As my office in the Black Mountains is invaded by hoverflies seeking holes for hibernation, I journey to London to chair a discussion on the National Pollinator Strategy.
When the Public Policy Exchange asked me to moderate ‘Promoting Community Partnerships: tackling the decline of pollinating insects in the UK’ (involving a Research Council, enviro groups, academia, farm conservation advisor and beekeepers)….
I sought to frame the conversation around two words: exchange, as in knowledge sharing, and communities, as in farming, urban, scientific and local and political.
All of whom were in the room with their associated expertise. However, the only person I will name is the politician – Huw Merriman MP.
That is because the government is key to keeping the Pollinator Strategy on path without it being biased, or diluted, by others claiming ‘ownership’ in seeking to reverse the decline of pollinators. As politicians always have to be somewhere else, I asked speakers to outline their ’60 second’ executive summary (without saying for whom they worked) before the MP had to leave.
So here they are: get policy makers out into the field – educate and empower planners – manage habitat for food (human and pollinators) – understand farmers better – assess best diverse solutions. I later asked the audience for their 30 second ‘outtake’ on how matters should progress; all responded without fail which reflects the ongoing interest in the subject.
Keys points from the day were that we already have the solutions – sow more flowers, create nesting and hibernation habitats, celebrate good practice, take care with pesticide applications on both crops and honeybees (miticides).
We lack technical skills to monitor the huge range of pollinator species and an ability to connect with those who can do most for pollinators over huge swathes of countryside i.e. farmers. Yes, urban areas are important, but as London is apparently awash with managed honey bees (over 6000 swarms), there is a danger of out-competing wild bees over limited forage.
The environment correspondent of a broadsheet newspaper once told me that he avoided writing about pollinators because of the confusing research around neonicotinoids and bees (allegedly around 20 papers are published globally every day). Are we so obsessed with the panacea that banning pesticides will save iconic pollinators that we take our eye off the key headline in the Pollinator Strategy (page 4) that ‘loss of habitat was identified as a likely main cause of pollinator declines‘?
I aim to return to this matter again, as well as nudge farming syllabuses to focus on ‘cross pollinating’ with subjects beyond the traditional topics that I studied at ag college some 25 years ago.
Hi Rob.
Thanks for chairing with a firm but fair hand. Where is the golden key to turn our wealth of knowledge into better on farm delivery?
Are we short of training, intensive or the basic understanding of why increasing farmland pollinators is so important?
Farmers are facing challenging times so unless someone sells the importance of pollinators, more urgent and pressing issues will focus the farmer’s mind. Farmers have become hardened to environmental woes and apportioning blame, so maybe think things are not as bad as many make out?
35 years of appropriate, quality on-farm habitat creation has never failed to increase pollinators. Help from the TV would not go a miss. Africa’s wildlife may be good for viewing ratings but surely UK wildlife is a more worthy and immediate cause.
All have a role to play in every aspect of wildlife appreciation and education. Farmers need help and encouragement to feed us and protect our wildlife so let’s all work on this together and put our wealth of knowledge to good use.
Hi Rob
Just a little plug for what we are trying to do at the Campaign for the Farmed Environment (CFE), on a relative shoe string. It isn’t perfect, but we are trying to find common ground between farming and biodiversity NGOs. So we approach things from the farmer perspective, and aim to integrate voluntary environmental management alongside a productive farm business.
CFE has always been about the whole farm, and good practice to manage the farm for biodiversity, soil and water – alongside a productive business. CFE partners did agree to produce pollinator guidance (including a general guide for farmers, and further guidance on hedge management) and we ran a set of pollinator events this summer (where Marek’s book went down very well!!). As well as promoting some subsidised seed mixes. Plus, I’d encourage everyone to test your pollinator knowledge with the CFE Online Training Module http://www.cfeonline.org.uk/advice-and-training/online-training-module/
The focus really needs to be on finding out exactly what is happening to our pollinators. A robust scientific ( properly funded) scheme will help all concerned to find solutions to reversing the declines. There is really good work already going on with farmers and landowners and I believe there is a willingness and imperative, dare I say enthusiasm to help pollinators across society. We should use that current momentum to best advantage by advertising all the best practice as widely as possible and the NGOs working together to produce easy to follow guidance for farmers and landowners- more joined up. The 2020 group is a very good example, the new website http://www.pollinatorexchange.org/ is another. Its not all about the farmers and landowners, but all of us as consumers have a part to play.
Hi Rob
Good to see a report of this event. We don’t see banning neonics as a paneca, but we do think it’s an essential part of a strategy to reverse bee decline (and we can hardly be accused of not campaigning against climate change or habitat loss!).
I think your wording “confusing research” around neonics gives the impression that Penelope Whitehorn’s blog is making that case. It isn’t.
https://sti-cs.org/2016/05/19/pesticide-related-confusion-in-pollinators-and-politicians/
She states: “It’s tempting – even essential – to note that it’s in the interests of the chemical companies that decision-makers should remain confused, and that clear findings should be made opaque. And it’s natural that farmers in particular, faced with warnings of major economic losses and crop failure, tend to be very cautious. But it really isn’t possible to hide behind the science anymore – the evidence is in and it is clear; neonics are causing massive harm to species that we all depend upon.”