DOCSLIB.ORG

Review of Evidence of Interactions Between

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review of Evidence of Interactions Between The funders of this report should be acknowledged here. These are understood to be: The Angling Trust The River Otter Fisheries Association South West Rivers Association Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust Salmon and Trout Conservation Atlantic Salmon Trust REVIEW OF EVIDENCE OF INTERACTIONS BETWEEN BEAVERS AND FISH AND FISHERIES IN ENGLAND AND Affiliation of the author to the WALES University of Hull should be stated here, unless there is some reason that this work is not considered to be an academic report. Prof. Ian G. Cowx Peer-review of Cowx (2020), Professor Richard Brazier, February, 2020. Main points 1. This report is presented as an independent review, however, no explanation is given as to how the author has maintained an objective approach, given the funders of the work. 2. No statement has been made as to how the author has avoided bias or ensured that a balanced view of the impact of beaver on fish and fisheries is presented, in the absence of peer review of the report. 3. Throughout the document, the author violates the basic rules of writing a systematic review: (a) Opinions are regularly presented as fact, with no reference to the peer-reviewed literature to substantiate the views that are put forward, (b) References that are presented are highly selective to enforce negative preconceptions of beaver impacts, (c) Balanced, well-reasoned arguments are almost entirely lacking, due to a near complete absence of argument versus counter-argument (again unsupported by peer-reviewed references), (d) Poor understanding of the literature is rife, as is misinterpretation and/or disagreement with peer-reviewed literature, with no sound, scientific basis for such disagreement, (e) search terms for research papers, relevant to the topic, are inappropriate and bias the literature searchDecem towardsber 2020 negative impacts and (f) many important papers have not been read or referenced, illustrating significant gaps in the authors knowledge and demonstrating that he does not have the expertise to undertake such a review. 4. The report is overlong and repetitive and draws conclusions that are entirely unsupported by any data presented herein, or indeed any of the literature that has not been reviewed due to the above shortcomings. 5. Were this report to be submitted for publication and formally subjected to the peer-review process, it would be rejected outright. As such, it is no basis for the policy recommendations that it makes. 1 6. A detailed review of this report is included below, demonstrating major flaws and limitations throughout. References, questions that should be addressed, corrections of many factual inaccuracies and locations of biased and unsupported opinions are highlighted to help the author understand the magnitude of the task required should he choose to publish a revised version of this report for peer-review. Contents Summary ...............................................................................................................................4 Introduction ..................................................................................................................6 1.1 Context ...................................................................................................................6 1.2 About the author ...................................................................................................7 Review of beaver-fish interactions ...............................................................................9 2.1 Methodology ..........................................................................................................9 2.2 Review of beaver fisheries interactions .................................................................9 Distribution of beaver in Europe ..................................................................14 Distribution of beaver in the UK ...................................................................14 Ecology of beavers ........................................................................................16 Beaver dams .................................................................................................19 Effects of habitat modification by beaver activity ........................................20 Impacts on fish movements .........................................................................23 Cumulative effects of beaver activity on water courses and fish ................26 2.3 Ecosystem services ...............................................................................................28 2.4 Potential mitigation and management options and further R&D .......................30 Legal status ...................................................................................................31 Mitigation measures .....................................................................................31 Beaver Management Plans ...........................................................................34 Overview of the River Otter and its fisheries .............................................................37 3.1 Catchment characteristics ...................................................................................37 Flood risk .......................................................................................................38 3.2 River Otter fish and fisheries ...............................................................................39 Rod fisheries .................................................................................................39 River Otter national fisheries surveys (Source Environment Agency, National Fish Populations Database) ........................................................................................41 Review of the River Otter Beaver Trial Science and Evidence Report .......................47 4.1 Background ..........................................................................................................47 2 4.2 Beaver activity ......................................................................................................48 4.3 Fish and Fisheries Assessment .............................................................................52 Fisheries surveys ...........................................................................................52 Barriers to fish migration ..............................................................................59 Alteration of habitat .....................................................................................62 Disease ..........................................................................................................63 Mitigation measures .....................................................................................63 Attitudes to beavers .....................................................................................64 Economic characteriZation ...........................................................................65 Conflicts ........................................................................................................66 River Otter Beaver Management Strategy Framework ................................67 Conclusions and recommendations ...........................................................................71 Literature ....................................................................................................................78 6.1 ROBT documents reviewed ..................................................................................78 6.2 References............................................................................................................79 3 Summary In recent years, beavers have been reintroduced into the UK, mostly in enclosed (fenced) environments. Several ‘wild’ populations have also established, including one in the River Otter in Devon, which is being used as a trial to assess the likely impacts (positive and negative) on riverine ecosystem functioning and biodiversity. There are concerns, however, that the River Otter trial is too narrow in scope to provide robust evidence to inform decisions on further reintroductions, especially into the wild. The aims of this review are to: ñ re-examine the evidence base on the scale and intensity of impacts from beaver reintroductions on river ecosystems, and specifically on fish and fisheries; ñ review evidence from the River Otter Beaver Trial and associated studies to understand the impact of beavers on fisheries under ‘wild’ conditions; ñ provide conclusions and recommendations about the potential impact of beavers on fish and fisheries with particular reference to UK rivers. A review of the literature and other materials related to beaver reintroductions, with specific reference to fish and fisheries, was carried out. There is considerable emphasis in the literature and media on the positive benefits that beavers can bring to aquatic ecosystems and biodiversity, but the reintroduction of beavers can also cause a number of potential problems, such as disruption to fish migration and fish recruitment, damage to trees, loss of agricultural production, and damage to banks and other infrastructure, with concomitant impacts on biodiversity, stakeholder conflicts and management costs. The fish and fisheries problems mainly occur because of construction of dams that impede fish migration and flood spawning and nursery habitats. It also appears that most of the costs associated with dealing with the impacts of beavers are borne by the stakeholder, including A land/riparianbalanced summary
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Insecta: Coleoptera: Leiodidae: Cholevinae), with a Description of Sciaphyes Shestakovi Sp.N
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Arthropod Systematics and Phylogeny Jahr/Year: 2011 Band/Volume: 69 Autor(en)/Author(s): Fresneda Javier, Grebennikov Vasily V., Ribera Ignacio Artikel/Article: The phylogenetic and geographic limits of Leptodirini (Insecta: Coleoptera: Leiodidae: Cholevinae), with a description of Sciaphyes shestakovi sp.n. from the Russian Far East 99-123 Arthropod Systematics & Phylogeny 99 69 (2) 99 –123 © Museum für Tierkunde Dresden, eISSN 1864-8312, 21.07.2011 The phylogenetic and geographic limits of Leptodirini (Insecta: Coleoptera: Leiodidae: Cholevinae), with a description of Sciaphyes shestakovi sp. n. from the Russian Far East JAVIER FRESNEDA 1, 2, VASILY V. GREBENNIKOV 3 & IGNACIO RIBERA 4, * 1 Ca de Massa, 25526 Llesp, Lleida, Spain 2 Museu de Ciències Naturals (Zoologia), Passeig Picasso s/n, 08003 Barcelona, Spain [[email protected]] 3 Ottawa Plant Laboratory, Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0C6, Canada [[email protected]] 4 Institut de Biologia Evolutiva (CSIC-UPF), Passeig Marítim de la Barceloneta, 37 – 49, 08003 Barcelona, Spain [[email protected]] * Corresponding author Received 26.iv.2011, accepted 27.v.2011. Published online at www.arthropod-systematics.de on 21.vii.2011. > Abstract The tribe Leptodirini of the beetle family Leiodidae is one of the most diverse radiations of cave animals, with a distribution centred north of the Mediterranean basin from the Iberian Peninsula to Iran. Six genera outside this core area, most notably Platycholeus Horn, 1880 in the western United States and others in East Asia, have been assumed to be related to Lepto- dirini.
