![By PJC&Co (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons](https://markavery.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/800px-Maculinea_arion_Large_Blue_Underside_SFrance_2009-07-18.jpg)
His punchline is ‘…in the context of our declining wildlife, are reintroductions a part of sound conservation management addressing key environmental priorities, or an expensive, cynical and high-profile diversion from it?‘. Which do you think he’d like you to say?
Well, I’d say the former. I admire the work of Butterfly Conservation, CEH and Natural England (and others) in reintroducing the large blue butterfly into the UK – what a fabulous thing to do! It would have been better if we hadn’t lost them in the first place, but how great to have them back! And I was very cheered to hear some reasonably positive news about the Cambridgeshire corncrake reintroduction a while back, after a terrible year in 2012 – fingers crossed! And the California condor story is rather a good one too. And the black-footed ferret! How about the Arabian oryx?
But the GWCT, writing in the NFU magazine, takes a rather jaundiced view of restoring lost species and creating conservation gains.
It seems a bit rich to me that an organisation whose members (and probably some non-members too) release upwards of 35 million non-native pheasants, and around 9 million non-native red-legged partridges, into the countryside each year for ‘sport’ would take such a line. Crikey! The next thing we know someone will ask the pheasant-shooting Minister for biodiversity for licences to kill buzzards because they eat a pheasant or two. Couldn’t happen could it?
![Arabian oryx: these aren't wild but they are beautiful. By Tamar Assaf (Own work) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons](https://markavery.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/800px-Arabian_orix_.jpg)
Is this the same Ian Lindsay who project-managed the Monnow project back in the early to mid noughties (when the GWCT was the GCT)?
https://www.gwct.org.uk/about_us/news/1896.asp
If it is the same Ian Lindsay, then he seemed fine about reintroducing water voles on the Dore (as part of his project) at that time.
“”We thought it was a wonderful opportunity to extend the restoration of the water vole to this part of the country.”
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2006/jun/30/conservationandendangeredspecies.uknews
Ten years down the road and either he’s changed his mind* about reintroductions I guess, or it isn’t the same Ian Lindsay….
Probably isn’t the same Ian Lindsay.
*
Although to be fair, I don’t personally subscribe to the NFU Countryside Magazine and don’t know from the evidence you’ve provided in your blog what Ian Lindsay’s actual stance is on reintroductions (generally) without a hefty amount of unqualified speculation.
Doug, this is the same Ian Lindsay, our Director of Advisory and Education. Mark’s blog has been highly selective. Read Ian’s full article here and make up your own mind…
http://keeptheendinmind.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/mega-reintroductions-convenient.html
Andrew – thank you. Hardly ‘highly selective’ – just selective since i couldn’t republish the whole thing. And there wasn’t, as far as I could tell, an online version at the time. Glad there is now.
What is the GWCT’s view on reintroductions though? And how do you square that with your active support for large-scale pheasant releases?
With the first meeting of the White tailed Eagle reintroduction forecast for the next few months should reintroductions be that expensive? With 66 young reared in 2012 in Scotland bringing young into Cumbria should not be that expensive. As the eagles will naturally move south a reintroduction is only helping to educate the local population to their coming as well as being a big money potential especially for some farmers. The Marsh Fritillary has been a great success in Cumbria even though Scottish butterflies were the main new blood line.
No-one is pretending that re-introductions are the answer to every conservation problem but with the right species and when properly planned and executed they have an important contribution to make alongside other conservation measures.
As well as restoring beautiful species to where they should rightfully be they can help to restore the functioning of ecosystems from which they had been lost. Although not actually a reintroduction project as the otters returned under their own steam, there is an interesting example reported recently of how the return of a missing predator can benefit an ecosystem when sea-otters returned to a part of Monterey Bay, California: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/study-finds-endangered-sea-grasses-boosted-by-return-of-sea-otters-8784934.html
I also believe that the “PR” aspects of reintroductions are not to be sniffed at as a collateral benefit although I suspect that in using the term “high profile diversion” Lindsay is suggesting that this is often the only benefit. One of the Red Kite reintroduction projects took place here in the North East of England and there is no doubt that it has had some success in capturing the public imagination and I know I am far from alone in taking pleasure from seeing the kites flying over the Derwent valley on the outskirts of Gateshead. The local bus company even has a ‘red kite’ bus route. If all this encourages a few more children and families to take an interest in wildlife and to be concerned for its conservation then that is certainly a good thing.
