Environment and Conservation
These words mean many things to many people. ‘Protecting the environment’ can mean anything from picking litter to picketing politicians.
Equally, ‘conservation’ ranges from fixing romantic assignations for pandas to banning double glazing in historic houses.
I like to see wildlife – plants and animals, thriving. I have been fortunate to visit nature conservation sites ranging from haymeadows in the high pennines to estuaries full of wading birds. I’ve seen heather moors and ancient woodland, acid bogs and alkaline grassland. Some are purely wildlife reserves: others are part of a thriving farm. They’re all lovely, and they’re all full of their own speical mix of wildlife.
I live in the countryside, with hedges, little copses, and a small river. The village, and surrounding fields, abound with wildlife: birds of all sorts, bats, insects, frogs, toads, rabbits, deer, hedgehogs, slugs, snails, spiders – you name it, it’s out there hiding somewhere.
Many farmers love to see the birds and animals, and put aside a little land to make space for them. They may plant some trees or hedges to provide extra cover, mow a verge only once a year to leave flowers for butterflies, or dig a scrape to hold water – a magnet for wildlife.
Many other people create wildlife conservation reserves – maybe especially for birds, or maybe for a range of species. These are very nice – full of plants and animals, often cared for by devoted volunteers, and they provide beautiful places to visit.
But I would like to see these things everywhere: not just in a few favoured conservation areas. Furthermore, I don’t think that people need to be in conflict with nature conservation. Why can’t nature be in the cities too?
The latest theory is that we need to link wildlife sites together, providing ‘wildlife corridors’ for animals to migrate to suitable habitats as climate and environment change.
Many organisations, from private farmers to Government organisations, are working to create a network of linking ‘corridors’ along which wildlife can move across the country.
I think that this is a wonderful idea, with the potential to allow wildlife to spread, breed more successfully, and help species to survive.
And I think it could be great for people as well. It’s not just wildlife that needs access to natural environments: people do too. Research shows that people with access to greenery and nature are happier and healthier than those deprived of living green. Wildlife corridors in the cities could give people access to this green, not just for a Sunday afternoon trip into the countryside, but every day.
Imagine if ‘wildlife corridors’ ran into cities, close to every home in the land. Imagine what people could enjoy if their daily route to work, school, shops, or walking the dog passed through a ‘wildlife corridor’?
People could re-connect with nature. They could watch the turn of the year, seeing buds swell on bare winter branches, turning misty green in spring. In summer they would see birds flitting back and to their nests, beaks filled with insects to feed their hungry brood. In autumn, they’d see the low afternoon sun glow on the red and yellow leaves. They might even share a feast of hedgerow berries with the birds.
This is my dream. And it’s not the wildlife that’s stopping us – it’s our hunger to take over every inch of land. Wildlife can thrive in the most unlikely places, if we only give it space. Wildlife already lives in suburban gardens, derelict industrial sites, scrubland, abandoned quarries, and motorway verges, as well as in nicely-managed conservation areas. On Teesside, wildlife thrives next to chemical works and a nuclear power station – we can have it all, if we only allow the wildlife to join us.
All that wildlife wants is for us to give it a bit of space. Would that be so difficult?