology, 31.3: 686–695. associated with reductions in zooplankton Review 2013, 134–148. 13. ICES (2017). Report of the Working Group on abundance and fish stock recruitment.Global 31. Evans PGH (2018). North Sea cetacean research Bycatch of Protected Species (WGBYC), 12–15 June Change Biology, 24: e352–e364. since the 1960s: advances and gaps. Lutra, 61 2017, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, USA. ICES 10. Beaugrand G & Reid PC (2003). Long-term (1): 3–13. CM 2017/ACOM:24. 82 pp. changes in phytoplankton, zooplankton and 32. Defra (2018). The National Adaptation 14. Northridge S, et al. (2010). Entanglement salmon related to climate. Global Change Programme and the Third Strategy for Climate of minke whales in Scottish waters: an Biology, 9: 801–817. Adaptation Reporting. Making the country resilient investigation into occurrence, causes and 11. Pitois SG & Fox CJ (2006). Long-term changes in to a changing climate. https://assets.publishing. mitigation. Contract Report. Final Report to zooplankton biomass concentration and mean service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/ Scottish Government CR/2007/49. size over the Northwest European shelf inferred uploads/attachment_data/file/727252/national- 15. Ryan C, et al. (2016). Entanglement: an from Continuous Plankton Recorder data. ICES adaptation-programme-2018.pdf. emerging threat to humpback whales in Journal of Marine Science, 63: 785–798. 33. MCCIP (2018). Climate Change and Marine Scottish waters. In Scientific Committee Meeting 12. Beaugrand G, et al. (2008). Causes and Conservation. http://www.mccip.org.uk/climate- of the International Whaling Commission. projections of abrupt climate-driven ecosystem smart-adaptation/climate-change-and-marine- 16. Tindall C, Hetherington S, Bell C, Deaville R, shifts in the North Atlantic. Ecology Letters, 11: conservation/. Barker J, Borrow K, Oakley M, Bendall V and 1157–1168. 34. MCCIP (2018). Climate change and marine Engelhard G (Eds) (2019). Hauling Up Solutions: 13. Wanless S, et al. (2005). Low energy values of conservation: Saltmarsh (eds. Ladd C, Skov M, Reducing Cetacean Bycatch in UK Fisheries. Final fish as a probable cause of a major seabird Lewis H and Leegwater E) MCCIP, Lowestoft, 8pp. Workshop Report. 31 pp. www.cefas.co.uk/ breeding failure in the North Sea. Marine Ecology 35. MCCIP (2018). Climate change and marine cetacean-by-catch-workshop. Progress Series, 294: 1–8. conservation: Maerl Beds (eds. Russel T and 17. Mitchell, et al. (2018). Harbour porpoise bycatch. 14. Daunt F, Mitchell I and Frederiksen M (2017). Cunningham S) MCCIP, Lowestoft, 8pp. UK Marine Online Assessment Tool, available Seabirds. MCCIP Science Review 2017, 42–46. 36. MCCIP (2018). Climate change and marine at: https://moat.cefas.co.uk/biodiversity-food- doi:10.14465/2017.arc10.004-seb. conservation: Horse Mussel Beds (eds. Smedley webs-and-marine-protected-areas/cetaceans/ 15. MCCIP (2018). Climate change and marine M, et al.) MCCIP, Lowestoft, 8pp. doi: harbour-porpoise-bycatch/. conservation: Sandeels and their availability 10.14465.2018.ccmco.002-hom. 18. SCOS (2018). Scientific Advice on Matters Related as seabird prey. (Eds. Wright P, Regnier T, to the Management of Seal Populations: 2018. EerkesMedrano D and Gibb F) MCCIP, Lowestoft, Fisheries Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) 8pp. doi: 10.14465.2018.ccmco.006-sel. 1. IPBES (2019). Report of the Plenary of the Special Committee on Seals. 16. Perry AL, et al. (2005). Climate change and Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on 19. Bradbury G, et al. (2017). Risk assessment of distribution shifts in marine fishes.Science , Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services on the work seabird bycatch in UK waters. Report to Defra. 308(5730): 1912–1915. of its seventh session. https://www.ipbes.net/ Defra Project: MB0126. 17. Pinnegar J, et al. (2017). Fisheries. MCCIP Science system/tdf/ipbes_7_10_add-1-_advance_0. 20. ASCOBANS (2006). 5th meeting of the parties to Review 2017, 73–89. pdf?file=1&type=node&id=35245. ASCOBANS, Resolution No. 5, Incidental Take of 18. Parmesan C & Yohe G (2003). A globally 2. ICES (2019). ICES fisheries overviews – Greater Small Cetaceans. https://www.ascobans.org/ coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts North Sea ecoregion. http://www.ices.dk/ sites/default/files/document/MOP5_2006- across natural systems. Nature, 421(6918): 37. sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ 5_IncidentalTake_1.pdf. 19. Simpson SD, et al. (2011). Continental shelf-wide Advice/2018/2018/GreaterNorthSeaEcoregion_ 21. Leaper R & Calderan S (2017). Review of methods response of a fish assemblage to rapid warming FisheriesOverview.pdf. used to reduce risks of cetacean bycatch and of the sea. Current Biology, 21: 1565–1570. 3. ICES (2019). ICES fisheries overviews – Celtic entanglement. Report to the International Whaling Commission SC/67a. 20. Pinnegar JK, et al. (2002). Long-term changes Seas ecoregion. http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/ in the trophic level of the Celtic Sea fish Publication%20Reports/Advice/2018/2018/ 22. UK Government (2010). No. 1627 Environmental community and fish market price distribution. CelticSeasEcoregion_FisheriesOverviews.pdf. protection marine management – the marine Journal of Applied Ecology, 39: 377–390 . 4. Pauly D, et al. (2000). Fishing down aquatic strategy regulations 2010. http://www.legislation. gov.uk/uksi/2010/1627/pdfs/uksi_20101627_ 21. Montero-Serra I, et al. (2015). Warmer shelf seas food webs: Industrial fishing over the past half- en.pdf. drive the subtropicalization of European pelagic century has noticeably depleted the topmost fish communities.Global Change Biology, 21: links in aquatic food chains. American Scientist, 23. European Commission (2012). Communication 144–153. 