“Couldn’t happen could it?”
Bunion’s World doesn’t extend beyond Newbury, where his votes are.
“Key environmental priorities”…….yes, We certainly need to improve our environment to ensure that ALL species can thrive in our countryside.
Reintroductions can be considered when the environment is suitable, and I would say are part of the solution; however we must improve the countryside where all of these species live, and that means farmers and landowners will need to play their part.
Mark, maybe a case that there’s no sport or profit in shooting Large Blues.
It seems to me that the NFU only want things that either benefit farmers and lan-owners directly, or otherwise can’t be seen to compete with their sporting and business interests in any way, irrespective of whether these instincts are scientifically evidenced. Queue Badgergate…..
I don’t see there being any predator species that will be respected as a protected species given the current Victorian climate, including the Otter, Buzzard, Osprey, Red Kite and the list could go on, unless the political climate changes and NGO’s take off their gloves and up their political game.
Mark, if the habitat is no longer suitable for a species then the priority is to restore the habitat, not restore the species. That is responsible science. Introductions or re-introductions do not improve the habitat. The responsible action must be to find out why the habitat is no longer suitable. This means that knowledgeable naturalists should undertake surveys to discover the problem. Any one can introduce/re-introduce a species to a habitat and claim that habitat is improving. This proves nothing. How many species would have come back to the UK without human intervention, given time and the cessation of persecution. The trouble is some people want a “quick fix.” This is NOT science, best wishes.
Diapensia = of course. I think we know that. It’s when the habitat is suitable, the reasons for loss have been corrected but there is little likelihood of nature coming back on its own very quickly that it needs a hand. A good example is the red kite reintroductions – red kites were stuck in Wales and wouldn’t be seen almost daily over my Northants garden if they hadn’t been reintroduced. And they are thriving and indeed are much-loved locally. If you suggested getting rid of red kites now there would be uproar, but because no-one knew what they were missing it took conservationists to decide to put them back. there are many similar examples.
Looking after the habitat is the main thing – but it isn’t the only thing. Good chapter in Fighting for Birds on this subject – plug! plug!
I read this article the other night after I had finally bothered to open the magazine that is normally full of all sorts of crap aimed at the lifestyle buyer and second country home -owner. Was interested to see the species they chose to illustrate the article with – sea eagle. A slightly controversial species with some of this titles market audience me thinks?
I understand what you say Mark, but do you think sometimes people like to see species, such as red kite, because they are good to look at. How long would it have been before they re-colonised more of their former sites from abroad? Are all Ospreys the result of re-introductions. Not in Scotland. Cranes seem to be doing all right, no one knows for sure if they are all the result of human interference. Avocets are back on their own in good numbers. Plants are increasing their range on their own. No Mark, I think wildlife can cope without us but it cannot cope with our destruction of wildlife habitats. More needs to be done for habitats, that,s where some wildlife organisations are failing. Good books alert us to the problems that wildlife face. I,m afraid I haven,t read yours but I assume it is a good read. I am in the process of co-writing a book about wild plants, there,s another plug if you would be so good as to include it.
Diapensia – red kites are good to look at. And if we hadn’t wiped them out we would still be looking at them. It would have taken a very long time for kites to recolonise – there were few signs of it happening when reintroductions were planned.
I don’t think we should use reintroductions for everything – that would be daft. And we at the RSPB were sniffy about the Rutland osprey reintroduction since Scottish ospreys were expanding south anyway – and nested in the Lake District in 2001 and every year since. Some wildlife can do it without any help, some can’t. Nature needs a hand in lots of ways – reintroductions are one way.
