The State of the UK's Butterflies 2015

[Pete Eeles]

Today saw the launch of the most recent publication from Butterfly Conservation / Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, at the Huxley Lecture Theatre, at the Zoological Society of London. A PDF of the report can be found at: http://butterfly-conservation.org/48-10 ... flies.html which contains all of the facts and figures, and it makes for very sobering reading, with many of our butterflies continuing their long-term decline.

The launch covered the facts from several angles as listed below. All the speakers gave excellent talks, nicely rounded off by the inimitable Chris Packham who gave a rallying cry to us all to convert the statistics into action, from raising awareness of the plight of our fauna (and flora) through to lobbying those in positions of power, using all of the mechanisms available to us (such as social media). I hope the videos of the talks will be made available since they all merit a repeat viewing, but the passion of Chris Packham, especially, is quite something to behold (especially first hand!).

1. Welcome
Martin Warren, Chief Executive, Butterfly Conservation

Martin Warren

2. State of Butterflies in the UK: Overview
Richard Fox, Head of Recording, Butterfly Conservation

Richard Fox

3. Impact of climate change
David Roy, Head of the Biological Records Centre, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology

David Roy

4. Trends on farmland
Tom Brereton, Head of Monitoring, Butterfly Conservation

Tom Brereton

5. Conserving butterflies at a landscape scale: BCs approach
Sam Ellis, Director of Conservation and Regions, Butterfly Conservation

Sam Ellis

6. Address
Chris Packham, Vice President, Butterfly Conservation

Chris Packham

Cheers,

- Pete

[David M]

I've read and digested this publication and it has not put me in a positive mood.

Since 1976, the decline in many UK species has been worrying, and in several cases, alarming.

By contrast, the pattern within the last decade doesn't seem to have been quite as bad, but even so, the situation doesn't inspire much confidence for the future.

I have only read it once, so my current view is largely based on gut instinct, but to me it seems that whilst some of our most threatened species (which had already declined massively and are improving only slightly upon what was hitherto an already extremely weakened position) are in slightly better 'health', many of our so called 'common' butterflies are wasting away before our eyes.

It would be interesting to see how other insects are faring, e.g. bees, dragonflies, etc. This serious decline surely has a reach beyond lepidoptera, and if so, then it raises questions about modern human behaviour as a whole, and the impact that it's having on the natural world around us.

[bugboy]

I've read and digested this publication and it has not put me in a positive mood.

Since 1976, the decline in many UK species has been worrying, and in several cases, alarming.

By contrast, the pattern within the last decade doesn't seem to have been quite as bad, but even so, the situation doesn't inspire much confidence for the future.

I have only read it once, so my current view is largely based on gut instinct, but to me it seems that whilst some of our most threatened species (which had already declined massively and are improving only slightly upon what was hitherto an already extremely weakened position) are in slightly better 'health', many of our so called 'common' butterflies are wasting away before our eyes.

It would be interesting to see how other insects are faring, e.g. bees, dragonflies, etc. This serious decline surely has a reach beyond lepidoptera, and if so, then it raises questions about modern human behaviour as a whole, and the impact that it's having on the natural world around us.

That pretty much sums things up David, We've been so engrossed in the rare ones we've taken our eye's of the ball with the (now not so) common ones. Even species that are increasing their range are actually declining in numbers overall. Chris Packhams closing talk was an excellant 'call to arms, this is our final warning' but I fear he was mostly preaching to the converted.

Very sobering and the saddest thing of all is that all the evedence is right there to read and act on, if only the people that can actually make the changes would listen!

Still the fights not over, while the butterflies are still flying we can still turn things around, the more of a fuss people like us make to the policy makers the better!

[ChrisC]

I know some of you guys work for/ with Butterfly Conservation so may I ask a question of you knowledgeable folk....
Are these declines of the more common species being seen on BC reserves? I can understand to a degree the farmland declines with herbicide and pesticide use, but on land that has been managed for butterflies and wildlife whose regimes have not changed for many years then surely it is "simple" as the weather.
Even by BC reports the awful season in 2012 (was it) was followed by a bumper year the following year. how did so few butterflies manage such a feat or was it all down to second broods?
have more people venturing out into the countryside disturbed transect routes?
Have any surveys been done on the availability on larval food plants, the ratio of the larval food plant grasses to others? phenology of the growing season?