88.1 (2000): 46–51. from the commission to the European Parliament and the Council – Action Plan for reducing 22. Lynam CP (2017). Trophic and environmental 5. UK Marine Monitoring and Assessment Strategy incidental catches of seabirds in fishing gears. control in the North Sea. Proceedings of the (2019). https://moat.cefas.co.uk/introduction-to- https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/ National Academy of Sciences, 114 (8): 1952–1957. uk-marine-strategy/. PDF/?uri=CELEX:52012DC0665&from=EN. 23. Régnier T, et al. (2017). Importance of trophic 6. OSPAR (2017). Size Composition in Fish 24. BirdLife International (2017). Towards Seabird- mismatch in a winter-hatching species: evidence Communities. https://oap.ospar.org/en/ospar- Safe Fisheries: Global Efforts and Solutions. http:// from lesser sandeel. Marine Ecology Progress assessments/intermediate-assessment-2017/ www.birdlife.org/sites/default/files/bycatch_ Series, 567: 185–197. biodiversity-status/fish-and-food-webs/size-fish- composition/. booklet_2017_w.pdf. 24. Frederiksen M, et al. (2004). The role of industrial 25. Sardà F, et al. (2015). Overlooked impacts and fisheries and oceanographic change in the 7. Speirs DC, et al. (2016). Modelling the effects of challenges of the new European discard ban. decline of North Sea black-legged kittiwakes. fishing on the North Sea fish community size Fish and Fisheries, 16.1: 175–180. Journal of Applied Ecology, 41(6), 1129–1139. composition. Ecological Modelling, 321, 35–45. 26. European Commission (2011). Proposal for a 25. Frederiksen M, et al. (2013). Climate, copepods 8. Queirós AM, et al. (2018). Climate change Regulation of the European Parliament and and seabirds in the boreal Northeast Atlantic – alters fish community size-structure, requiring of the 491 Council on the Common Fisheries current state and future outlook. Global Change adaptive policy targets. Fish and Fisheries, 19.4: Policy. COM (2011) 425 final, 2011/0195 (COD). Biology, 19(2), 364–372. 613–621. Brussels; 492. 102 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
27. UK Parliament (2019). European Union Committee 11. OSPAR (2017). Trends in discharges, spills and UK COUNTRIES – Fisheries: implementation and enforcement of emissions from offshore oil and gas installations. the EU landing obligation. https://publications. D8. https://oap.ospar.org/en/ospar- England parliament.uk/pa/ld201719/ldselect/ assessments/intermediate-assessment-2017/ 1. Burns F, et al. (2016). Agricultural management ldeucom/276/27602.htm. pressures-human-activities/trends-discharges- and climatic change are the major drivers of spills-and-emissions-offshore-oil-and-gas-inst/. 28. UK Parliament. (2018). Written evidence biodiversity change in the UK. PloS one, 11: provided by H2020 DiscardLess to the EU 12. UK Marine Monitoring and Assessment Strategy e0151595. Energy and the Environment Sub Committee (2010). Charting Progress 2: An assessment of the 2. UK Government (2019). Structure of the http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/ state of UK seas. Stationery Office. agricultural industry in England and the UK committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/ 13. Wind Europe (2019). Wind energy in Europe at June. https://www.gov.uk/government/ eu-energy-andenvironment-subcommittee/ in 2018, trends and statistics. https:// statistical-data-sets/structure-of-the- implementation-and-enforcement-of-the-eu- windeurope.org/wp-content/uploads/files/ agricultural-industry-in-england-and-the-uk- landing-obligation/written/93934.html. about-wind/statistics/WindEurope-Annual- at-june. 29. European Union Committee (2019). The EU Statistics-2018.pdf. 3. Defra (2019). England biodiversity indicators. fisheries landing obligation: six months on. 43rd 14. Dolman S & Simmonds M (2010). Towards https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ Report of Session 2017–19. https://publications. best environmental practice for cetacean england-biodiversity-indicators. parliament.uk/pa/ld201719/ldselect/ conservation in developing Scotland’s marine 4. UK NEA (2011). The UK National Ecosystem ldeucom/395/395.pdf. renewable energy. Marine Policy, 34: 1021–1027. Assessment. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. 30. DiscardLess – Strategies for the gradual http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2010.02.009. 5. Walker LK, et al. (2018). Effects of higher-tier elimination of discards in European fisheries 15. Cook AS & Robinson RA (2017). Towards a agri-environment scheme on the abundance http://www.discardless.eu/. framework for quantifying the population-level of priority farmland birds. Animal conservation, 31. European Commission, Directorate-General for consequences of anthropogenic pressures 21(3): 183–192. Maritime Affairs and Fisheries (2018). Towards on the environment: The case of seabirds new SCIPs, Advisory Council Consultation. http:// and windfarms. Journal of Environmental 6. MacDonald MA, et al. (2012). Effects of agri- nsrac.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Paper- Management, 190: 113. environment management for cirl buntings on other biodiversity. Biodiversity and conservation, 9.1-SCIPs-AC-consultation-For-Information.docx. 16. JNCC (2019). UK Marine Protected Area network 21(6): 1477–1492. 32. Royal Commissions on Environmental statistics. http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-7619. 