We have lost so much that conservation cannot simply be about protecting what we have – it has to be about restoring it too, or else we are cramped by our own lack of ambition. Nobody seems to object, much at any rate, to planting some reedstems to recreate a reedbed habitat – what’s the difference with letting some kites go out of a box? Not much really!
But where will it end?
Diapensia – where will it begin?
I think to be fair, the reintroductions of kites to the Chilterns area more or less co-insided with their own success in Wales. I remember well having to go Tregaron or Cwm Ystwyth area for kites, but now I sit here in the lounge and 7 are circling within my field of view! So as far as Wales is concerned the kites did it (with much encouragement) themselves.
There are now great-spotted woodpeckers in the Wicklows, and buzzards are being regularly seen in Wexford. So birds can do it themselves.
Mind, reintroductions are vital for some species, so all these bits play their part.
Think as long as we are careful not to go overboard and think we could cope with animals that we could not expect to be compatible with today’s style of living re-introductions are acceptable where we have wiped them out previously and conditions are there for their re-introduction.
The Sea Eagle takes a lot of flak but think there is no evidence of even one live lamb being taken.If there is then it would be interesting to hear the evidence.
Looking forward to the upcoming ‘Controversial Conservation’ debate including introductions, ‘niche species’ etc., and your talk Mark! http://www.worldlandtrust.org/news/events/controversial-conservation-world-land-trust-debate-led-chris-packham
I have been following today’s comments with great interest. Nature Conservation this country is now in such a bad way that we need to be broad in our choice of solutions. Reintroductions are just a small part of what needs to be done. It is not a case of either/or. There have been some questionable reintroductions and I would include the Crane in the Somerset Levels. This species is slowly establishing in Eastern England and increasing its population in Europe. Why then spend money on doing more in UK? One could argue that Red Grouse need more attention because this is an endemic race.
There is already a very good set of criteria set out by IUCN when assessing the suitability of reintroductions and if this is followed most will get it right.
Picking up on the point of Red Kites were doing it anyway in Wales that is not exactly right. The Welsh population was stuck at a very low number for years but received a boost from a German female which turned up and gave the population a significant genetic boost. Now as the other reintroductions take place birds interchange throughout the UK making the genetic baseline much stronger.
The Red Kite has perhaps been the greatest success as reintroductions go.
Sadly too many generations here have never know some of the species which are contemplated for reintroduction. Who can forget the Scottish Laird who proclaimed on TV that he was against Beaver reintroduction because they would eat his fish. The ignorance amongst some people is incredible. Most important we who favour more biodiversity have to make our case loudly not sit by and let a handful of land owners defeat a project as we did with the potential White-tailed Eagle reintroduction in East Anglia. Mind you that project might have also got off the ground if the RSPB had not expressed early concern about the raptors eating Bitterns.
I concede too that increasing the amount of habitat we have is also essential but then so to is increasing awareness to more and more people and coming together to more effectively persuade governments of the error of their ways. We should not be divisive but work together to make the suite of options work and bring more people into the family of conservation.
Derek – many thanks. yes, I think you are right about red kites – both on Wales and on what a huge success they have been.
You might be right about cranes and if you are then I will share some of the blame. Well, there you go. What I would say is that when the project was thought up it was not obvious that the UK crane population was increasing very much. I’m glad that it is though. I still think, that as a Bristolian, we West Country folk deserve to get some cranes back too. But the habitat creation at Ham Wall – with bitterns, little bitterns etc is even more amazing in that part of the world.
And sea eagles in East Anglia – you could be right!
I do recommend the chapter on this subject in Fighting for Birds!
Can I firstly pick you up on a point you made to diapensia and the “sniffy nose to Rutland’s osprey’s”? Weren’t the RSPB a bit sniffy about the redkites re-introduction to Fineshades (northants) as that was a scheme by the FC and why the “sniffy-ness” for the osprey? Isn’t thats similar in sorts to Mr.Lindsay?