I must confess to being a bit of a skeptic when it comes to statistics. If BC came out with a statement All butterflies are doing great would they get the donations and support. likewise the £9,000 being raised for research into neonics affect on butterflies, is this going to make any difference whatsoever? economically bees are more important than butterflies and yet in the face of all the facts the government still allow its use. what will spending nine grand on this research achieve?

apologies for the rant.
Chris

[bugboy]

With regards to the declines, they are in reference to long term stats rather than 'last year they had a bad year, this year they had a good year'. The overall population, both in range and actual number for many species has declined over the past 40 years, even taking into account the odd 'good year' here and there. When you see the graphs for supposedly common, widespread species they invariably show a similar pattern, which is also mirrored by other taxa such as earthworms, hedgehogs, songbirds, raptors etc etc. The list goes on. The bulk of evidence where these declines are most extreme seems to point to middle England, where the majority of UK farmland is and therefore where neonics are most in use.

Protected areas with targeted conservation aimed at specific species has halted the decline for species such as Dukes and HBF but these are very isolated instances. With the continued fragmentation of the countryside, protected nature reserves can only help so far. If a nature reserve suffers a 'natural' decline or extinction, where can it become naturally re-colonised from if the next nearest reserve is 50 miles away across monocultured farmland. Butterflies, like all wildlife, require large areas of suitable habitat to sustain populations, each area connected or at least close enough to the next so isolated extinctions can easily be absorbed into the greater scheme of things.

You have to see everything as relative. Todays relatively healthy populations would be seen as horrificly barren affairs 100 years ago. If we were able to accurately graph butterfly populations over the past 200 year we would probably see the year 2015 vanishing of the bottom of the graph into oblivion (thats probably an over simplistic pessimistic view but you get the idea) but the evidence does point to many species coming perilously close to the tipping point. Climate change is compounding the issue, adding extra pressure to an already fragile situation.

As to raising money for research, well the other option is to sit on are collective arses and wait with fingers crossed for the powers that be to see sense. We might as well obtain more evidence to prove what we all suspect is going on, the bigger the pile of data to prove a fact the better. It may just be a drop in the ocean but surely BC is duty bound to fund this sort of research otherwise whats the point in doing surveys every year!

I hope that goes some way to answering your questions, Chris

[David M]

As to raising money for research, well the other option is to sit on are collective arses and wait with fingers crossed for the powers that be to see sense. We might as well obtain more evidence to prove what we all suspect is going on, the bigger the pile of data to prove a fact the better. It may just be a drop in the ocean but surely BC is duty bound to fund this sort of research otherwise whats the point in doing surveys every year!

Agree with this. Whilst it might seem relatively pointless in isolation, one thing's for sure: if these surveys weren't undertaken, then not only would nothing happen with regard to change, but we would not even be able to challenge established practices for lack of sufficient evidence to claim that they were detrimental.

This is why I pontificated earlier on whether other insects were showing similar declines. If they are (and I can't believe this is not the case) then government is presented with an irresistible collective set of data showing quite clearly that what society is doing is seriously undermining the health of our invertebrate brethren, and that continuing with such accepted practices will damage them further with potentially disadvantageous consequences.

[MikeOxon]

It seems inevitable that, when so many insects, from clothes moths onwards, are considered 'pests', our butterflies will get caught up in the mass 'cull'. Unless we can develop far more specific controls, then I can see little prospect for a return to 19th-century populations.

[badgerbob]

With all these wind and solar farms cropping up all over the place why can't wild flowers be planted between the panels or turbines and left to grow. This would help nectaring insects of all sorts find food. This would then help insect feeding birds etc. etc. Bee hives could also be placed at the edges of these areas which would help bees. It could make quite a difference and would hardly cost anything!! I'm sure the companies would want to keep the areas manicured as ever, but if these companies could see they were giving something back to nature maybe they would see the benefit.

[Matsukaze]

With all these wind and solar farms cropping up all over the place why can't wild flowers be planted between the panels or turbines and left to grow. This would help nectaring insects of all sorts find food. This would then help insect feeding birds etc. etc. Bee hives could also be placed at the edges of these areas which would help bees. It could make quite a difference and would hardly cost anything!! I'm sure the companies would want to keep the areas manicured as ever, but if these companies could see they were giving something back to nature maybe they would see the benefit.

In some cases this has been happening - the Bumblebee Conservation Trust was doing some good work on this a couple of years back.