7. MacDonald MA, et al. (2012). Effects of agri- Pollution (2004). Turning the tide: addressing the 17. JNCC (2019). Sixth National Report to the United environment management for stone curlews impact of fisheries on the marine environment. Nations Convention on Biological Diversity: United on other biodiversity. Biological conservation, https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov. . Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 148(1): 134–145. uk/20110322144421/http://www.rcep.org. JNCC, Peterborough. 8. Defra (2018). A green future: our 25-year plan to uk/reports/25-marine/documents/ 18. Scottish Government (2018). Marine Protected improve the environment. Turningthetide.pdf. Area Network – 2018 Report to the Scottish 33. ICES (2019). Advice on fishing opportunities, Parliament. https://www.gov.scot/publications/ Northern Ireland catch and effort. Greater North Sea Ecoregion. marine-protected-area-network-2018-report- Cod (Gadus morhua) in Subarea 4, Division 7.d, scottish-parliament/pages/11/. 1. DAERA (2018). Statistical Review of Northern Ireland Agriculture 2017: Agriculture, Fishing & and Subdivision 20 (North Sea, eastern English 19. Scottish Government (2018). Marine Protected Forestry. https://www.daera-ni.gov.uk/sites/ Channel, Skagerrak). http://ices.dk/sites/pub/ Area Network Assessments. https://www2. default/files/publications/daera/Stats%20 Publication%20Reports/Advice/2019/2019/ gov.scot/Topics/marine/marine-environment/ Review%202017%20final.pdf. cod.27.47d20.pdf. mpanetwork. 2. Colhoun K & Cummins S (2013). Birds of 34. JNCC (2019). B2. Sustainable fisheries. https:// 20. Cunningham S, et al. (2011). Assessing the conservation concern in Ireland 2014–2019. jncc.gov.uk/our-work/ukbi2018-b2-sustainable- contribution of other area-based measures to Irish Birds, 9: 523–544. fisheries/. the ecological coherence of the MPA network in Scotland’s seas. Final report produced by Scottish 3. McCann T, et al. (2012). Northern Ireland Pressures on marine nature Natural Heritage, the Joint Nature Conservation Countryside Survey NICS2007: Field Boundary 1. UNEP (2014). Year Book 2014 emerging issues Committee and Marine Scotland for the Scottish – Summary Report 1998–2007. Northern update, United Nations Environment Programme. Marine Protected Areas Project. Ireland Environment Agency Research and Development Series No.12/13, Belfast. Nairobi, Kenya. 21. Hiscock K & Breckels M (2007). Marine 2. Kühn S, et al. (2015). Deleterious effects of litter biodiversity hotspots in the UK. A report identifying 4. Cooper A, et al. (2009). Northern Ireland on marine life. In Marine anthropogenic litter. pp. and protecting areas for marine biodiversity. countryside survey 2007: Broad habitat change 75–116. Springer, Cham. WWF, UK. 1998–2007. 3. Ostle C, Thompson RC, Broughton D, Gregory L, 22. Hiddink JG, et al. (2006). Indicators of the 5. Rowe E, et al. (2019). Trends Report 2019: Trends Wootton M and John DG (2019). The rise in ecological impact of bottom-trawl disturbance in critical load and critical level exceedances in ocean plastics evidenced from a 60-year time on seabed communities. Ecosystems, 9: the UK. Report to Defra under Contract AQ0843, series. Nature Communications, 10: 1622. 1190–1199. CEH Project NEC05708. https://uk-air.defra.gov. uk/library/. 4. Provencher JF, et al. (2017). Quantifying ingested 23. Foden J, et al. (2010). Recovery of UK seabed debris in marine megafauna: a review and habitats from benthic fishing and aggregate 6. CEH (2019). Critical Load Exceedance maps. recommendations for standardization. Analytical extraction—towards a cumulative impact http://www.cldm.ceh.ac.uk/exceedances/maps. Methods, 9: 1454–1469. assessment. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 7. UK NEA (2011). The UK National Ecosystem 5. OSPAR (2017). Plastic Particles in Fulmar Stomachs 411: 259–270. Assessment. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. in the North Sea: D10 – Marine Litter. https://oap. 24. Babcock RC, et al. (2010). Decadal trends 8. Burns F, et al. (2016). Agricultural management ospar.org/en/ospar-assessments/intermediate- in marine reserves reveal differential rates and climatic change are the major drivers of assessment-2017/pressures-human-activities/ of change in direct and indirect effects. biodiversity change in the UK. PloS one, 11: marine-litter/plastic-particles-fulmar-stomachs- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, e0151595. north-sea/. 107: 18256–18261. 9. JNCC (2019). Agricultural and forest area under 6. Bourne (1976). Seabirds and pollution. Johnston 25. Sheehan EV, et al. (2013). Recovery of a environmental management schemes. http://jncc. R (Ed.), Marine Pollution, Academic Press, London temperate reef assemblage in a marine defra.gov.uk/page-4242. (1976), pp. 403–502. protected area following the exclusion of towed 10. McEvoy PM, et al. (2006). The Environmentally 7. Furness RW (1985). Plastic particle pollution: demersal fishing.PloS one, 8: e83883. Sensitive Area scheme (ESA) in Northern accumulation by Procellariiform seabirds at 26. Bradshaw C, et al. (2003). To what extent Ireland: ten years of agri-environment Scottish colonies. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 16: does upright sessile epifauna affect benthic monitoring. Biol. Env: Proc. Roy. Ir. Ac, 106: 103–106. biodiversity and community composition? 413–423. 8. Van Franeker J (1985). Plastic ingestion in the Marine Biology, 143: 783–791. 11. Reid N, et al. (2007). Mammals and agri- North Atlantic fulmar. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 27. Rees SE, et al. (2016). An evaluation framework environment schemes: hare haven or pest 16: 367–369. to determine the impact of the Lyme Bay Fisheries paradise? J. Appl. Ecol, 44: 1200–1208. 9. OSPAR (2017). Distribution of Reported and Conservation Reserve and the activities of the 12. Colhoun K, et al. (2017). Agri-environment Impulsive Sounds. https://oap.ospar.org/ Lyme Bay Consultative Committee on ecosystem scheme enhances breeding populations of en/ospar-assessments/intermediate- services and human wellbeing. A report to the some priority farmland birds in Northern assessment-2017/pressures-human-activities/ Blue Marine Foundation by research staff the Ireland. Bird study, 64(4): 545–556. distribution-reported-impulsive-sounds-sea/. Marine Institute at Plymouth University, Exeter 13. Stanbury A, et al. (2017). Prioritising islands in 10. Hastie G, et al. (2019). Effects of impulsive noise University and Cefas. the United Kingdom and crown dependencies on marine mammals: investigating range- for the eradication of invasive alien vertebrates dependent risk. Ecological Applications (2019): and rodent biosecurity. European journal of e01906. wildlife research, 63(1): 31. State of Nature Report 2019 103
14. Department of the Environment Northern 9. Emmett BE & GMEP team (2017). Glastir 9. Olivos P & Aragonés J-I (2011). Psychometric Ireland (2018). Northern Ireland Environmental Monitoing and Evaluation Programme. Final properties of the Environmental Identity scale Statistics Report May 2018. www.daera-ni.gov. Report to Welsh Government. (EID). Psyecology, 2: 65–74. uk/sites/default/files/publications/daera/ni- 10. Endangered Landscape Programme (2019). 10. Cheng JC-H & Monroe MC (2012). Connection environmental-statistics-report-2018_1.pdf. Summit to Sea, Cambrian Mountains, Wales. to nature: Children’s affective attitude toward 15. DAERA (2019). Northern Ireland Environmental https://www.endangeredlandscapes.org/ nature. Environment and Behavior, 44: 31–49. Statistics, Annual Report 2019. https://www.daera- projects/summit-to-sea-restoring-flourishing- 11. Clayton LW (2003). Identity and the natural ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/daera/ ecosystems-and-a-resilient-economy-in-mid- environment: The psychological significance of ni-environmental-statistics-report-2019_0.pdf. wales/. nature, MIT Press. 11. Welsh Government (2019). Marine and 12. Soga M & Gaston KJ (2018). Shifting baseline Scotland Coastal Access Act 2009 – Report to the National syndrome: causes, consequences, and 1. UK NEA (2011). The UK National Ecosystem Assembly for Wales on Marine Protected Areas implications. Frontiers in Ecology and the Assessment. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. in Wales. https://gov.wales/sites/default/ Environment, 16: 222–230. 2. Mitchell PI, et al. (2004). Seabird populations of files/publications/2019-01/report-on-marine- 13. Frantz CM & Mayer FS (2014). The importance Britain and Ireland. T & AD Poyser, London. protected-areas-mpas-2019.pdf. of connection to nature in assessing 3. SNH (2019). State Indicators. https://www.nature. environmental education programs. Studies in scot/state-indicators-all. THE UK OVERSEAS TERRITORIES Educational Evaluation, 41: 85–89. 4. Morris T (2018). Scotland’s Nature on Red Alert. 14. Roberts S (2017). The Attitudes of Housing Scottish Environment LINK and WWF Scotland AND CROWN DEPENDENCIES Occupants to Integral Bird and Bat boxes. partnership. University of Gloucestershire. 1. Churchyard T, et al. (2016). The biodiversity of 5. Thomas S, (2017). Island restoration in the 15. Nicol R, et al. (2007). Outdoor education in et al. the United Kingdom’s Overseas Territories: UK–past, present and future. 41: Scotland: A summary of recent research. Scottish British Wildlife, a stock take of species occurrence and 1583–1589. Natural Heritage. https://www.nature.scot/ assessment of key knowledge gaps. Biodiversity outdoor-education-scotland-summary- 6. Stanbury A, et al. (2017). Prioritising islands in and Conservation, 25(9): 1677–1694. the United Kingdom and crown dependencies recent-research. 2. JNCC (2019). Sixth National Report to the United for the eradication of invasive alien vertebrates 16. Cleary A, et al. (2018). Predictors of nature Nations Convention on Biological Diversity: United and rodent biosecurity. European Journal of connection among urban residents: assessing Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. , 63(1): 31. the role of childhood and adult nature Wildlife Research JNCC, Peterborough. 7. UK Government (2019). Structure of the experiences. Environment and Behavior: 3. IUCN (2019). The IUCN Red List of Threatened agricultural industry in England and the UK 0013916518811431. Species. Version 2019 – 2. https://www. . https://www.gov.uk/government/ 17. Richardson M, et al. (2019). A Measure of at June iucnredlist.org. Downloaded on 21/07/2019. statistical-data-sets/structure-of-the-agricultural- Nature Connectedness for Children and industry-in-england-and-the-uk-at-june. 4. Manx Basking Shark Watch (2019). Adults: Validation, Performance, and Insights. www.manxbaskingsharkwatch.org. 8. JNCC (2019). B1. Agricultural and forest area Sustainability, 11: 3250. under environmental management schemes. 