    [Show full text]
  • The Direct and Indirect Contribution Made by the Wildlife Trusts to the Health and Wellbeing of Local People
    An independent assessment for The Wildlife Trusts: by the University of Essex The direct and indirect contribution made by The Wildlife Trusts to the health and wellbeing of local people Protecting Wildlife for the Future Dr Carly Wood, Dr Mike Rogerson*, Dr Rachel Bragg, Dr Jo Barton and Professor Jules Pretty School of Biological Sciences, University of Essex Acknowledgments The authors are very grateful for the help and support given by The Wildlife Trusts staff, notably Nigel Doar, Cally Keetley and William George. All photos are courtesy of various Wildlife Trusts and are credited accordingly. Front Cover Photo credits: © Matthew Roberts Back Cover Photo credits: Small Copper Butterfly © Bob Coyle. * Correspondence contact: Mike Rogerson, Research Officer, School of Biological Sciences, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ. [email protected] The direct and indirect contribution made by individual Wildlife Trusts on the health and wellbeing of local people Report for The Wildlife Trusts Carly Wood, Mike Rogerson*, Rachel Bragg, Jo Barton, Jules Pretty Contents Executive Summary 5 1. Introduction 8 1.1 Background to research 8 1.2 The role of the Wildlife Trusts in promoting health and wellbeing 8 1.3 The role of the Green Exercise Research Team 9 1.4 The impact of nature on health and wellbeing 10 1.5 Nature-based activities for the general public and Green Care interventions for vulnerable people 11 1.6 Aim and objectives of this research 14 1.7 Content and structure of this report 15 2. Methodology 16 2.1 Survey of current nature-based activities run by individual Wildlife Trusts and Wildlife Trusts’ perceptions of evaluating health and wellbeing.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Support 2019
    Devon Wildlife Trust’s income Together we are making a and spend in 2018-19 difference to Devon’s wildlife Devon Wildlife Trust works for local wildlife and wild places. Our charity is able to achieve so much because of the Gis, Donations and people and organisations that support us. These include… It has been an excellent year for Devon Corporate Support Your Wildlife Trust. Total income for the Group 4% was £5,236,187 against expenditure of Commercial Trading • Our 35,000 loyal members £4,168,784 and the charitable Group Legacies 6% accounts show a surplus for the year 28% • Our more than 300 regular volunteers of £1,067,403. This means that our Contracts Support Winter 2019-20 unrestricted financial reserves have 17% • The charitable trusts, businesses, grown and are now at a level that is in line foundations and grant-giving bodies that with Charity Commission guidance. generously support our work What a year! Westminster may have been in utter chaos, Aram Atkinson but in the much saner world of Devon Wildlife Trust it’s A significant legacy is responsible for the • Our dedicated network of volunteer Local been an unforgettable 12 months for much better reasons. bulk of this unplanned surplus in 2018- Our dedicated team of staff Photo: In this issue of Your Support you can read about some of 19. Legacy income and membership Groups the highlights. continue to be critical sources of income Grants and for the Trust. We have also continued to Charitable Trusts Membership • Our committed board of trustees We’ve fought a long, tough battle to secure a new 23% 22% benefit from the support of a range of • The people and groups who donate to our Environment Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Celebrating the Landfill Communities Fund
    Celebrating the Landfill Communities Fund Protecting Wildlife for the Future Thanks to the Landfill L Communities Fund, d a n n and the organisations distributing it, we d u fi F l s have managed to help and protect the UK’s l e C ti om muni precious wildlife and iconic landscapes There are two ways in which landfill operators support projects through the Landfill Communities Fund. The first is via Distributive Environmental Bodies (DEBs) – the logos of the main UK DEBs are provided here. The second is direct funding to local organisations from the landfill operator. Both routes are equally and vitally important to supporting the work of The Wildlife Trusts and we are extremely grateful to the hundreds of landfill operators, DEBs, Environmental Bodies and third party funders who have made our work possible. Award Building communities. Transforming lives. Celebrating the Landfill Communities Fund. Produced and edited by The Wildlife Trusts 2014. Written and designed by Helen Walsh/lonelycottage.co.uk. Printed by Seacourt using waterless offset printing and 100% recycled paper. Picture credits: Cover: Paul Harris/2020VISION/ naturepl.com; p3: De Meester/ARCO.naturepl.com; p4: Helen Walsh; p5: Alex Mustard, Helen Walsh; p6: Helen Taylour; p7: Derbyshire Wildlife Trust, Devon Wildlife Trust; p8: Andy Sands/ naturepl.com, London Wildlife Trust; p9: Tom Marshall; p10: Helen Walsh; p11: Avon Wildlife Trust, Tanya Perdikou; p12: Markus Varesvuo/naturepl.com, Scottish Wildlife Trust; p13: The Wildlife Trusts, Wendy Carter; p14: Sue Daly/naturepl.com; p15: Cat Wilding, Cumbria Wildlife Trust; p16: Stephen Dalton/naturepl.com; p17: Tom Marshall, Scottish Beaver Trial; p18: David Kjaer/ naturepl.com, Paul Hobson, Scottish Wildlife Trust, Andy Sands/naturepl.com, Markus Varesvuo/naturepl.com; p19: Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust, Berks, Bucks and Oxon Wildlife Trust, Helen Walsh, Ross Hoddinott/naturepl.com, James Lowen/FLPA, Scottish Wildlife Trust; cover: Guy Edwardes/2020VISION/naturepl.com.