Also hands up if you’ve seen the new advert from the rspb? The one (as some predicted) is now asking you to “text” donate £3…told you it was a money making scheme!
Douglas – no I don’t recall the RSPB being sniffy about the red kite reintroduction at Fineshade. I remember speaking enthusiastically at a red kite event there. I told my favourite Lord Lilford story. of course, I can’t speak for everyone but I don’t recall any such coolness. And it was primarily an EN (at the time) project, as I recall.
The osprey was a judgement call. Ospreys are doing well (and were at the time of the reintroduction). We thought that they would probably get back to England on their own – and they did! At the time it also seemed as though there were other ospreys looking as though they might breed in southern England – although, now we know that nothing seems to have come of them.
Enthusiasm for some reintroductions doesn’t mean enthusiasm for all reintroductions: not for those that won’t work (although you only know that when they have failed) or those that aren’t needed (which you also only really know in retropsect0. In fact you only ever know things after the event!
I haven’t seen the RSPB ad – have yous ent them some money?
Have I sent them any money…do I really have to say 🙂 Wait until you see it, you’ll like the “imagery” except with one rodent making an appearnace but you’ll question the tone of voice over man and what/why the rspb need the money for….think famine appeal.
As for reintroductions I’m in favour, just waiting for the re-introduction of common sense.
By and large, I’m sceptical about the effort that goes into reintroductions when so many formerly abundant species have declined so much. I know marque reintroductions can attract useful interest and publicity but there is surely a risk that good news stories about reintroductions that can prosper (with intensive support) at the margins will obscure the reality of the dire state of core e.g. farmland and woodland species. Personally I would rather see effort directed at research/land management/promotion into Corn Buntings or Willow Tits than grand schemes like reintroducing Sea Eagles to East Anglia.
John – thank you and welcome. I would say that it is good that we can do both – each wherever it’s appropriate. Like investing in the stock market, it’s best to have a balanced portfolio. Thank you for your comment.
Cirl Buntings have been reintroduced so it can be done with less “showy” species, and there are also many smaller scaled reintreoductions that go on in the background to restore localised lost populations such as Dormice, Harvest Mice, Water Shrews etc….not all reintroductions need to be bringing long lost species back “from the dead”, some can be much smaller but still just as valuable.
Ben – thank you. I agree.
I must say I get a bit miffed when people criticise NGO’s about raising (making money). Nature conservation is a very expensive business. Acquiring and managing land for a start is enormously expensive and we cannot get enough of that. The money they receive from members is never enough. Personally I would rather they got more of their cash from the public and less from governmentr departments. If that is to happen then we all have to respond. I suspect the whingeing comes from people who have never worked for or indeed managed an NGO.
With the pressure on everyone’s purse today it is getting more difficult.
We should all stop carping about NGO’s asking for money but we should be critical if they do not use it wisely and effectively.
Derek – well said!
And if reintroductions are expensive (which I don’t think they are) then they are clearly putting money into the economy somewhere or other! That’s usually the justification given for shooting things – sometimes the only one!
Well firstly Derek, have you seen the second advert, when you do, if you haven’t I look forward to hearing your response. It will raise in my opinion some questions?
Secondly I think the public are already cash strapped enough, more so then the bank account of the rspb, I assume their accounts are ok? So to play the harp strings and pour on the “guilt factor” is a low for an organisation such as the rspb. If you’re going to go to the “joe public” cap in hand do it with honesty and intregrity, but I’ll expand on that once people have seen the advert.
Thirdly, of course I’ve never worked for or managed (after all I even got turn down as a volunteer for an NGO on the basis of previous mental health issues-judgemental and illegal) that doesn’t mean I cannot have a critical opinion all I see is the rspb sliding down a very slippery path to loosing it core base, yes I know and so does everyone else know purchasing of land ain’t cheap and running an NGO like the RSPB ain’t cheap, but let me ask you this, have you heard others expressing the same views/concerns? Various NGO’s asked to be listened to by governments and complain when they’re ignored, but when do the same NGO’s start listening and acting on the WHINGES of their members or ex-members waiting to be members again?
