Egret Regret

There was quite a long newspaper article (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/travel/best_of_britain/article6893929.ece) about the colonisation of the UK by the Little egret (Egretta garzetta) from foreign parts. The claim was made (true) that one of the first places they successfully bred here was on Brownsea Island in Poole Harbour. What the story didn't mention is that that breeding group was decimated by Ravens (Corvus corax) which, as an endangered UK species, could not be touched. The 'foreigners' have presumably gone somewhere else to try to raise a family. There is no doubt that the Little egrets migration north continues at a pace. Groups of them forage near the Loughor bridge at low tide.

Seeing the Changes 243

In Loughor, the mild weather resulted in the Fly honeysuckle (Lonicera xylosteum) and Common chickweed (Stellaria media) coming into flower again. In Bynea, Square-stalked St John's wort (Hypericum tetrapterum) was blooming and Ivy (Hedera helix) berries starting to ripen. Small, brown toadstools were scattered on the grass and a micromoth frequented the Ragwort.

There Then Came a Spider Who Sat Down Beside Her

It must be Halloween. There has been some media attention on the numbers of spiders in people's houses and gardens (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/6460539/More-than-750-million-spiders-in-UK.html). Some people, of course, become very upset by spiders (thought to be a learned response) but all the Native UK spiders are completely harmless to humans and do an excellent job keeping down the numbers of flying insects who, like little vampires, can suck our blood, transport disease to our food or ravage 'our' crops. I personally think that we ought to love our eight-legged friends a bit more.

It's Nutts!

The news that the UK Government's chief (unpaid) adviser on the level of risks associated with the taking of recreational psychoactive drugs has been sacked is no great surprise (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8334774.stm). David Nutt paid the price for arguing that the taking of ecstasy is actually less risky than horse riding and that cannabis did not 'deserve' being elevated to class B (drugs are classed as categories A-C with A being the highest risk) and actually caused less damage than perfectly legal alcohol and tobacco. There are real difficulties interactions between scientists (who have to weigh complex evidence in a dispassionate way) and politicians (who have to deliver what the public-or at least a vociferous section of the public- want). This is further complicated by the media who generally want a good story with clear blacks and whites (rather than greys) in terms of evidence. Governments have repeatedly suggested that, in terms of the science, they want to adopt 'evidence-driven policy'. The difficulty comes when they feel that they dare not go where the science directs them. There are then two possible responses. They can argue that in spite of the science, they are compelled to make a particular decision (and the policy is no longer 'evidence-based') or they can try to change the science (and, as this is no longer science, irritate the people that they asked to make judgements on their behalf). You can see such tensions in many areas including child care, education and our penal system. The trouble is that scientists and politicians are supposed to operate in completely different ways with different sets of rules. One group is supposed to use evidence based on probability whereas their counterparts generally use advocacy (a convincing story). People from either tradition who use the techniques of the other culture often become unstuck.

Common or Garden?

The RSPB's most recent surveys have apparently suggested that, in the last decade, more than half the 63 species of rare birds have shown increases in the UK as 40% of more common species have declined (http://www.rspb.org.uk/news/details.asp?id=tcm:9-233523). There may well be a number of complicating reasons for these figures (over and above simple changes in numbers). Rare birds may do better than their proletarian counterparts as they are a) more likely to be 'sighted'; b) subject to better protections; c) subject to higher 'spends' and d) often limited to particular areas of the country (so management of their environments is likely to be easier). The common species appear to be victims of changes in agricultural practises and the increasing urbanisation of the land. They certainly don't get the same kind of attention as their 'up-market' colleagues!

Seeing the Changes 242

At the National Wetlands Centre Wales (Penclacwydd), the rain had brought out the fungi. There were also lots of Teasel (Dipsacus fullonum) heads in the grounds to attract seed-eating birds. Grey squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis) were busy stocking up on the contents of the bird feeders. Mallard (Anas platyrynchos) had invaded all the pens of the exotic birds (probably as a safe place, with food provided, to change into their sexual plumage). Male European eider ducks (Somateria mollissima mollissima), who were also in their finest, were producing their ghostly calls. There was also a collection of Coscoroba swan (Coscoroba coscoroba) cygnets exploring the pens without their parents.

Hotdogs?

A book from New Zealand by Robert and Brenda Vale 'Time to Eat The Dog: The Real Guide to Sustainable Living' (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Time-Eat-Dog-Sustainable-Living/dp/0500287902) raises a number of issues. The authors claim that the 'average' Collie consumes 164 kg of meat and 95 kg of cereals per annum and that this results in their having twice the 'carbon footprint' (or pawprint?) of a 4.6L 4x4 Land Cruiser travelling 6000 miles per year. A cat is said to be equivalent to a VW Golf. It is not, of course, easy to do such calculations. I suspect that the carbon footprint associated with creating and disposing of the car is much greater than that involved with your average dog (and this does not appear to feature in their comparison). Pets also have a beneficial effect on the health of their owners (cars don't unless you are very close to them). A serious point, however, is that the kind of pet you keep can have a powerful impact on your impact on the planet. Low maintenance pets would include a goldfish or a snail.