Nicolas Castillo’s Post

1/2 #BiodiversityNetGain is being much talked about on LinkedIn with several posts by e.g. Tilly Tilbrook CEcol, Sam Arthur, Hayley Farnell-Booker, Mikael Lytzau Forup that I have responded to - wearing my entomologists' hat on. This work by Natalie Duffus is obviously of very real interest to me, and undoubtedly other applied entomologists (e.g. Conops Entomology Ltd, Baker Consultants Ltd), other engagers (e.g. Legacy Habitat Banks & Environment Bank), and Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) ecologists/ environmental scientists more generally. No one is arguing that the destination is undesirable. But 'reading the room' through the portal that's LinkedIn, there is a lot of frustration out there. And that is before the realisation dawns that #BNG is perhaps not delivering for actual biodiversity (see paper). If we are not careful, having achieved the prize of engaging developers and planners at the concept stage of the planning process, we will lose the proverbial room and BNG will descend into the same chasm of notoriety as Great Crested Newts - becoming a cause celebre for politicians seeking to dilute regulation and approaches that at its heart, seek to protect the natural world. Combine this with Labour's house building policy (https://lnkd.in/ese8sKj2), & is it foreseeable that BNG could be flagged as an obstructive process? The perception is that front line practitioners are complaining about it, so if it's on the forefront of their minds & viewed as something that needs resolving, then detractors likely see it as being vulnerable, despite most agreeing that the destination is desirable. I don't know if there are discussions behind the scenes, or whether there are conversations being had to (radically) revise the approach, but I don't think that the status quo is sustainable or desirable. BNG has, to put it bluntly, cocked-up. Ignoring species-rich groups, too much focus on delivering supposed biodiversity in small to tiny sites is wasting everyone's time in my view. Surely, a better outcome would be for every relevant small site to pay a lumpsum based on a proportion of the developed area (or similar threshold) to fund Local Nature Recovery Strategies, or enable non-statutory sites to be properly managed. This would surely be an opportunity to deliver within-urban areas biodiversity and forget about whether that corner of a car park needs [x] or [y] area of yet more Other Neutral Grassland? Architects and planners can then get on with what they are best able to achieve - designing quality builds & layouts, with decent sustainable greenspace that meets the needs of residents, workers (for commercial spaces) or whoever it may be. LPAs can focus resources on large(r) schemes where there time and energies can deliver better meaningful outcomes. Continued....

Very excited to share our latest pre-print! https://lnkd.in/eta5p5dm Proxy biodiversity metrics based on combined habitat area and condition (area-condition metrics) are proliferating globally in response to a demand for simple and standardised ways to measure biodiversity. This includes evidencing No Net Loss (NNL) and Net Gain (NG) and for demonstrating biodiversity uplift to evidence biodiversity credits. In this paper, Thomas Atkins and I collected data on ground invertebrates across a range of sites over 2 field seasons, to test the relationship between invertebrate biodiversity and scoring by the Statutory Biodiversity Metric used to evidence Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) in England. Not only does this metric underpin BNG, but it also forms the basis for a (growing) number of other metrics globally. We find that invertebrate communities are incredibly variable even between habitats of the same type and condition! Indeed, some sites which received relatively low metrics scores were among the most invertebrate rich & abundant. We discuss some reasons why this might be in the paper and the importance of using real on-the-ground species data collection to understand patterns of species diversity. While area-condition metrics are an incredibly helpful tool for decision making, accompanying data remains essential. Without it, we risk not fully understanding our biodiversity impacts! Big thanks to all the wonderful co-authors & funders of this work! Thomas Atkins Owen Lewis Sophus zu Ermgassen Richard Grenyer E.J. Milner-Gulland Joe W Bull Dan Castell Niamh Tooher Ben Stone Oxford Martin School The Leverhulme Centre for Nature Recovery Department of Biology, University of Oxford

Having read more and more posts clearly expressing the reality of BNG implementation this thread has so much common sense included! It seems that we repeat the same strategic mistakes largely in making "everything" overly complex and losing sight of actual positive outcomes whilst getting bogged down in process driven policy. As is remarked on, developers largely want clarity and simple mechanisms. There is the current example of something that works, not perfectly, but it has to be assessed as "better" than BNG, and that is mitigation strategies like that adopted by the Thames Basin Heaths Partnership. This involves 2 development levies which have delivered over 80 SANG amounting to nearly 2000 hectares, theoretically with sustainable management funding in place for perpetuity. The second levy has delivered a sustainably funded team, SAMM, of wardens and educators, around 12 of them, who operate over the whole area of the Thames Basin Heaths SPA. I will never understand why these ideas haven't been promoted as a possible alternative answer to the morass of BNG.

