the online meeting place for all who love our amphibians and reptiles |
|
Reptile translocation - UPDATE |
Post Reply | Page <1 456 |
Author | |
herpetologic2
Forum Coordinator Joined: 15 Jun 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1511 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Can I ask whether any of the following is subjected to
translocations in mitigation schemes? Bats Birds Invertebrates Badgers Otters Dormice Water voles Great crested newts You see the London Gateway project moved reptiles to Wiltshire. The other species were kept locally in Essex while the reptiles are now in a different county To me the issue in this case is the acceptability of moving reptiles such large distances while the other species were kept closer becos of their protection Reptiles need more protection and a licensing system to prevent them being moved all over the UK I understand the need to broaden the scope so that we can get a good number of signatures. The first thing to do is get a letter from ARC BHS LEHART EARG ARG UK over the reptile issue and followed by a more general petition in relation to Biodiversity offsets |
|
Report your sightings to the Record Pool http://arguk.org/recording
|
|
administrator
Admin Group Joined: 01 Jan 2007 Status: Offline Points: 10 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Good point Jon, I would agree that would be the best approach. If we can sort our end of things and then perhaps get a 'snow ball' going with other groups on the wider issues it would make a lot of sense. |
|
will
Senior Member Joined: 27 Feb 2007 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1830 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Yes, sounds good to me - let's get a consensus of interested parties in herp circles, and then perhaps cast the net wider? we could cite the Wiltshire example from the specific perspective of reptiles in the first instance.
|
|
Robert V
Senior Member Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1264 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I agree with you Will, Gemma and Jon. I am afraid it is time to act guys. For those of you connected to the construction industry, you will have noticed last night that the planning restrictions on Section 106 and class C "change of use" from shops to houses slipped in under the radar very low key. I have no doubt that wholesale changes to planning rules are coming and if we don't watch out this environment bank may become a vehicle for clearance exercises under the banner "good causes". You have to say it is very Thatcheresque in its propogation! You know; dressed up as if its designed with wildlife in mind but with one eye on getting over the planning hurdles connected with 'protected' species". Ok, so what the next move?? R |
|
RobV
|
|
will
Senior Member Joined: 27 Feb 2007 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1830 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
in the Guardian newspaper and Guardian online today : http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/21/essex-rept iles-wiltshire-homes I'll try writing a letter and see if they publish it; we also need that petition to be agreed and sent to ARG-UK etc Cheers Will |
|
will
Senior Member Joined: 27 Feb 2007 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1830 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Excellent letter in today's Guardian from our own herpetologic himself re this issue - well done Jon! (even if the Guardian calls slowworms 'worms'...) Now let's get that petition sent out!
|
|
will
Senior Member Joined: 27 Feb 2007 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1830 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi All
we've not done much since the forum went down. I've spent a bit of time fleshing out the points made for our petition, as below. Remember that the initial purpose is to get people and organisations to jump off the fence and say whether they actually think that removing reptiles from Essex to Wiltshire is a good idea or not. Hence the idea of the petition is firstly to get speciifc groups like ARG-UK, ARC etc on side (or not - depends what they think, but I'd be interested to know if they support the DP World approach and why...) and then to ask the Wildlife Trusts to sign up - again, this could be interesting - Wiltshire Wildlife Trust evidently thinks it's OK to take Essex adders, but what about the other Trusts? What about the National Trust? - let's ask them to sign up too! we're keeping other fauna and flora out of it for the moment, not least because birds etc can at least theoretically travel large distances and so issues of genetic integrity are less valid in the context of conserving local populations, I guess. I'd like to send this off to other herp organisations in the next week or so, so your amendations and suggestions would be appreciated - thanks in advance. Proposed wording of petition: Petition against the long-distance relocation and principle of ‘biodiversity-banking’ in the context of protected species (especially herpetofauna – reptiles and amphibians), April 2011 We, the undersigned, formally state our objection to the principle of long-distance relocation of species during commercial translocations and also to that of ‘biodiversity-banking’ where a developer purchases land (neither necessarily of conservation value nor close to the specific development site) with the purpose of using them for long-distance relocation at some point in the future to facilitate planning consent for the development in question. Our reasons for objecting to long-distance relocation during commercial translocations include the following: 1) The medium and long term survival of amphibians and reptiles moved in large numbers over considerable distances from their origins is scientifically unproven and therefore this strategy constitutes a risk to the individual animals concerned 2) The presumption should be on relocation of animals either in situ as part of the mitigation works or as close to the development site as feasible in order to maintain the local and regional conservation status of the species concerned and also to maintain the genetic integrity of populations of animals which, due to the poor dispersal capabilities of herpetofauna, will have diverged from other populations over the course of thousands of years of geographical separation. 3) The existence of ‘biodiversity (land) banks’ set up in advance of translocations could mitigate against careful planned work to identify suitable local receptor sites and hence make it too easy to obtain planning consent without due regard both to the survival of captured animals in the medium to long term at the receptor site as well as the continued or enhanced local and regional conservation status of the species in the vicinity of the development site Consequently, we the undersigned, urge developers not to employ the practice of long-distance relocation of species during commercial translocations and the related practice of ‘biodiversity-banking’ and instead to liaise with local and regional wildlife conservation organisations to undertake best practice where a development would lead to destruction of habitat of a donor population of a protected species. This best practice would involve planning from the earliest stage to obtain and manage habitat in situ or nearby ex situ to prevent the conservation problems listed above from arising. In addition, we the undersigned, call on statutory conservation and planning authorities to discourage long-distance relocations and ‘land-banking’ as described above. In this way we hope that the recent large-scale removal of reptile species by DP World from Essex to Wiltshire as part of the London Gateway development will not mark the start of a slippery path of least resistance where the legal obligations for herpetofauna conservation are concerned. Signatories: |
|
Robert V
Senior Member Joined: 06 Aug 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1264 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hey guys,
that's weird, I just checked out the Guardian's back issues and couldn't see Jon's letter - any chance you could link it??
And on the subject of consultation...
As well as notifications to the local groups, I think the "Environment Bank" website needs to include an open data base of all the planning applications / devlopment proposals in the pipeline so that individuals can check it and get involved with local issues if they have specific knowledge that relates etc.
It should be open to all, area by area - that way "consultation" will remain genuine and cannot be bought off by restricting info to a closed knit circle of so called "conservation groups" that all have their own agendas going on.
Cheers
Rob
|
|
RobV
|
|
will
Senior Member Joined: 27 Feb 2007 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 1830 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi Rob
it was under the 'Reply' section for March 29th on their website - try this link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/mar/29/essex-reptiles-relocation-measuring-success thanks re the environment bank suggestion too. I'm unsure about whether to add this to the petition as it stands, as this could be seen as condoning the land bank concept. Perhaps this could be held back for a separate discussion. Anyway, I'll check out this website. Cheers Will |
|
Post Reply | Page <1 456 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |