The National Park Management Plan – an ecosystem-based approach

[Tony Whitbread]

 

I’ve recently signed on to the forum so thought I might start by contributing a “think piece” on recent developments on ecosystem approaches and how this might influence the management plan.

 

There are big changes underway regarding the natural world!  Increasingly we are recognising that it is the quality of the environment that has a determining factor on everything else.  Nature is not just a special interest that exits only in little boxes (nature reserves) it must thrive everywhere in order to continue to provide all the benefits that we ultimately rely on.

 

Technically these benefits are called “ecosystem services” – this includes everything that makes life both possible and worth while – fresh air, clean water, timber, clothing, drugs, an equitable climate, pollination of our food plants, cycling of nutrients in soils, flood risk reduction and many other things.

 

An ecosystem is the dynamic complex of plants, animals and microorganisms interacting with their non-living environment – in other words large, ecologically functioning blocks of land.  This is pretty similar to a description of “landscape”, and a good one is pretty much what we mean by “natural beauty”, the primary purpose of a National Park.

 

So – maintaining and improving ecosystems is broadly what needs to be done in order to conserve and enhance natural beauty, and is also what needs to be done in order to get all the benefits that nature provides.  A coherent ecological network, or what the Sussex Wildlife Trust calls a “Living Landscape”, is the physical means by which these ecosystem services are delivered.

 

The primary purpose of the South Downs Management Plan should therefore be to deliver a high quality, wildlife rich Living Landscape as the pre-requisite to delivering all the benefits needed by society.

 

As a result this should be the conceptual framework behind the development of the South Downs Management Plan.  A high quality environment should be at the heart of the purpose of the plan.  This is not to put it in conflict or look for “balance” with other sectors (economy and society), on the contrary it recognises the fact that we need a high quality environment in order to provide the services that are essential for society and the economy.

 

The UK National Ecosystem Assessment (http://uknea.unep-wcmc.org) has developed a structure for an ecosystem approach which fits fairly well with the current list of South Downs Special Qualities.  Inspirational landscapes, tranquil places and rich wildlife might reflect high quality ecosystems.  Archaeology, history, culture and recreation reflect the cultural services we gain whilst farming and thriving, distinctive communities reflect the goods that we get from high quality ecosystems.

 

A 21^st century Management Plan for the Downs should therefore take these special qualities and develop an ecosystem-based approach towards conserving and enhancing them.  This will be different to current “sector” based approaches which tend to balance the needs of different sectors against each other (needs of conservation v needs of agriculture v needs of communities v needs for transport etc) and should provide a framework that works more with complementarities and win-win solutions.

 

 

[Stephen Miles]

From Stephen Miles, Local resident and amateur entomologist with a special interest in the BAP species, the Mottled Bee-fly, Thyridanthrax fenestratus and its host wasp, Ammophila pubescens, currently still found on Weaver's Down.

Sadly the SDNPA and related partners are already planning to destroy the relative tranquility of the heathland sectors of the National Park as at Weaver's Down by routing the Shipwright's Way through it. Because there are no enforced controls on cyclists and their behaviour this is likely to lead to disturbance to the ground nesting birds of the heaths like the Nightjar. SDNPA and their partners need to route this nationally advertised cycle route, using existing bridleways, away from sensitive areas like Weaver's Down. If they cannot even do this there is no hope for their new responsibilities for wildlife and biodiversity conservation! Access by hundreds of people is not compatible with maintaining wildlife habitats. If you do not believe me please look at the reports produced by Footprint Ecology in relation to disturbance and the heaths of Dorset, The New Forest and The Thames Basin Heaths.

[Phil Belden]

Ecosystem services - not a phrase that is easy to relate to perhaps, but the concept is fundamental to life! Tony Whitbread refers to all those more understandable things we cherish (wildlife, culture etc), but we do often put them in separate boxes, without relating their mutual inter-dependence. Managing a good quality environment is essential for our health and well-being. Think back to the pea-souper fogs of the 1950s and 1960s - keeping warm by chucking fossil-fuel smoke into our atmosphere so we then suffered from respiratory ailments; those multi-coloured foamy rivers taking the industrial effluent out to the sea, as we produced our goods at great cost to our health and environment.  

 

Today, the problems are less visible but still there. The invisible car fumes relating to increasing asthma; less obvious soil erosion polluting rivers as we grow our salad crops on sandy slopes. One person's benefit is often another person's problem! The South Downs Management Plan is being developed to conserve this Protected Landscape. It needs to be the mechanism that stitches together the fabric of this landscape and how it is managed. To give but one example of a real 'joined-up' action opportunity: farmers produce food, but in their operations they also manage wildlife-dependent habitat; they can also farm clean drinking water (as the aquifer lies under their farmland, so whatever they put on the land, good or bad, will end up in our water); CO2 - we can't seem to stop producing more and more, yet pasture is a "natural" carbon sink and planting crops such a sainfoin could boost this even more - both could be invaluable to our essential wildlife like chalk grassland flora & fauna, plus arable plants and farmland birds. There's so much more, but we need to start thinking and acting on a landscape-scale now, properly incorporating ecosystem services for a truly sustainable future life.  And, we have to start now! 