    [Show full text]
  • Blackdown Hills Case Study
    Cumulus Consultants Ltd High Nature Value farmland in Rural Development policy Blackdown Hills Case Study Report for European Forum on Nature Conservation and Pastoralism Issue: 6.0 Report No: CC-P-504.1 Date of Issue: 25 February 2011 . Commercial in Confidence High Nature Value farmland in Rural Development policy Blackdown Hills Case Study Report Prepared for European Forum on Nature Conservation and Pastoralism Report prepared by: Paul Silcock Gavin Saunders Martin Turner Report reviewed by: Paul Silcock Cumulus Consultants Ltd, The Palmers, Wormington Grange, Wormington, Broadway, Worcestershire. WR12 7NJ Telephone: +44 (0)1386 584950 Email: [email protected] Internet: http://www.cumulus-consultants.co.uk HNV Farmland in Rural Development Policy – Blackdown Hills Case Study Reference: CC-P-504.1 Issue 6.0 Date: 25 February 2011 Commercial in Confidence Acknowledgements We would like to thank all those who have contributed to this case study in particular Guy Beaufoy (EFNCP), Linda Bennett (Blackdown Hills AONB), Sarah Jennings (Devon County Council) and Matt Low (Natural England). We would also like to thank all those farmers who kindly agreed to be interviewed and provided valuable insight into the management of High Nature Value farmland on farms across the Blackdown Hills. Thanks are also due to those who contributed to the research through telephone interviews. Glossary AES Agri-Environment Scheme AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty BAP Biodiversity Action Plan CAP Common Agricultural Policy CSS Countryside Stewardship
    [Show full text]
  • Adaptation to Climate Change Sustainable Local Economies Abundant Wildlife Healthy Cities and Green Space for All
    A living landscape A call to restore the UK’s battered ecosystems, for wildlife and people Adaptation to climate change Sustainable local economies Abundant wildlife Healthy cities and green space for all Updated with 100+ Living Landscape schemes So much of the UK now is packed with development Fenton/BBC Beatrice and wildlife is in retreat. There are many fine nature A LIVING LANDSCAPE reserves but our future must be to integrate human and natural communities and restore a better balance. This document lays out exciting and important new plans. Professor Aubrey Manning OBE President of The Wildlife Trusts Matthew Roberts. Cover picture: St Ives and the river Great Ouse, Cambridgshire, Dae Sasitorn/lastrefuge.co.uk Dae Cambridgshire, Ouse, Great river the and Ives St picture: Cover Roberts. Matthew Where will our water come from? When will our land use become truly sustainable? How can our environment adapt to climate change? What would it take to rebuild a wildlife-rich countryside? Why are so many people disconnected from nature? Priestcliffe Lees nature reserve, owned by Derbyshire Wildlife Trust: a treasure chest of local biodiversity. The Wildlife Trusts see such places as nodes from It’s time to think big which plants and animals can recolonise a recovering landscape To adapt to climate change, the UK’s wildlife will need to move Driven by local people and aspirations, The Wildlife Trusts play along ‘climate corridors’ up and down the country, or to shadier a leading role not just in developing the vision but in mustering slopes or cooler valleys. Wildlife has done it all before, after the the support that can allow communities to drive their own last ice age, but this time the change is faster and there are change.
