Category: Biodiversity

Bristol is buzzing, how the city is helping pollinators

Posted on by janet.crompton

There has been a substantial amount of press coverage recently on the plight of our pollinators. They are now less abundant and widespread than they were in the 1950s. A number of threats are responsible, including habitat loss, disease, extreme weather, climate change and pesticide use.

There is not one smoking gun among these threats, but rather the combination that has endangered some species in the UK. Loss of wild flower rich habitat (due to intensive agriculture, industrialisation and urbanisation) escalates the effect of disease, extreme weather, climate change and pesticide use. Without food or shelter, pollinators are more vulnerable.

Whilst visiting the University of Bristol Botanic Garden a few weeks ago, I noticed the abundance of pollinators busily visiting many different flowers from the orchid look-a-like flower of Impatiens tinctoria to the swathes of Rudbeckia sp. and Verbena bonariensis. This year saw the 6th year of the University of Bristol Botanic Gardens hosting the Bee and Pollination Festival in September. The Community Ecology Group from Bristol’s School of Biological Sciences was exhibiting and promoting their research as well as the exciting Get Bristol Buzzing Initiative.

To find out more about pollinator research at the University, I met up with Dr Katherine Baldock, a NERC Knowledge Exchange Fellow from the School of Biological Sciences and the Cabot Institute, to discuss the group’s work.

“Most people know that pollinators are important, but quite often don’t know what to do to help them, “ explained Katherine. “And this is where our research at the University comes into play”.

The aim of Katherine’s fellowship is to improve the value of the UK’s urban areas for pollinators by working with various stakeholders, such as city councils, conservation practitioners and the landscape industry.

Translating science into solutions

Up until 2014, Katherine worked on the Urban Pollinators Project, which is researching insect pollinators and the plants they forage on in urban habitats.

Kath Baldock

Building upon research from this project and her current Fellowship, Katherine and her Bristol colleagues have contributed to the development of  a Greater Bristol Pollinator Strategy (2015-2020). The University research group has teamed up with Bristol City Council, the Avon Wildlife Trust, Bristol Friends of the Earth, Buglife, South Gloucestershire Council and the University of the West of England to implement this with the aim of protecting existing habitat and increasing pollinator habitat in the Greater Bristol area.

The group is also raising awareness of the importance of pollinators to a wide-ranging audience within the city and further afield. This is the first local pollinator strategy within the UK and follows closely in the wake of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ National Pollinator Strategy launched in 2014. It will help to promote aspects of the national strategy relevant to urban areas and hopefully set a precedent for the development of other local pollinator strategies throughout the UK.

The local pollinator strategy outlines actions that will help fulfill the strategy aims, including:

  • formation of a Local Pollinator Forum intended to share knowledge and best practice,
  • establishment of a joined-up approach to pollinator conservation by linking projects through the ‘Get Bristol Buzzing’ Initiative,
  • working with the public in local areas to explain actions they can take as individuals.

“Urban green spaces are important corridors for wildlife and help to provide linkages across the country”, explained Katherine. I envisaged a series of insect aerial motorways linking the whole of the UK, invisible threads connecting countryside, urban fringe and city centres.

The bee link-up

The Get Bristol Buzzing Initiative is doing just that, as one of its strategic aims with the local pollinator strategy for 2016-2020, is to “Map pollinator habitat and identify target sites that allow habitat networks and stepping stones to be created to enable pollinators to move through urban areas”.

Katherine talked about how engaging the public at ground level was really important to Get Bristol Buzzing. The initiative is the pollinator component of My Wild City, a project whose vision is for people in Bristol to help transform spaces into a city-wide nature reserve. A number of interactive maps have been created that allow people to add what they have been doing in their area to help wildlife. The Get Buzzing Initiative will feed into these maps. Kath said,

‘The fact that you can add yourselves onto a map makes the Get Buzzing Initiative really visually appealing to people and much more personal.”

So, what can you do at home to help urban pollinators?