5. Caravaggi A, et al. (2019). The impacts of 18. Hughes J, et al. (2019). Age and connection to http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-4242. introduced House Mice on the breeding success nature: when is engagement critical? Frontiers in of nesting seabirds on Gough Island. Ibis. 9. Wilkinson NI, (2012). Agri-environment Ecology and the Environment. et al. doi:10.1111/ibi.12664. management for corncrake Crex crex delivers 19. O’Brien L, et al. (2017). Cultural ecosystem higher species richness and abundance across 6. Holmes ND, et al. (2019). Globally important benefits of urban and peri-urban green other taxonomic groups. Agriculture, Ecosystems islands where eradicating invasive mammals infrastructure across different European & Environment, 155: 27–34. will benefit highly threatened vertebrates.PloS countries. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 24: one, 14 (3): e0212128. 10. Scottish Forestry (2014). Native Woodland 236–248. Survey of Scotland (NWSS). https://forestry.gov. 7. Poncet S, et al. (2017). Recent trends in numbers 20. Cox DT & Gaston KJ (2016). Urban bird feeding: scot/forests-environment/biodiversity/native- of Wandering (Diomedea exulans), Black-browed connecting people with nature. PloS one, 11: woodlands/native-woodland-survey-of- (Thalassarche melanophris) and Grey-headed e0158717. (T. chrysostoma) albatrosses breeding at South scotland-nwss. 21. Lovell R, et al. (2018). Health and the natural Georgia. Polar Biology, 40(7):1347–1358. 11. Scottish Government (2018). Marine Protected environment: A review of evidence, policy, practice Area Network – 2018 Report to the Scottish 8. The Albatross Task Force. https://www.rspb.org. and opportunities for the future. uk/our-work/our-positions-and-casework/our- Parliament. https://www.gov.scot/publications/ 22. Lumber R, et al. (2017). Beyond knowing nature: positions/marine-and-coastal/saving-seabirds- marine-protected-area-network-2018-report- Contact, emotion, compassion, meaning, and globally/the-albatross-task-force/. scottish-parliament/. beauty are pathways to nature connection. PloS one, 12: e0177186. Wales ESSAYS 23. Carr V & Hughes J (in prep). ENACT: Developing 1. UK NEA (2011). The UK National Ecosystem a measure to evaluate the effectiveness of nature Assessment. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. Connection to nature connection activities. 2. Mitchell PI, et al. (2004). Seabird populations of 1. Amel E, et al. (2017). Beyond the roots of human 24. Hunt A, et al. (2017). Monitor of engagement with Britain and Ireland. T & AD Poyser, London. inaction: fostering collective effort toward the natural environment: developing a method 3. Burns F, et al. (2016). Agricultural management ecosystem conservation. Science, 356: 275–279. to measure nature connection across the English and climatic change are the major drivers of 2. RSPB (2013). Connecting with Nature: Finding out population (adults and children). Sheffield, UK: biodiversity change in the UK. PloS one, 11: how connected to nature the UK’s children are. Natural England. e0151595. Sandy, UK. http://ww2.rspb.org.uk/Images/ 4. NRW (2016). State of Natural Resources Report connecting-with-nature_tcm9-354603.pdf. Monitoring the state of nature: (SoNaRR): Assessment of the sustainable 3. Hughes J, et al. (2018). Evaluating connection to who, what and why? Management of Natural Resources. Technical nature and the relationship with conservation 1. Robinson A, et al. (2018) Terrestrial Report. Natural Resources Wales. behaviour in children. Journal for Nature evidence review part 1: The value of JNCC’s 5. JNCC (2019). B1. Agricultural and forest area Conservation, 45: 11–19. terrestrial evidence programme. JNCC. under environmental management schemes. 4. Zylstra MJ, et al. (2014). Connectedness as a http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/JNCC1801_ http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-4242. core conservation concern: An interdisciplinary Terrestrialevidencereviewpart1.pdf. 6. Dadam D & Siriwardena GM (2019). Agri- review of theory and a call for practice. Springer 2. Pocock MJ, et al. (2015). The Biological Records environment effects on birds in Wales: Tir Gofal Science Reviews, 2: 119–143. Centre: a pioneer of citizen science. Biological benefited woodland and hedgerow species. 5. Martin L, et al. (in prep). Nature contact, nature Journal of the Linnean Society, 115: 475–493. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 284: connectedness and associations with health, 3. UKBMS (2019). The UK Butterfly Monitoring 106587. wellbeing and pro-environmental behaviours. Scheme. http://www.ukbms.org/wcbs. 7. Angell RL, et al. (2019). The effect of a Welsh 6. Ives CD, et al. (2017). Human–nature connection: 4. BRC (2019) Biological Records Centre, Recording agri-environment scheme on bat activity: A a multidisciplinary review. Current Opinion in Schemes, http://www.brc.ac.uk/recording- large-scale study. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environmental Sustainability, 26: 106–113. schemes. Environment, 275: 32–41. 7. Kals E, et al. (1999). Emotional affinity toward 5. Isaac NJ, et al. (2014). Statistics for citizen 8. MacDonald MA, et al. (2018). Have Welsh nature as a motivational basis to protect nature. science: extracting signals of change from agri-environment schemes delivered for Environment and behavior, 31: 178–202. noisy ecological data. Methods in Ecology and focal species? Results from a comprehensive 8. Schultz PW (2002). Inclusion with nature: The Evolution, 5: 1052–1060. monitoring programme. Journal of Applied psychology of human-nature relations. In 6. Outhwaite, CL, et al. (2018). Prior specification Ecology. Psychology of sustainable development: 61–78. in Bayesian occupancy modelling improves analysis of species occurrence data. Ecological Indicators, 93: 333–343. 104 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