    [Show full text]
  • Reversing the Decline of Insects
    A new report from the Wildlife Trusts Reversing the Decline of Insects Lead Author: Professor Dave Goulson, University of Sussex Reversing the Decline of Insects Contributors Contents Foreword Lead Author: Professor Dave Goulson, University of Sussex Craig Bennett, on behalf of Foreword 3 Professor of Biology and specialising in bee ecology, The Wildlife Trusts Executive Summary 4 he has published more than 300 scientific articles on the ecology and conservation of bumblebees Introduction 5 and other insects. Section 1: Insect Recovery Networks 6 s a five-year-old boy when I left Section 2: Insects in the Farmed Landscape 12 Editorial Group: my light on at night with the Penny Mason, Devon Wildlife Trust window open, my bedroom Section 3: Insects in our Towns and Cities 18 Ellie Brodie, The Wildlife Trusts A would be swarming with moths half Section 4: Insects in our Rivers and Streams 24 Sarah Brompton, Action for Insects Campaign Manager Imogen Davenport, Dorset Wildlife Trust an hour later. Section 5: Insect Champions 32 Steve Hussey, Devon Wildlife Trust Conclusion 37 Gary Mantle, Wiltshire Wildlife Trust Now, I’d be lucky to see one. When venturing away for a family Joanna Richards, The Wildlife Trusts holiday, driving up the A1 for five hours, the front number plate The Wildlife Trusts’ Asks 39 would be covered in squashed insects by the time we arrived at our destination. Now, there might be one or two. With thanks to the many contributors Alice Baker, Wiltshire Wildlife Trust Today, I’m 48 years old and the science is clear; in my lifetime Tim Baker, Charlton Manor Primary School 41% of wildlife species in UK have suffered strong or moderate Jenny Bennion, Lancashire Wildlife Trust decreases in their numbers – be it number of species, or Janie Bickersteth, Incredible Edible Lambeth number of individuals within a species, and it is insects that Leigh Biagi, On the Verge Stirling have suffered most.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Record of the Parasitic Beaver Beetle (Platypsyllus Castoris) (Coleoptera: Leiodidae) from Stavropol Territory (Russia)
    Available online at www.easletters.com Entomology and Applied Science ISSN No: 2349-2864 Letters, 2014, 1, 4:1-3 A new record of the parasitic beaver beetle (Platypsyllus Castoris) (Coleoptera: Leiodidae) from Stavropol Territory (Russia) S.V. Pushkin North Caucasian Federal University, Institute of Live Systems, Botany, Zoology and General Biology Department; 355009 (Stavropol), Russia Correspondence: [email protected] (Received: 12/8/14 ) (Accepted:2/10/14) _____________________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT Platypsyllus castoris Ritsema, 1869 previously noted only in Voronezh Region is found in Stavropol area (Russia) for the first time. This species was collected not on beaver, for which it was cited earlier, but on river otter ((Lutra lutra meridionalis (Ognev 1931)) – rare species of the North Caucasian region. Key words : Coleoptera, Leiodidae, Platypsyllus castoris , Stavropol area Russia. _____________________________________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION In 2013, the hairline Caucasian otter ((Lutra lutra meridionalis (Ognev, 1931)) collected near Budennovska, Pyatigorsk; Stavropol Krai (Kuban river) were collected 2 female beaver beetles Platypsyllus castoris Ritsema, 1869. This is the third discovery of this interesting parasitic insect with the European part of the former USSR, distant to the south for 300 km from the first [12] and about 100 from the second [1]. Particular interest is the fact that this is the second in the European part of the finding of this species parasitic on the otter, and not on traditional host – beaver. MATERIALS AND METHODS The material gathered the standard zoological methods. In total 2 females of a species are collected. 5 otters are examined. During researches any animal has not suffered. The account of number of an otter in territory of Stavropol territory is in passing spent.
    [Show full text]
  • Parasitic Fauna of Eurasian Beavers (Castor Fiber) in Sweden (1997–1998)
    Åhlen et al. Acta Vet Scand (2021) 63:23 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13028-021-00588-w Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica RESEARCH Open Access Parasitic fauna of Eurasian beavers (Castor fber) in Sweden (1997–1998) Per‑Arne Åhlen1,3, Göran Sjöberg1* and Margareta Stéen2 Abstract Background: The parasitic fauna of beavers (Castor fber and C. canadensis) has been well studied in many parts of their respective areas of distribution. In Scandinavia there have, however, been limited investigations conducted on the parasites of beavers in recent times. The present study is the frst quantitative survey of parasites on beavers living in Sweden and elsewhere in Scandinavia. We investigated the parasitic fauna of the Eurasian beaver (C. fber) in a North–South gradient in Sweden. The aim of the study was to investigate parasite distribution and prevalence in particular, related to average yearly air temperature and diferent age groups of beavers. A total of 30 beavers were sampled at eight localities, spanning a 720 km North–South gradient during the springs of 1997 and 1998. Results: Five parasite taxa were identifed. Four of these were present in all of the examined beavers, Stichorchis subtriquetrus (trematode), Travassosius rufus (nematode), Platypsyllus castoris (coleopteran), and Schizocarpus spp. (arachnid). A higher number of new infections of S. subtriquetrus, and more adults of T. rufus, were seen in beavers in southern Sweden where temperatures are higher. One‑year old beavers had a higher infestation of S. subtriquetrus, but not of T. rufus, than older individuals. Conclusions: The parasite fauna of Swedish beavers mirrored the impoverished parasite fauna of the original Norwe‑ gian population, and the high prevalence of parasites could be due to low major histocompatibility complex (MHC) polymorphism.
