I never saw a man who looked
With such a wistful eye
Upon that little tent of blue
Which prisoners call the sky,
And at every drifting cloud that went
With sails of silver by.
In his introductory remarks to the Near 'n' Far conference last week, Andy Clements, from the British Trust for Ornithology, became the latest person to talk about our "disconnect from nature". He said that people in the UK now spend 40% less time "in nature" than a few years ago, that 1.3m people never "visit nature" at all, and that only 10% of schools do so.
Prior to all this nonsense, he'd said that nature is linked to learning, health and wellbeing, that it is the foundation of our health, and a place for exploration. He talked about his own early and significant life experiences [SLE] which had led in some way to his current interests, role and position.
All that reminded me of a talk I heard some years back when SLE research was all the rage. In this, it was said that if we could only find out which SLEs were particularly significant, we could ensure that everybody experienced them. I remember the teacher sitting next to me turning and whispering, "That is rubbish, isn't it?" I assured her it was. It still is, but we find it hard to accept that what's good for one person will not do for someone else; instead, we get into moral panics and invent dodgy concepts such as "nature deficit disorder".
Andy Clements, as well as being Director of the British Trust for Ornithology, is a Board Member of Natural England, and a Trustee of the National Biodiversity Network, so he obviously knows more than most about "nature". It's a pity, then, that he didn't talk about it in a more nuanced way.
I said, earlier, that his comment that "people in the UK now spend 40% less time "in nature" than a few years ago" was nonsense, because it is. Given that we humans are part of nature, it is hard to see how we could be spending less time in it than before. And as for the 1.3 million who are said never visit nature, well, they don't need to because it comes visiting them every day. They don't even need to move – unless they are locked away somewhere: a prison, perhaps – or a conference in East London.
Like most people in "our field", Andy knows all this. But we conspire to make it difficult for people to understand what we are trying to say by using simplistic terminology. How much easier it is to say that people never visit nature than to explain what is meant, and why it's a problem.
As for what is meant, let me refer you back to the Essex University report for the Wildlife Trusts which had a good go at teasing out the issues, albeit imperfectly. I was rather surprised that the authors were not invited to speak at the conference.
And finally, let me mention, again, what I highlighted the other day from Simon Beames' talk:
"We need to reconceptualise 'adventure' so as to gain theoretical purpose"
This applies to our 'being in nature' as well.
.................................................................................
I know not whether Laws be right,
Or whether Laws be wrong;
All that we know who lie in goal
Is that the wall is strong;
And that each day is like a year,
A year whose days are long.
Respond