Saw 12+ red kites in central Scotland today, the fabulous birds brightening up a ‘dreich’ day. When I came to Scotland the only kites in the UK were the sad remnants at Ynys-hir. Only a re-introduction programme could have achieved what has been achieved…despite the poisoning, shooting and trapping!
Keep up the good work is what I say. White-tailed eagles at St Andrews please!
Derek,doubt many of us in the South West would call it a questionable re introduction,it has breathed life into the area and given us something to enjoy and be proud of and incidentally it does not seem there is any persecution,rather the reverse everyone keen to help.
Without it I in my lifetime would have vever seen a flock of Cranes as at the rate they were expanding it would have been next century before reaching Somerset.
Even now I very much doubt there are more than a handful of Red Kites breeding in the South West and I have never seen one in that area the nearest probably being in the Oxford area.
Dennis – I accept your point on your Ccranes and I understand Red Kites are now nesting in Wiltshire so they may be close to you soon.
Derek, Absolutely correct and while I am not totally sure exactly where you are Dennis, they are not too far away from you. My main uncertainty over re-introduction has consistently been the Great Bustard despite living in Wiltshire. I do have some concerns about habitat and disturbance for that species but I do live in hope that I am wrong.
I must say that I really love Kites but they may be part of the problem for the unholy alliance. I did have a conversation with a prominent member of the Moorland Association who complained about the kites disrupting red grouse shooting on two estates and that this hould havebeen taken into account when being foolish to reintroduce them. Poppy cock I know but in the area of one of those moors kite numbers have been greatly diminished, I suspect by poison as one or twp have been so found. MA members are big funders of GWCT and of course NFU members shoot or at least a lot of them do. So with hopefully of more WTEs in England and Wales, Beavers in Scotland may add to the clamour for them in Wales and England (GWCT was always against them) and the an outside chance of Lynx those in favour of a tame countryside full of shootable introductions( the hypocrits) are bound to be against further introductions. We might even insist that they manage the countryside better and not just for the benefit of profit and game birds. oh and we wanr hen harriers back please stop the killing and they will come back on their own.
Some days ago Mark , you suggested that much of the countryside lobby had moved from the middle ground to the right is this not in part some proof of that?
Good comment Paul, perhaps the large estate owners could use their gamekeepers to lead small groups of people to get close enough to birds and animals to be able to photograph them. This would need to be done without causing disturbance in the breeding season. There would obviously be a charge for this service. Of course, this would also mean that wildlife would have to be there for people to be able to use the expertise to obtain good photos. I know, just another of my daft ideas. It won,t happen. Then again, the season for taking photos never ends!
Diapensia – the only estate that I know does this is Glen Tanar in Scotland but there may be others.
Mark, it looks like Glen Tanar is the only one that does. A UK leader?
In my recent review of John Love’s excellent book ‘ A saga of sea eagles’ I made the comment about needing a bit more information on the East Anglian reintroduction failure. As I have been told Anglian Water were the big money boys but from then on the scheme went down hill as ‘the environmental assessment’ was missing before hand. Preaching about a battle in 902 AD as the proof of breeding White tailed Eagles in East Anglia never was going to be the main decider as non breeding continental birds could have been in the area as we even see today with birds migrating across the North Sea. The book seems to miss that eagles even take Bitterns as food mainly as the book is talking about upland birds and given that the Bittern has such camouflage I presume numbers would be small other than in hard winters when the birds are driven onto the ice and many would die any way. As Derek points out money is tight and reintroductions can stimulate money so that other species and habitat can benefit as well. As for Paul’s missing Kites many learned folk do not realise that game keepers need their ‘tax free’ back hands at shooting days and that means removing the birds and mammals that might disrupt a shoot.