  • Plant for pollinators. Think about what plants you have in your garden. Could you change the planting or improve on it to make it more attractive to pollinators? Think about growing species that have nectar and pollen rich flowers and let your lawn grow longer to allow plants to flower.
  • Avoid pesticides. Most gardeners like their plants to remain pest free but avoid the temptation to use pesticides and accept the fact that you will lose some plants to pests. Instead try to encourage wildlife that will devour those pests or cultivate plants that will deter pests.
  • Provide habitat. As pollinators need a home, you can always make your own nest boxes if you want to give your pollinating visitors a helping hand by drilling holes in a log or by bundling up lengths of hollow sticks such as bamboo. Visit the Botanic Garden’s bee hotel for inspiration!

‘Setting aside a wild bit of garden can help pollinators by providing food, but provides nesting sites too’, remarked Katherine.

————————–

This blog was written by Helen Roberts.  It has been republished with kind permission from the University of Bristol’s Botanic Gardens blog.

Additional information

Festival of Nature 2015: Roots and soil erosion

Posted on by janet.crompton

Seed lucky dips, 3D-printer pens, and Bill Oddie with a puffin. All in a day’s volunteering for the Festival of Nature 2015!

 

Bristol’s Festival of Nature is the UK’s largest celebration of the natural world, and has recently spread over into Bath too. This year, I helped Kevin Smyth and Tom Denbigh from the School of Biological Sciences. Their work in Prof Claire Grierson’s lab group looks at plant roots, especially how important they are at preventing soil erosion. This work is funded by the Leverhulme Trust.

We also had some smaller plants growing in transparent media. The bean on the left
has thicker roots and very few side shoots, whereas the tomato on the right has much
thinner roots but more side shoots.

The stall really helped reveal what’s going under our feet in any park, garden or green space. Like the well-known tip of the iceberg, there’s often a lot going on below the surface! For the sunflowers in this rhizotron, the roots were taller than many of the kids we saw!

We also had some smaller plants growing in transparent media (see image above). The bean on the left has thicker roots and very few side shoots, whereas the tomato on the right has much thinner roots but more side shoots.

If you want evidence that plants do help combat soil erosion, just look at the pictures! Soil without plants (right) can be really crumbly and doesn’t hold itself together well. A slight slope and some rainfall would wash it away easily, leading to soil erosion. Soil and plants is a far more effective solution, holding itself together with ease – even without a supporting pot. One of so many reasons why we need more plants around!

 

Seed lucky dip at the Festival of Nature.

Are you inspired to lend a hand with increasing the plant numbers in your area? Perhaps you are curious about the medical-looking pots are behind the bowl of soil in the image above. We can help with both – it’s a seed lucky dip!

In the lab, Kevin’s group studies roots to try and understand why plants are so effective at preventing soil erosion. To do this, they can make mutations in some plants and see if it changes the roots. The mutant plants of choice are Arabadopsis, weedy relatives of the mustard plant and perhaps the most studied plant in the world.

Looking down the microscope at the samples, you could work out which plant was the “bald” mutant (below left) and which was the “werewolf” (below right) compared to the normal roots in the middle. If we understand how the plant’s genetics affects their roots, perhaps in the future we could grow plants that are better at holding the soil together.

Looking down the microscope at the samples, you could work out which plant
was the “bald” mutant (left) and which was the “werewolf” (right) compared
to the normal roots in the middle.
A 3D printing pen was used to create root structures at the Festival of Nature.

There was art as well as science! You could draw your own root structure on a plant template, then one of us lucky volunteers got to use this amazing 3D-printing pen to made a “real” version of it. You could either take it home or donate it to our ever-growing wall…

As a bonus, my lunch break timed nicely with Bill Oddie’s talk so I got to hear him tell a bunch of amusing anecdotes about his young life and how that led to a passion for wildlife. One of these apparently required a stuffed puffin!

Bill Oddie at the Festival of Nature.

There was plenty to do at the stall, in the tent and throughout the festival. I was genuinely impressed at the range of activities and how interesting they were, something for all ages and experiences. I had a great time helping out and look forward to next year’s Festival of Nature already! It also fit in as a pretty wild indeed #30dayswild.
————————————–
This blog is written by Emily Coyte, and has been reproduced from her blog Memetic Drift.  Emily is an Assistant Teacher in the School of Biochemistry at the University of Bristol.

