It is possible, but very unlikely, that Dominic Cummings was reading my latest column in British Wildlife which points out that we need some more experts in Westminster and Whitehall when he wrote his latest blog post.
Cummings called for misfits and weirdos to bolster government’s ability to know what it is doing. He has a point if you look around the Conservative MPs on offer – they aren’t a very expert bunch in terms of environment although a few of them are weirdos and some are misfits. But civil servants with a deep knowledge of the natural world are also few and far between (as far as I can see, although my knowledge is less than it once was) and always have been.
Nature conservation is a fairly complex undertaking although I’m not saying it is more complicated than the law, medicine, engineering or music but you do have to know which issues to address and how to address them. And caring is nowhere near enough. Just as caring about justice for all, ill people, driving a car and violin concertos does not mean that you could be a lawyer, doctor, mechanic or violinist, caring about nature does not make you a nature conservationist.
The failure of the Glover report to say much meaningful about nature conservation in protected areas is surely at least partly because there wasn’t a proper nature conservationist on the panel. Yes, they were all good people, and all, I’m sure, liked a walk with nature more than one without, but they weren’t nature conservationists and so it was unsurprising that they didn’t deliver much on this subject. It still surprised me how wimpishly they ducked the twin issues of rewilding and grouse moor management but they did. And lest you think that this is looking wise after the event then no, on this subject I was wise before the event – see here.
And then there was Werritty – another missed opportunity and another group that was weak on nature conservation professionalism. In fact each time I go back to check that it is as bad as I thought it was, I find more reasons to hold to that opinion. How did the advisors to the group allow such a poor document to emerge?
So there is evidence that the current system is not working as well as it could, and I reckon that the downplaying of nature conservation professionalism is a part of that. Luckily there are a few weirdos and misfits in nature conservation and I’m sure government will be seeking them out soon.
[registration_form]
You are so right about Werrity – it feels more like a scrapbook than a review, and it’s predominantly composed of snippets from the other side presented as if they merit serious consideration rather than objective scrutiny. There are many non scientists who could have done a far, far better report than this piece of amateurish drivel which is especially painful as so many were waiting for it with bated breath. Yet another false dawn.
Uri Geller has put himself forward – R4