This post, written last week has gained traction here and off-line. Since I wrote it, a real-life example of how BNG could have delivered for nature conservation at landscape scale has presented itself. Working with a northern Wildlife Trust, we had submitted for funding to undertake work in an amazing remote landscape. Square kilometres of upland habitat. Part of this bid included for invertebrate survey, on land and topography that is almost untouched by the biological recorder. Certainly by entomologists. However, it's not a priority for the funder and so feedback is that the survey work probably won't go ahead. This may well result in the Wildlife Trust managing the habitats 'blind', based on generic principles rather than site specifics. That's if they get the habitat management funding. Uplands receive far fewer planning applications (fewer people live there) and so it may well be that BNG will largely bypass our wilder, remoter and more extensive habitats. If only developers could be offered a means by which such habitats and landscapes could receive funding, a developer levy or option. And these places are not disconnected from the inhabited lowlands. It could offer a means by which degraded and damaged upland landscapes could be returned to a more natural environment that slows the flow of rainfall, better absorbs carbon dioxide and drives the land management focus from sheep and grouse farming to broader biodiversity. Further, it could change the narrative on how upland landscapes are viewed economically as landowners could be funded to pay for delivering upland biodiversity such that raptors become a financial asset and not vermin to be eradicated, and grasslands are allowed to be grasslands and not overgrazed bowling greens. The challenge would not be how to shoehorn [x] units into a pointless exercise, but how to structure the funding proportionate to the development.

#algalbiodiversity #Climatechange #conservationstrategies #coralreefs #kelpforests #Marineecosystems Algal Biodiversity Hotspots: Exploring Unique Habitats https://lnkd.in/gb6uUi6P

Explore how the concept of a ‘nature unit’ is revolutionizing conservation and restoration efforts. This groundbreaking approach aims to standardize biodiversity measurements to enhance funding and corporate accountability. A critical step towards more effective and transparent biodiversity management methods. Read the full article for more insights on this vital initiative: https://lnkd.in/eYA3W6fh #Conservation #Biodiversity #Sustainability

To ensure success, the Biodiversity Credit Market should (1) use dynamic baselines with control sites, (2) monitor the populations dynamics of a large array of vertebrate and invertebrate species, and (3) assign credits through an independent, transparent, and cost-effective validation process. IT MUST BE SCIENCE-BASED! https://lnkd.in/d_XfEA-P

Yet another article on biodiversity loss in #Science... https://lnkd.in/dQbRCXBv "An estimated 3 billion individual birds, or almost a third of 1970 abundance, are estimated to have already been lost. Countless individuals of less monitored species have surely been lost as well. Although it is near impossible to fully quantify the ecosystem and welfare losses of such widespread declines, stemming the biodiversity crisis is crucial to maintaining the many benefits that ecosystems provide for which technological substitutes cannot readily, or perhaps, ever replace".

10 "Must-Knows from Biodiversity Science", compiled in a report by the Leibniz Research Network Biodiversity: ➡Achieving climate and biodiversity protection together ➡Enabling a healthy life on a healthy planet ➡Considering undiscovered biodiversity ➡Linking linguistic, cultural and biological diversity ➡Harmonising the diverse use of forest ecosystems and biodiversity conservation ➡Transforming agricultural and food systems ➡Protecting land and resources ➡Releasing transformative change through international collaboration and Education for Sustainable Development ➡Ensuring free access and open use of biodiversity-related data ➡Reducing biodiversity impacts from food consumption https://lnkd.in/dckWjR29

To rescue biodiversity, we need a better way to measure it