Emily Coyte

 

Biodiversity in Bedminster

Posted on by janet.crompton

Students undertaking community based learning projects are coming to the end of their dissertation process and are beginning to disseminate their results to the community.  Last night student Julia Kole shared her findings with the Bedminster community.  Julia discussed the benefits and limitations of wildlife corridors and stepping stones in Bedminster.  Attendees asked lots of questions about the project and discussed how the local community can take forward findings from Julia’s dissertation.

Julia also conducted an interview earlier in the week with B@se radio about the project.  She discusses her background growing up in Canada and her interested in the environment from a young age enjoying watching nature documentaries.  This led on to studying in the US and working with children in national parks and Julia discusses the impact this had on children involved.

She explains that she picked the Environmental Policy and Management MSc due to the institution being world renowned and how she loved the city. She talks of how the course is a great mix of different subjects from climate change modelling and impact to statistical analysis as well as a mix of students from all over the world sharing their knowledge.  She also shares her findings on how biodiversity in Bedminster can be improved. 

———————-
This blog is written by Hannah Tweddle, Community Based Learning Intern at the Cabot Institute.

Beyond wildlife corridors: Investigating and evaluating other urban wildlife enhancement projects

Posted on by janet.crompton

Over the course of the summer, I shall be analysing various urban wildlife enhancement practices taking place in the 7 Core Cities of England. Determining if these projects have been successful overall will be based on a set list of quantitative and qualitative ecological performance indicators. To obtain qualitative data or information not readily available through public sources, I will interview personnel who have/had key roles in wildlife enhancement projects in their respective Core Cities. An additional qualitative survey will be sent out to various “green space” and nature organizations to find out what projects they have been involved in and which ones have been successful at functioning as they were intended to.  The research questions I will try to answer are:

Why are wildlife corridors often the default urban wildlife enhancement policy of choice?

There hasn’t been significant data collection, experiments or academic evaluations of urban wildlife corridors to justify why they are the popular choice of urban wildlife enhancement projects. What about other methods? What is in use in the core cities? Is it working? What has been the most successful?

How can corridors and other methods of wildlife enhancement in urban areas be measured to determine overall success?

 

This brook flows through the Blackbrook Open Space,
an important wildlife corridor through a large
housing estate in south-east Taunton. Credit: Geograph

Background research and literature reviews will aid in designing a performance indicator model that will be used to summarise information gathered through the interviews. There will be both a quantitative and qualitative section, with indicators to be determined as my research progresses.

Ever since I can remember, I have always had a strong passion to explore and understand the natural world. Summers spent camping in the Canadian wilderness and years of Girl Guides were just some of the many activities I did growing up that helped me to appreciate, respect and responsibly interact with the environment. After my undergrad, I worked for a year in a National Park in the USA as an environmental educator and spent my days leading school groups through different ecosystems and teaching them how to be informed stewards to the natural world. When I read about this partnership topic dealing with biodiversity and urban wildlife enhancement projects for Bristol, I knew I could easily translate my interests in the conservation of wild spaces into an interest in protecting and enhancing urban green spaces.

The organisation I am working with is the Greater Bedminster Community Partnership, a group made up of local councillors, voluntary and community organisations, private businesses and public agencies within the Bristol wards of Southville and Bedminster. Their goals consist of improving and enhancing the quality of life for Bristol residents and community members in these areas. Members of this organization have been involved with local biodiversity counts and studies of local green spaces and have found that these two wards of Bristol are at the bottom in regards to wildlife biodiversity. The organization would like me to assess the impact of different wildlife enhancement practices and identify applicable practices that can be used in the BS3 area to enhance urban wildlife populations. I hope to use the results of my dissertation to present to the organization an assessment of different urban wildlife enhancement practices currently implemented in the UK and make suggestions on which practices would work best for their area.

