The current migration of people into Europe from North Africa, the Middle East, and farther afield because of war and other social turmoil has already been linked to climate change\u00a0\u2013 not only\u00a0because this has been seen as a contributor to the conflicts within Syria, but also in\u00a0the sense that what we are seeing now is likely to be a harbinger of things to come as the world warms further and greater numbers of people will seek more hospitable (in every sense) places to live.<\/p>\n
Migration applies not just to people, but to nature more generally, and a new report from the RSPB: The Nature of Climate Change \u2013 Europe's wildlife at risk<\/em>\u00a0explores the issues. This is part of Mike Clarke's introduction which lays out the issue clearly:<\/p>\n \u201cWe are at a point in recent geological history where the rate of human-induced climate change will far outstrip the ability of species to adapt successfully, especially when the resilience of nature has been reduced by habitat loss, non-native species introductions and over-exploitation. The disruption to the web of life is a threat not just to wildlife, but to the lives of people around the world.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The report sets out evidence that wildlife of all kinds will be challenged because of climate change, and it says that protected areas and nature reserves will be vital in helping wildlife cope with a changing climate, which is something that many UK wildlife charities will agree with.\u00a0 For UK birds, for example, higher rainfall will adversely affect bearded tits, capercaillie and shags, and warmer temperatures in southern Europe will result in habitat loss for Dartford warblers.\u00a0 But Clarke says that it\u2019s not all bad news from the RSPB perspective as new bird species have begun breeding here, such as little egrets, black-winged stilts and little bitterns.<\/p>\n Clarke also raises the issue of whether we need to be both less precious about the idea of native, and much more welcoming of nature's migrants:<\/p>\n \"The wildlife we typically accept as being part of our \u2018native\u2019 flora and fauna is moving, and new species\u00a0are arriving as colonists, partly driven by climate change. \u00a0The assemblage of species we consider \u2018native\u2019 is therefore in a state of flux. \u00a0We cannot arrest the changes, so to aid adaptation it will be important to enable species to colonise new areas via provision of sufficient, suitably-protected habitat, in areas that will become more climatically suitable over time.\"<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This idea is also part of what Fred Pearce argues in his book The New Wild<\/em>: why invasive species will be nature's salvation.\u00a0 Pearce says that keeping out non-native species looks increasingly flawed as a strategy and that we should celebrate their dynamism and the novel ecosystems they create. \u00a0Pearce thinks that, in an era of climate change and widespread ecological damage, we should be\u00a0finding ways to help nature regenerate, and that embracing this 'new wild' is our best chance.<\/p>\n Clearly, not everyone will agree with this open, liberal approach, and there are other, considered points of view.\u00a0 In all this, it\u2019s necessary, perhaps, to distinguish between the invasive, and the merely non-native: that is, between those species that are here causing trouble, and those that are just here. \u00a0Invasive species can be plants, animals, or other groups such as fungi or algae that cause disease or pest problems, and the RHS says that, after habitat destruction, invasive non-native species are the most serious threat to global biodiversity. \u00a0It says that, in the UK, there are now 1402 non-native plant species, with 108 (8%)\u00a0of these considered as invasive.\u00a0 Internationally, the\u00a0database of such\u00a0troublesome species is managed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature, which now lists 3,163 such plants and 820 animals.\u00a0 Based on this, the\u00a0EU looks set to approve a list of 37 plant and animal species that member-states must eradicate where possible.\u00a0 Mercifully, this does not include John Wyndham\u2019s triffids, that ultimate invasive species.<\/p>\n Non-native species are those that occur outside their natural range due to direct or indirect introduction by humans, and where the introduced species persist in natural or unmanaged habitats, they are termed \u2018naturalised\u2019.\u00a0 It is obvious that many naturalised species do not cause a problem; however, if they spread and out-compete native species they can threaten ecosystems, habitats, or the existence of native species themselves, and give rise to environmental damage and economic cost. \u00a0One problem is that many non-native species can take a long time to become invasive, and many of the plants now considered invasive have been growing in the UK for over 100 years without causing a problem.\u00a0 Where they are a problem, however, they can be expensive to eradicate and it can take a long time: for example, at least ten years might be needed to eradicate giant hogweed, and three to four years to get rid of Japanese knotweed. \u00a0A recent Economist article: Invasive Species \u2013 day of the triffids (which surprisingly doesn't mention climate) argues for a measured and pragmatic approach to non-native species. \u00a0It quotes Chris Thomas, a biologist at the University of York, who has calculated that of the UK\u2019s 677 most widespread plant species, 68 were introduced by humans before 1500 and another 56 after that date, with not one of these introduced species ranks among the 50 most widespread plants in the country.\u00a0 Even Himalayan balsam is so rare that it barely makes the list. \u00a0This is, of course, to take a national view, whereas all politics (whether about plants or people) is local and Himalayan balsam has to be tackled wherever it is found.<\/p>\n As I hinted at the outset, there are some parallels in all this with the current debate about the migration of peoples, although there are clearly important differences as well.\u00a0 For example, some of the language regularly used in relation to plants and animals cannot be used about people.\u00a0 But it\u2019s possible that a discussion of the migration of plants and animals, and how tolerant we should be of the benefits and problems they bring, might ease a consideration of the much more difficult topic of the immigration of people.<\/p>\n .\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026\u2026..<\/p>\n This is the text of my\u00a0President\u2019s Column in NAEE's journal, Environmental Education (Vol 111) which was published last month. \u00a0Regular readers will recognise that it was developed from a short post I wrote last December.<\/p>\n References<\/strong><\/p>\n Royal Horticultural Society (RHS) Invasive non-native species \u00a0http:\/\/ow.ly\/Wauus<\/p>\n Pearce F (2015) The New Wild: why invasive species will be nature's salvation. London: Icon Books<\/p>\n RSPB (2015) The Nature of Climate Change \u2013 Europe's wildlife at risk\u00a0 http:\/\/ow.ly\/Wauq6<\/p>\n The Economist (2015) Invasive Species \u2013 day of the triffids\u00a0 http:\/\/ow.ly\/Waulx<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The current migration of people into Europe from North Africa, the Middle East, and farther afield because of war and other social turmoil has already been linked to climate change\u00a0\u2013 not only\u00a0because this has been seen as a contributor to...<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":237,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[2,3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6660","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-comment","category-new-publications"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6660","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/237"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6660"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6660\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6660"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6660"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.bath.ac.uk\/edswahs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6660"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}