7. NBN (2019). NBN Atlas, https://nbnatlas.org/. 3. Outhwaite CL, et al. (2018). Prior specification 8. JNCC (2019). UK Biodiversity Indicators 2018 in Bayesian occupancy modelling improves ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Category. http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-4229. analysis of species occurrence data. Ecological Indicators, 93: 333–343. Progress towards international 4. Isaac NJ, et al. (2014). Statistics for citizen The monitoring and research that commitments: the Aichi targets science: extracting signals of change from underpins this report, and our wider noisy ecological data. Methods in Ecology and 1. IPBES (2019). Summary for policymakers of the Evolution, 5: 1052–1060. knowledge of the state of nature in global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental 5. Outhwaite CL, et al. (in prep). Complexity of the UK, its four component countries Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and biodiversity change revealed through long-term and its Crown Dependencies and Ecosystem Services. IPBES secretariat, trends of invertebrates, bryophytes and lichens. Bonn, Germany. 6. Isaac NJB, et al. (2019). C4b: Status of UK priority Overseas Territories, is conducted by 2. Convention on Biological Diversity (2019). species – Distribution D1c. Status of Pollinating a wide variety of organisations and www.cbd.int/. Insects, Technical background document: Deriving Indicators from Occupancy Models UK thousands of individuals. We do not 3. Convention on Biological Diversity (2019). Biodiversity Indicators 2019 Biological Records Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, including have space here to recognise their Centre, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology. Aichi Biodiversity Targets. www.cbd.int/sp. contributions individually, but offer 7. Dennis EB, et al. (2016). A generalized 4. JNCC (2019). United Kingdom’s 6th National abundance index for seasonal invertebrates. our collective thanks to them all. Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Biometrics, 72: 1305–1314. jncc.gov.uk/our-work/united-kingdom-s-6th- In addition to the authors of this national-report-to-the-convention-on-biological- 8. Harrower CA, et al. (2019). UK moth trends from diversity/. Rothamsted Insect Survey light trap network (1968 report, conservationists and scientists to 2016). NERC Environmental Information Data 5. JNCC (2019). UK Biodiversity Indicators. http:// Centre. https://doi.org/10.5285/e7e0e4ad-f8c1- from the State of Nature partners and jncc.gov.uk/our-work/uk-biodiversity- 46fc-85b5-6d88057024b8. indicators-2018/. other organisations have provided 9. Hill MO (2012). Local frequency as a key to 6. SNH (2018). Scotland’s Biodiversity Progress data, analyses, case studies and interpreting species occurrence data when to 2020 Aichi Targets, Interim report 2017. recording effort is not known. Methods in guidance, and have given their time to SNH, Inverness. Ecology and Evolution, 3: 195–205. 7. United Nations (2019). UN’s review drafts during the production of 10. Greenstreet S & Moriarty M (2017). Manual for Sustainable Development Goals. https:// version 3 of the groundfish survey monitoring the State of Nature 2019 report. sustainabledevelopment.un.org. and assessment data product. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science, 8: 1986–1. In particular, we wish to thank Nida Al APPENDIX 11. Moriarty M, et al. (2017). Derivation of Fulaij, Ben Andrew, Neil Bailey, Richard groundfish survey monitoring and assessment Bashford, Paul Bellamy, Catherine How to interpret this report data product for the Northeast Atlantic Area. 1. Outhwaite CL, et al. (in prep). Complexity of Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science, 8: 1984–1. Bertrand, Isabel Bishop, Julie Boswell, biodiversity change revealed through long-term 12. Van Strien AJ, et al. (2016). Modest recovery of Nigel Bourn, Tom Brereton, Emma biodiversity in a western European country: trends of invertebrates, bryophytes and lichens. Brookman, Andy Brown, Paul Buckley, 2. BRC (2018). National Recording Schemes and The Living Planet Index for the Netherlands. Societies. Biological Records Centre, Biological Conservation, 200: 44–50. David Bullock, Phil Burfield, Suzanne Wallingford, UK. 13. Chamberlain DE & Fuller R (2001). Contrasting Burgess, Finlay Burns, Niamh Busby, patterns of change in the distribution and 3. Dennis EB, et al. (2017). Efficient occupancy Charlie Butt, Pauline Campbell, Chris model-fitting for extensive citizen-science data. abundance of farmland birds in relation to PloS one, 12: e0174433. farming system in lowland Britain. Global Carnegy, Colin Cheesman, Colin Ecology and Biogeography, 10: 399–409. 4. Isaac NJ, et al. (2014). Statistics for citizen Clubbe, Sandy Coppins, Nina Cornish, science: extracting signals of change from noisy 14. Dennis EB, et al. (2019). Trends and indicators ecological data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, for quantifying moth abundance and occupancy Rebecca Craske, Amy Crosweller, 5: 1052–1060. in Scotland. Journal of Insect Conservation, 23: Clare Dinham, Chloe Elding, Chris Ellis, 369–380. 