Here are some related links for anyone interested:
The Greater Bedminster Community Partnership
The Avon Wildlife Trust
Natural Improvement Areas

Thanks for taking the time to read up on what I will be up to all summer long! If you would like to know more about my project or have any questions, comments or suggestions, please email me at: jk13039@my.bristol.ac.uk.
————————————
This blog is written by Julia Kole, an MSc Environmental Policy and Management student at the University of Bristol.  Julia is from Mississauga, Ontario, Canada.

Further reading

Community Based Learning at the Cabot Institute
Linking students to green projects in Bristol
Green Deal delivery
Julia Kole

Do we care too much about nature?

Posted on by janet.crompton

Over 80% of British adults believe that the natural environment should be protected at all costs. Yet, a recent report suggests that “government progress on commitments to the natural environment has been largely static” (1). Indeed, the budget for DEFRA, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, has been slashed by 10% (£37m) and a reduction in green levies is likely as the government attempts to reduce domestic energy bills.

Has the government lost interest in the environment? Or do we care too much about nature?
To discuss this further, the Cabot Institute hosted a public recording of BBC Radio 4′s Shared Planet, a show which explores the complex relationship between the human populations and wildlife. John Burton, CEO of the World Land Trust (WLT), was the first panellist and is a well known journalist and conservationist who has raised £19m for nature conservation in Africa, Asia and Central and Southern America. He believes that we should think about policy on “the life scale of an oak tree” and that further measures are required to protect the environment, both at home and abroad. The second panellist, Hannah Stoddart, is the head of the economic justice policy team at Oxfam GB and believes that fairer redistribution of wealth is more important than wildlife conservation.
Do we care about nature?
A new report, by the Environmental Funders Network, suggests that one in ten UK adults are now a member or supporter of Britain’s environmental and conservation groups (2). This equates to nearly 4.5 million people, with 81 organisations protecting species and 78 working on climate change. Although 44% of funding is allocated to biodiversity and nature protection, only 7.3% of total funds have been allocated to the climate and the atmosphere. This suggests we are more interested in ‘traditional’ environmental issues than climate change. A recent research project by the RSPB indicates that four out of five UK children are no longer connected with nature (3). Dr Mike Clarke, the chief executive of the RSPB, explains that “…nature is in trouble, and children’s connection to nature is closely linked to this”. At a time where UK species are in decline, are we doing enough to engage young people in the natural world?
An alternative to conservation
Both John Burton and Hannah Stoddart agree that nature is important and that conservation can help protect endangered landscapes. However, many conservation sites are maintained in ”favourable condition”. In other words, they are kept in the condition they were found when designated as conversation sites. A alternative concept, known as rewilding, attempts to reverse the destruction of nature by standing back and allowing nature to control its own destiny.
Currently, farmers have to prevent the development of foreign or exotic vegetation on their land. This results in the development of bare land, lacking in biodiversity. Removal of the ‘agricultural condition’ rule and the introduction of rewilding may allow this land to flourish once again. George Monbiot, author of Feral, is particularly interested in the reintroduction of megafauna, large animals that existed at the end of the last glacial period (>11ka) (4). It seems hard to believe, but over ten thousand years ago, elephants, rhinoceri and camels roamed Europe while other animals, such as bison, wolves and wildcats, were particularly widespread throughout the UK.
Indeed, the re-introduction of missing species can have a profound effect on wildlife. In 1995, grey wolves were reintroducedto Yellowstone National Park for the first time in 50 years (5). The elk population, who were now at risk of predation by wolves, began to redistribute. This allowed willow and aspen trees to flourish and increased the habitat for certain bird species, small mammals, beavers, and moose. This effect, known as a trophic cascade, suggests that careful reintroduction of megafauna into the wild can allow ecosystems to flourish. However, rewilding can backfire. In 2008, endangered Mallorcan toads were reintroduced into the natural population but were infected with Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, a well-known fungus that can threaten amphibians (6). As a result, the Mallorcan toads are now in danger of being wiped out once again. Despite this, I believe that rewilding in the UK is feasible and could allow the public, especially children, to reconnect with nature in new and exciting ways.
—
  1. Nature Check 2013. http://www.wcl.org.uk/docs/Link_Nature_Check_Report_November_2013.pdf
  2. Passionate Collaboraton. http://www.greenfunders.org/wp-content/uploads/Passionate-Collaboration-Full-Report.pdf
  3. RSPB Connecting with Nature. http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/connecting-with-nature_tcm9-354603.pdf
  4. Monbiot, G. Feral: searching for enchantment on the frontiers of rewilding. Allen Lane.
  5. Ripple et al,. 2001. Trophic cascades among wolves, elk and aspen on Yellowstone National Parks’s northern range.Biological Conservation. 102. 227-234
  6. Walker et al, 2008. Invasive pathogens threaten species recovery programs. Current Biology. 18. R853-R854

