The Value of Wildlife

A couple of weeks ago a comment was left on a previous posting about the rediscovery of the Crucifix Beetle in Wicken Fen. This discovery enabled me to finally identify a beetle that I had seen in my local wood as the same species. Anyway, the comment was from someone who had a picture of a beetle that looked as though it was the same, or very similar.

Now what I find fascinating about this species is that there is virtually nothing known about the habitat needs, foods or sexual behaviour of this insect. This is partly because it is so rare, officially there is only a single know location, Wicken Fen and only if a specimen can be caught and killed so that it can be studied and tested would my local population be recognised. But as my attitude is that killing a very rare species just to identify it kind of defeats the objective of trying to conserve it.

But this discovery has greater implications as there are many other species that are not recorded as present just because the discovery or the records are not coming from trained scientists. With birds, plants and reptiles often a photograph is all an amateur needs to prove that an observation is correct. But with some of the less sexy orders of animals like insects or snails to name a few, sightings and records are seen as unreliable unless there is a specimen to study.

There is also a commercial and financial reason why some bodies don't want to discover that there is something rare about. In Britain there is quite strong legal protection for many species, not all of them rare but important to the diversity and health of the environment. However, it is particularly when development or construction work is being proposed (or carried out) that discovery of a protected species becomes unwanted. Developers are under a legal obligation to carry out a survey and make provision for any protected species. This may mean they have to create an artificial loft for bats so they can redevelop an old building to turn it into apartments. When bats are already using the building. Or to build new homes on a sensitive site there may be a requirement that Great Crested Newts get a new pond so that an existing population is not destroyed. I include both these examples as these have happened and have lead to the developers complaining about what the law requires.

Equally there are companies that try to avoid getting a proper Environmental Impact Survey done so that nothing rare or protected is ever discovered. The other area where this can cause a problem for commercial interests is when, say a bird, nests on or in a building. With most birds it is illegal to disturb the nest, so that a work can be delayed should this happen. There was an example of this locally this year, and there the developer just got on with other work until the chicks fledged. This is not the attitude of many though as far to many complain about this and claim that it all adds to their costs. Yet the reality is that all that happens is the ones that complain do just as the ones that don't complain and get on with other aspects of the development.

One of the benefits of developers now having to carry out Environmental Impact Surveys is that species have been rediscovered. One of the locations that I am trying to access to film the wildlife on, has recently discovered a rare beetle, this was only found as they had to carry out the EIS. There they have just moved the activity away from the sensitive area.

I also know that this is a problem around the world. In Pennsylvania there was a snake expert that discovered snakes in various counties where they are supposed to be absent. Also one of my regular readers in Maine can not get her local state to recognise that they have a pair of Golden Eagles nesting there nor that box turtles are present even though she has posted pictures on the internet of them. There as here it would require government and business to take actions to protect them and their habitats.

Part of the difficulty will always be that people do not value the wildlife around them. The success of the Red Kite project though should provide a template for how wildlife benefits the economy. One of the local bus companies renamed one of their routes the Red Kite, it goes right through the birds range. Even before the increases in fuel costs this brought the company an increase in passenger numbers of at least forty percent. Also a bed and breakfast that was on the brink of closure before the Kites came is now ticking along quite nicely because of the kites. People will pay to see these magnificent birds. Equally when I go trekking to other wildlife hot spots, I do spend money on meals out and occasionally accommodation.

However while the tourism potential is easily understood there are some benefits that are less obvious. Bats eat insects, in Britain that means midges. As female midges eat tourists and wildlife photographers in particular, the presence of bats helps keep a problem at bay. But equally birds who feed on insects keep take care of the pests that also want to eat our food crops. This is something any organic grower already knows, but if there were not the birds there the estimated cost to agriculture would run into billions.

As I have already reported here there is a problem with the loss of bees, and while the science is still not conclusive about why we are seeing bees dying, the economic impact has been highlighted. Without bees to pollinate crops it would take an army of workers to transfer pollen between flowers using brushes and I bet it will not be as efficient as the bees do it.

Therefore while the economic case has been made for wildlife and just not the range we think of as useful, but all wildlife, what is needed is for a real change in the attitude towards the species we share the planet with. At the moment if a species is causing a perceived economic harm to one business or sector then often actions are taken to control. This is done without regard to the impact upon other businesses or sectors of the economy. The most obvious example are the shooting estates. Even though it is illegal large numbers of raptors are killed to preserve the economics of the estate. Yet many other smaller businesses suffer because the depleted wildlife in the area fails to attract other leisure based activities including tourism.

While efforts have been made and are being made to discover what we have, only this year as part of a national survey of adders a whole population was discover in Yorkshire, until we know what we have and where we can not hope to protect it. Further no development should be allowed on sensitive sites. Often developers promise much, but the economic reality is almost always far less than was promised.

There really could be some wonderful gems out there that we just don't realise are there. As for the possible third location for the Crucifix Beetle, well my research shows that it is more likely to be either Necrophorus vespilloides or Necrophorus investigator both of the family Silphidae Burying Beetles. And I only discovered that from burying my head if a few books.