5. Outhwaite CL, et al. (2018). Prior specification Sam Ellis, John Faulkner, Tom Finch, in Bayesian occupancy modelling improves 15. Gregory RD, et al. (2005). Developing indicators analysis of species occurrence data. Ecological for European birds. Philosophical Transactions Simon Foster, Jennifer Fulton, David Indicators, 93: 333–343. of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 360: 269–288. Gibbons, Richard Gregory, Amy Hall, 6. Van Turnhout CA, et al. (2007). Scale-dependent homogenization: changes in breeding bird 16. Freeman S, et al. (2001). Statistical analysis of an Phillip Hammond, Sarah Havery, Julia diversity in the Netherlands over a 25-year indicator of population trends in farmland birds. Henney, Dan Hoare, Russel Hobson, BTO Research Report. period. Biological Conservation, 134: 505–516. Mark Holling, Ali Hood, Julian Hughes, 7. Zuckerberg B, et al. (2009). The consistency and 17. Wood SN (2011). Fast stable restricted stability of abundance–occupancy relationships maximum likelihood and marginal likelihood Tom Hunt, Lyndon John, Jo Judge, Paul estimation of semiparametric generalized linear in large-scale population dynamics. Journal of Kirkland, Neil Lambert, Emily Lomax, Animal Ecology, 78: 172–181. models. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 73: 3–36. 8. Chamberlain DE & Fuller R (2001). Contrasting Richard Luxmoore, Chris Lynam, Craig patterns of change in the distribution and 18. IUCN (2012). IUCN Red List Categories and Macadam, Dario Massimino, Andrew Criteria: Version 3.1. Second edition. IUCN, Gland, abundance of farmland birds in relation to McCutcheon, Anne-Marie McDevitt, farming system in lowland Britain. Global Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Ecology and Biogeography, 10: 399–409. 19. IUCN (2019). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Conor McKinney, Nova Mieszkowska, 9. Dennis EB, et al. (2019). Trends and indicators Species. Version 2019 – 2. https://www. Kate Mitchell, Meadhbh Moriarty, for quantifying moth abundance and occupancy iucnredlist.org. Downloaded on 20/07/2019. in Scotland. Journal of Insect Conservation, 23: 20. IUCN (2012). Guidelines for Application of IUCN David O’Brien, Steffen Oppel, Megan 369–380. Red List Criteria at Regional and National Levels: Parry, John Pinel, Jenny Plackett, Version 4.0. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and 10. Defra (2019). UK Biodiversity Indicators 2018. Stephanie Prince, Niamh Roche, Lucy https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ Cambridge, UK. biodiversity-indicators-for-the-uk. 21. IUCN (2016). Guidelines for reporting on Rogers, Kate Slater, Cleo Small, Helen the proportion threatened. Version 1.1. Smith, James Stevenson, Roy Tapping, Methods October 2016. 1. Burns F, et al. (2018). An assessment of the Rachel Taylor, Philippa Tomlinson, state of nature in the United Kingdom: a review Mike Townsend, Kevin Walker, Paul of findings, methods and impact.Ecological Indicators, 94: 226–236. 2. Outhwaite CL, et al. (2019). Annual estimates of occupancy for bryophytes, lichens and invertebrates in the UK (1970–2015). [Dataset] NERC Environmental Information Data Centre. https://doi.org/10.5285/0ec7e549-57d4-4e2d- b2d3-2199e1578d84. State of Nature Report 2019 105
Walton, Rob Ward, Tom Webb, Tony Bat Conservation Trust, British Finally, we wish to thank the Weighell, Andrew Whitehouse, Trust for Ornithology, Butterfly thousands of dedicated volunteer Ben Williams, James Williams, Matt Conservation, Centre for Ecology recorders who collect much of the Williams, Jeremy Wilson, Kedell and Hydrology, People’s Trust for data upon which our knowledge of Worboys, Simon Wotton, Toos van Endangered Species, Rare Breeding the state of nature is based. Many are Noordwijk and Glyn Young, as well Birds Panel, Rothamsted Research, supporters of the organisations within as all the photographers for the RSPB and Wildfowl and Wetlands the State of Nature partnership and use of their images. We would also Trust. Marine data were provided contribute to systematic monitoring like to thank Nadia Chelache, Kirsty largely by the Marine Biological and recording schemes. Without their Fotheringham, Vicki Wright and their Association, Marine Scotland and the efforts, our knowledge of the health colleagues at Flag Communication Ltd Sea Mammal Research Unit. of the UK’s nature would be just a www.flag.co.uk. fraction of what it is. We hope we can Data were provided by the Biological continue to work together with these In addition to data, time, effort Records Centre from the following volunteers to improve our knowledge, and expertise from individuals and recording schemes and societies: and thus provide an increasingly organisation across the partnership, Aquatic Heteroptera Recording robust basis for informing future the National Trust, People’s Trust Scheme; Bees, Wasps and Ants conservation efforts. Additionally, for Endangered Species, RSPB and Recording Society; Botanical we would like to thank all of the Woodland Trust funded production Society of Britain and Ireland; volunteers who are involved in the of this report. British Arachnological Society – many conservation projects underway Spider Recording Scheme; British We are grateful to the many charitable around the UK to address the issues Bryological Society; British Dragonfly trusts, grant-giving bodies, companies facing our wildlife. Without them, Society – Dragonfly Recording and private individuals that provide the challenge would be much greater. Network; British Lichen Society; vital funding for the monitoring British Myriapod and Isopod Group – of wildlife in the UK. Additionally, Centipede and Millipede Recording government agencies conduct or Schemes; Butterflies for the New support much of the recording, data Millennium Recording Scheme; collation, analysis and reporting of the Chrysomelidae Recording Scheme; state of the UK’s wildlife that has made Conchological Society of Great Britain this report possible. In particular, and Ireland; Cranefly Recording the Joint Nature Conservation Scheme; Empididae, Hybotidae & Committee, Natural England, Natural Dolichopodidae Recording Scheme; Resources