Is ash dieback under control?

Posted on by janet.crompton
Image by FERA

European ash tree is an important component of British woodlands. It has been stayed popular and recommended for planting due to its economic and aesthetic value, also the fact that its resistance towards grey squirrels. In UK, it has been estimated that among all the 141000ha big woodlands (>0.5ha), 5.4% of their composition is ash trees. However, since its first discovery in Poland in 1992, the ash dieback disease, caused by fungus Chalara fraxinea, has spread over the European continent and devastated ash populations in certain areas. On 19.Sep, Rob Spence for Forestry Commission came to Bristol to talk about thecurrent stage of ash dieback control in England.

Chalara fraxinea is the asexual stage of Hymenoscyphus pseudoalbidus, and also the infectious stage. Ascospores are produced from fruiting bodies on the dead branches in the litter, and can be transmitted by wind to more than 10km. Ascospores are not durable, thus its infection window is limited to summer months. The spores tend to attack the young trees due to their lower resistance to the disease, cause crown necrosis and eventually death. In mature plants, the effect of the disease is less severe. However, the disease can seriously compromise the condition of mature trees, and make them succumb to other diseases.

Source: BBC website

Current distribution of the disease in England is largely constrained in tree nurseries, except for East Anglia, where a number of cases have been reported in the wild. The prevalence of the disease in the nurseries all over the country is thought to be due to the fact that seeds are germinated outside of UK, and then saplings and young trees are imported back into UK from the continent, which may already be infected. However, the large outbreak in East Anglia is more likely attributed to extreme weather conditions which bring spores from the continent.

The control effort in southwest is focusing on confining the disease. Unlike East Anglia, the cases of ash dieback in wild are still rare. The Forestry Commission has been conducting aerial surveys to spot early infections, also, two smartphone apps, Tree Alert and OPAL can be used to take photos of suspected infected trees and send to the experts for identification. As the staff of the Forestry Commission is very limited, it becomes very unrealistic for them to come to field for most cases.

It is also worth noting that around 1-2% of the natural population is resistant against the disease. Researches are going on in The Sainsbury’s Lab and John Innes Centre in Norwich, as well as some European institutes trying to identify the resistant genes and possible approaches to deter the spread of the fungus through biological approaches. On country level, a ban has been placed on ash import from outside of the country and transfer of living ash tissues within the country, though the timber transport are still allowed as they are regarded as low risk.

In my point of view, ash dieback is well controlled at this stage. Despite the eventual widespread is inevitable, but this kind of selection bottlenecks has happened widely in nature since the evolution starts. Although there is no reason to reduce our effort in protecting ash trees, as long as we keep the genetic diversity with the susceptible populations while introducing and expanding the resistant traits within the population, the disease will be controlled in macro-scale.

This blog is written by Dan Lan, Biological Sciences, University of Bristol

Neonicotinoids: Are they killing our bees?

Posted on by janet.crompton



The UK government has announced that whilst it accepts the European Union ban on neonicotinoid pesticides, it does not believe that there is enough scientific evidence to support this action.

 In April, the EU banned the use of neonicotinoid pesticides for two years starting in December because of concerns over their effect on bees.  The use of these pesticides will not be allowed on flowering crops that attract bees or by the general public, however winter crops may still be treated. Fifteen countries voted for this ban, with eight voting against it (including the UK and Germany) and four countries abstaining.

Neonicotinoids were originally thought to have less of an impact on the environment and human health than other leading pesticides. They are systemic insecticides, which means they are transported throughout the plant in the vascular system making all tissues toxic to herbivorous insects looking for an easy meal. The most common application in the UK is to treat seeds before they are sown to ensure that even tiny seedlings are protected against pests.

Image by Kath Baldock

The major concern over neonicotinoids is whether nectar and pollen contains levels of pesticide is high enough to cause problems for bees. It has already been shown that they do not contain a lethal dose, however this is not the full story. Bees live in complex social colonies and work together to ensure that there is enough food for developing larvae and the queen. Since neonicotinoids were introduced in the early 1990s bee populations have been in decline and there is a growing feeling of unease that the two may be connected. Scientific research has provided evidence both for and against a possible link leaving governments, farmers, chemical companies environmentalists and beekeepers in an endless debate about whether or not a ban would save our bees.

Several studies on bees have shown that sublethal levels of neonicotinoids disrupt bee behaviour and memory. These chemicals target nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, one of the major ways that signals are sent through the insect central nervous system. Scientists at Newcastle University recently showed that bees exposed to neonicotinoids were less able to form long-term memories associating a smell with a reward, an important behaviour when foraging for pollen and nectar in the wild.

Researchers at the University of Stirling fed bumble bee colonies on pollen and sugar water laced with neonicotinoids for two weeks to simulate field-like exposure to flowering oil seed rape. When the colonies were placed into the field, those that had been fed the pesticides grew more slowly and produced 85% less queens compared with those fed on untreated pollen and nectar. The production of new queens is vital for bee survival because they start new colonies the next year. Studies in other bee species have found that only the largest colonies produce queens, so if neonicotinoids have even a small effect on colony size it may have a devastating effect on queen production.

 

So why does the government argue that there is not enough scientific evidence to support a ban on neonicotinoids?

 
Image by Kath Baldock

In 2012, the Food and Environment Research Agency set up a field trial using bumble bee colonies placed on sites growing either neonicotinoid-treated oil seed rape or untreated seeds. They found no significant difference between the amount of queens produced on each site, although the colonies near neonicotinoid-treated crops grew more slowly. The study also found that the levels of pesticide present in the crops was much lower than previously reported.

I personally think that both laboratory and field studies bring important information to the debate, however neither has the full answer. Whilst more realistic, the government’s field trial suffered from a lack of replication, variation in flowering times and various alternative food sources available to bees. Only 35% of pollen collected by the bees was from the oil seed rape plants, so where oil seed rape comprises the majority of flowering plants available to bees the effect on neonicotinoids may be more pronounced. The laboratory research can control more variables to establish a more clear picture, however the bees in these studies were often given only neonicotinoid-treated pollen and nectar to eat, which clearly is not the case in a rural landscape. Flies and beetles have been shown to avoid neonicotinoids, which could mean that bees would find alternative food sources where possible. This would have a major impact on crop pollination.

We desperately need well-designed field studies looking at the effect of neonicotinoids on bees and the environment in general. Despite an EU moratorium on growing neonicotinoid treated crops, an allowance should be made for scientists to set up controlled field trials to study the effect of these pesticides on bees during the two year ban. It could be our only chance to determine the danger these chemicals pose to vital pollinators and the wider environment.

 

This blog is written by Sarah Jose, Biological Sciences, University of Bristol
Sarah Jose

Sustainable landscapes for the future

Posted on by janet.crompton

On the 18th of July, the Cabot Institute at the University of Bristol hosted a one day conference for academics, landscape designers, industrial partners and policy makers to discuss how to create sustainable urban landscapes for the future. The event was organised to promote the exchange of ideas and to combine expertise from all stages of the process to determine how to create spaces that would maximise biodiversity and environmental benefits whilst remaining somewhere that people love to use.