    [Show full text]
  • Invertebrate Survey of Springs and Seepages in the Blackdown Hills, Devon/Somerset
    Springs and Seepages of Wessex Mendips Invertebrate Survey Andy Godfrey April 2014 Andy Godfrey Invertebrate Consultant 90 Bence Lane Darton Barnsley South Yorkshire S75 5DA Tel: 01226 384022 Mobile: 07502 364511 Email: [email protected] 2 Contents Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 5 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 5 2. Location ................................................................................................................................... 5 3. Methodology ............................................................................................................................ 5 3.1. Aquatic survey method ..................................................................................................... 5 3.2. Terrestrial survey method .................................................................................................. 6 3.3. Weather ............................................................................................................................ 6 3.4. Recording of Environmental Variables .............................................................................. 7 3.5. Identification ..................................................................................................................... 7 3.6. Assessment .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Trusts
    Response to Defra’s consultation: Health and Harmony: the future for food, farming and the environment in a Green Brexit The Wildlife Trusts May 2018 Contact: Ellie Brodie, Senior Policy Manager [email protected] Executive Summary Introduction • The Wildlife Trusts protects, champions and acts for wildlife and wild places on land and at sea. We believe that people are part of nature; everything we value ultimately comes from it and everything we do has an impact on it. • Nature needs to recover. To make this happen, we need to change the way we look after our land - we need spatial planning for nature’s recovery – we need a Nature Recovery Network. • We welcome the direction of travel suggested in the consultation document on paying farmers and land managers for delivering the benefits they cannot sell but that society needs, i.e. ‘public money for public goods’. Section 2: Reform within the CAP • Rather than introduce changes to Countryside Stewardship, we encourage Defra to put their resources into tackling the issues which are putting people off applying to Countryside Stewardship. • The majority of England’s wildlife depends on the remaining areas of semi-natural habitat that are less intensively farmed within the countryside. Small sites such as Local Wildlife Sites and commons, of high ecological value, are disadvantaged in Countryside Stewardship. A future ELMS must rectify this issue. • Payment levels can be too low to make entering Countryside Stewardship worthwhile. Farmers and land managers in a future ELMS must be better rewarded for the natural capital assets they maintain and the ecosystems services they provide.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Declines and Why They Matter Professor Dave Goulson, FRES
    FUTURE South West Insect declines and why they matter Professor Dave Goulson, FRES Commissioned by the South West Wildlife Trusts Protecting Wildlife for the Future Contents Executive summary 3 Insect declines: the evidence 4 The unnoticed apocalypse 5 Causes of declines 11 Why should we care about disappearing insects? 18 Ecosystem services provided by insects and other invertebrates 19 Shifting baselines 23 Together we can reverse insect declines 24 By greening our cities and towns… 25 ...and helping farms to be more wildlife friendly and sustainable 26 Tackling insect declines requires action at many levels, and we all have a role to play 28 Wildlife Trusts and supporters taking action 29 Appendix 1 - Featured species 31 Appendix 2 - What we can all do 35 Appendix 3 - Pesticides 39 Appendix 4 - Further reading 43 Inside Front Cover Photograph © Paul Williams Back Cover Photograph © Cat Bolado 2 Executive summary In the last fifty years, we have reduced the abundance of wildlife on Earth dramatically. Many species that were once common are now scarce. Much attention focusses on declines of large, charismatic animals, but recent evidence suggests that abundance of insects may have fallen by 50% or more since 1970. This is troubling, because insects are vitally important, as food, pollinators and recyclers amongst other things. Perhaps more frightening, most of us have not noticed that anything has changed. Even those of us who can remember the 1970s, and who are interested in nature, can’t accurately remember how many butterflies or bumblebees there were when we were children. The bulk of all animal life, whether measured by biomass, numerical abundance or numbers of species, is comprised of invertebrates such as insects, spiders, worms and so on.
    [Show full text]