Wales, the Department for Fungus Gnat Recording Scheme; Agriculture, Environment and Rural Gelechiid Recording Scheme; Affairs Northern Ireland and Scottish Grasshopper Recording Scheme; Natural Heritage make significant Ground Beetle Recording Scheme; contributions to the provision of Hoverfly Recording Scheme; monitoring across the separate parts Lacewings and Allies Recording of the UK. Other UK, national and local Scheme; National Moth Recording government bodies also do much Scheme; Riverfly Recording Schemes: to support the recording of wildlife Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and and habitats, as do a wide variety of Trichoptera; Soldier Beetles, Jewel non-governmental organisations not Beetles and Glow-worms Recording represented within the State of Nature Scheme; Soldierflies and Allies partnership. National governments Recording Scheme; Staphylinidae and non-governmental bodies support Recording Scheme; Terrestrial the monitoring of wildlife within the Heteroptera Recording Schemes; UK Overseas Territories. UK Ladybird Survey; Weevil and A number of organisations play Bark Beetle Recording Scheme a key role in running structured and by the Mammal Society. Many monitoring schemes for wildlife other State of Nature partners in the UK, providing the trends in contribute biological records to these abundance that underpin key State schemes, and support the evidence of Nature metrics. These include base that underpins this report Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, in a myriad of ways. 106 Key findings Drivers Conservation Marine UK countries UK OTs and CDs Essays Appendix
PARTNERS Bumblebee Conservation Trust Mammal Society bumblebeeconservation.org mammal.org.uk
A Focus On Nature Butterfly Conservation Manx BirdLife afocusonnature.org butterfly-conservation.org manxbirdlife.im A Rocha Centre for Ecology & Hydrology (CEH) Marine Biological Association (MBA) arocha.org.uk ceh.ac.uk mba.ac.uk Action for Conservation Centre for Environmental Data Marine Conservation Society actionforconservation.org and Recording (CEDar) mcsuk.org nmni.com/CEDaR Amphibian and Reptile Marine Ecosystems Research Conservation (ARC) Chartered Institute of Ecology and Programme arc-trust.org Environmental Management (CIEEM) marine-ecosystems.org.uk cieem.net Association of Local Environmental MARINELife Records Centres (ALERC) Chester Zoo marine-life.org.uk chesterzoo.org alerc.org.uk National Biodiversity Network (NBN) Badenoch & Strathspey Conchological Society of Great Britain nbn.org.uk and Ireland Conservation Group National Forum for Biological conchsoc.org bscg.org.uk Recording Bat Conservation Ireland Continuous Plankton Recorder nfbr.org.uk cprsurvey.org batconservationireland.org National Trust Bat Conservation Trust (BCT) Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust nationaltrust.org.uk (Durrell) bats.org.uk National Trust for Scotland durrell.org Biodiversity Ireland nts.org.uk Earthwatch biodiversityireland.ie Natural England (NE) earthwatch.org.uk Biological Records Centre (BRC) gov.uk/government/organisations/ brc.ac.uk Freshwater Habitats Trust natural-england freshwaterhabitats.org.uk Botanical Society of Britain Natural History Museum and Ireland Friends of the Earth nhm.ac.uk friendsoftheearth.uk bsbi.org Natural Resources Wales (NRW) British Arachnological Society (BAS) Froglife naturalresources.wales froglife.org britishspiders.org.uk Northern Ireland Bat Group British Bryological Society (BBS) Isle of Man Government bats-ni.org.uk gov.im britishbryologicalsociety.org.uk Northern Ireland Environment Agency British Dragonfly Society (BDS) iSpot (The Open University) daera-ni.gov.uk/northern-ireland- british-dragonflies.org.uk iSpotnature.org environment-agency British Lichen Society Jersey Government Department ORCA britishlichensociety.org.uk of the Environment orcaweb.org.uk gov.je/Government/Departments/ British Mycological Society (BMS) People’s Trust for Endangered Species PlanningEnvironment britmycolsoc.org.uk (PTES) John Muir Trust ptes.org British Pteridological Society (BPS) johnmuirtrust.org ebps.org.uk Plantlife Joint Nature Conservation plantlife.org.uk British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) Committee (JNCC) bto.org Royal Botanic Gardens, Edinburgh jncc.gov.uk rbge.org.uk Buglife Local Environmental Records buglife.org.uk Centre Wales lercwales.org.uk State of Nature Report 2019 107
Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew kew.org Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) rspb.org.uk Royal Zoological Society of Scotland rzss.org.uk Scottish Badgers scottishbadgers.org.uk Scottish Environment Link scotlink.org Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) nature.scot Scottish Wild Land Group swlg.org.uk Scottish Wildlife Trust scottishwildlifetrust.org.uk Shark Trust sharktrust.org States of Guernsey gov.gg Trees for Life treesforlife.org.uk Ulster Wildlife Trust ulsterwildlife.org University of Plymouth plymouth.ac.uk/research/institutes/ marine-institute University of Sheffield sheffield.ac.uk Vincent Wildlife Trust vwt.org.uk Whale and Dolphin Conservation (WDC) uk.whales.org Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust (WWT) wwt.org.uk Wildlife Trusts wildlifetrusts.org Woodland Trust woodlandtrust.org.uk WWF wwf.org.uk Zoological Society of London (ZSL) zsl.org
Photo: Ben Andrew (rspb-images.com) The State of Nature 2019 report is a collaboration between the conservation and research organisations listed below:
Freshwater Habitats Trust
ispotnature.org
Northern Ireland Bat Group
Vincent Wildlife Trust
www.nbn.org.uk/stateofnature2019