City Academy Meadow, Bristol

A common theme throughout the conference was whether green spaces in cities can be designed to accommodate the needs of both local wildlife and people. Professor Nigel Dunnett from the University of Sheffield was one of the principle designers of the Olympic Park landscape, where he created a stunning biodiverse pictorial meadow with a long flowering season. His presentation highlighted the importance of creating a landscape that wildlife will benefit from, but critically that people will use and love. Professor Dunnett argued that we take more joy from seeing a beautiful expanse of flowers than a lawn monoculture and that “beauty in biodiversity is about people in ecology”.  Landscape architect Kym Jones echoed this, describing landscapes that people don’t want to use as “socially unsustainable”, no matter how many environmentally-friendly boxes they tick.

Professor Dunnett’s urban meadows are controversial because he often uses non-native plant species in his design to increase the flowering period. Professor Jane Memmott of the University of Bristol Urban Pollinators research group presented data collected at nature reserves, farms and urban green spaces around Bristol that suggest most pollinators don’t really mind whether native or non-indigenous plant species are used, as long as they produce a lot of flowers. She reported that whilst pollinators are more numerous in nature reserves than urban sites, the cities retain a high level of species diversity that it is important to protect in the future. This called into question the BREEAM system of measuring sustainability in new developments, which does not usually allow non-native species to be incorporated into a design.

Professor Graham Stone

The debate about whether people would accept more biodiverse landscapes continued by questioning public opinion. Many established parks are attached to historical expectations of that place; typically well-manicured lawns and pruned trees. The group agreed that it was time to try and change the public’s  perception to accept a little wilderness in parks and gardens as a habitat for local wildlife. Urban meadows begin to look neglected after flowering, however Professor Graham Stone of the University of Edinburgh mentioned that it is important to let the plants produce their seeds to provide birds with an important food source in the autumn. Bristol City Council have been trialling annual meadows in central reservations around the approaches to the city, and reported that they had not had any complaints from local residents about plants looking untidy when dying back at the end of the season. With sustainable landscaping becoming more popular in UK schools and communities, it is hoped that the public perception towards ecologically friendly designs have already begun to change.

Dr. Sarah Webster presented DEFRA’s hopes for sustainable urban developments. The 2010 Making Space for Nature report outlined new guidelines for reducing the huge pressures on wildlife, which state that new landscapes should enhance the UK’s ecological network by being bigger, better and more connected to existing habitats. DEFRA is currently trialling “biodiversity offsets”, where companies restore an equivalent area for every habitat that is unavoidably lost during a development. It is currently undecided whether or not these offsets will be mandatory if introduced, and it remains difficult to quantify the importance of a habitat in order to produce a new site of equal value to the environment. If this scheme goes ahead, careful planning could ensure that urban landscapes become more connected and form ecological networks within cities.

One of the major difficulties facing the landscape industry is how to measure the economic benefits of sustainability. Howard Wood presented his work with Lyon Parks Department in France, an ambitious project that saved hundreds of thousands of Euros over a year using ecologically-friendly design and maintenance. His team made their own compost from green plant waste and horse manure, killed weeds using hot water, used bio-control methods to remove pests, planted annual meadows to reduce mowing and maintenance of lawns, and used wood chippings as mulch to reduce weeds and improve soil water retention. The group decided that one of the key aims for the future is to improve the baseline knowledge of how much money different types of sustainable landscape cost to create or maintain, and whether they will cost councils and developers less in contrast to the traditional landscape designs.

The day ended with a request from the landscape industry partners for academics to make new sustainability research more easily accessible and understandable. Kym Jones mentioned that sustainability is now an integral part of landscape design, but landscape architects need to have the facts about its importance and value to be able to sell it to their clients. The overwhelming feeling was that green lawns alone are not enough; urban meadows promote biodiversity whilst producing beautiful displays of colour for people to enjoy. Professor Dunnett summed the day up best for me when he said, “we need to mix aesthetics and beauty with the science”. We are building places for people and local wildlife, and innovative new approaches

This blog is written by Sarah Jose, Biological Sciences, University of Bristol
Sarah Jose
 
Sign up to our weekly newsletter for all the latest news, events and opportunities at https://bristol.ac.uk/cabot/news/subscribe. Find out more about our unique Master's by Research in Global Environmental Challenges at https://bristol.ac.uk/cabot-masters.