[Ann Link]

I cannot add much to all this, but agree, and am glad it is being said. Zero Carbon Britain http://www.zcb2030.org/ is one approach that could be useful in thinking about the whole system and changes that need to happen so that the land is a solution (absorbing carbon) rather than a problem emitter, but there is much more, as you say.

[Merrick Denton-Thompson]

The landscape we treasure in the South Downs is a bi-product of investment into growing food and it will be food that drives the landscape in the future. The breadth of public intervention into farming remains a mystery to most of us and so the first thing the Management Plan must do is to give a clear account of what is going on - the level of public investment, the regulatory controls, the advice, the information and the research into the future of farming on the chalk. Yes we must understand that the £40M (?) given to farmers in the South Downs and invested through the Rural Payments Agency is delivering National Park aims. The £millions handed out by Natural England must be delivering directly the Management Plan objectives and not be driven by Natural England's Strategic Direction! What of the investment by the Forestry Commission, the Environment Agency the Rural Development Programme and others?

Phil is right, we must also recognise that  as well as food growing the landscape must be multi-functional. We must give a value to clean water being a product of farming and this will require structural changes to public investment. But where the National Park can really change its relationship with the farming community is by supporting the transformation of food production to being more sustainable just as Phil says. We have abandoned the power of natural systems such as the level of fertility of soils being determined by its biodiversity, through unsustainable technology. Where is the research into food production without oil and natural gas (natural gas being the origins of granular nitrogen put on the land)? It was humanity that created species rich chalk grassland and it will be our intervention that creates the future of the South Downs landscapes but through sustainable systems of management, whatever form that takes!

[Ann Link]

It would also be good to have more knowledge of what the land is like and what is best produced on it - I am sure there is lots of knowledge, but it doesn't seem immediately accessible. The only map I have seen was from wartime but there must be modern versions. I'd love to have some guidance about where it may be accessible. Transition Town Totnes did some research on how the area could feed itself, which drew on Defra info - has anything been done around here? This knowledge could feed into things like the Local and Health Food Action Plan being developed by East Sussex County Council as a follow-on from its Environment Strategy.

[Emily Brennan]

All these comments are very interesting and relevant - the future of the South Downs is dependent upon us (humans) understanding, valuing and actively managing the landscape in order to maintain the special qualities that we value it for, to ensure that it continues to provide valuable ecosystem services, and to ensure that environmentally sustainable land management is financially viable. 

I am interested in how we can help people connect with the landscape in a way that is meaningful to them - terms such as 'biodiversity' and 'ecosystem services' can be confusing and meaningless to many.  The recent South Downs Forum, workshops and other engagement work have been really helpful in identifying what people think is special about the South Downs, and what their issues are, but we still have a long way to go. 

The SDNPA is collecting a wide range of relevant data to inform the first 'State of the Park' report (due out next year), and is also promoting and supporting relevant research into biodiversity, ecosystem services and other areas.   For example, the SDNPA is a partner in a national research bid to secure funds for ecosystem services research  - please see http://www.nerc.ac.uk/research/programmes/bess/ for more information. The Authority has also set up a Learning Partnership to foster research and learning within the South Downs National Park.

In response to Stephen's point about potential damage to heathland habitats at Weaver's Down, the SDNPA is fully committed to the conservation and enhancement of rare and threatened habitats such as lowland heathland.  This commitment has been recently demonstrated by the Authority funding a three year Heathland Manager post to help coordinate and drive forward heathland conservation in the region.  We must fully acknowledge that there are (and will always be) some conflicts between heathland management for conservation purposes and recreational use.  We must take a strategic approach, and work with all stakeholders to ensure the best outcome for both biodiversity conservation and heathland users.  Stephen, if you would like to contact me personally (as Biodiversity Strategy Lead for the SDNPA) to discuss this particular site, I'd be very happy to discuss your points.  Emily

[Chris Fairbrother]

Thanks Tony, Merrick and Christine - You are really setting out the challenge here, and we are perhaps presented with the best opportunity to address it through the management plan. Emily mentioned that we are currently putting some thought into the 'state of the South Downs' report, which will effectively be the baseline for a future work.

I am keen that as part of this work we have a complete understanding of all of the 'services' that society gets from the South Downs as a landscape. By better understanding the scale, and value, of these benefits can we start to look at what we can do to move to more sustainable systems - and achieve some of the benefits you have highlighted.

 

Chris Fairbrother, Landscape Strategy Lead, South Downs National Park Authority

[Colin Tingle]

Some really interesting points raised here about ecosystem services, the SDNP management plan and the issues surrounding trying to engage people who aren’t specialists in appreciating the relevance of ecosystem services to them, their communities and their businesses. I’d like to pick up and build on some of the ideas already raised …… and hopefully throw in a few other perspectives into the mix!

 

As both the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) and TEEB point out very clearly, business and industry of almost all types are in some way or other (and often very directly) linked to needing a healthy environment. When the ex-Managing Director in the Global Markets division at Deutsche Bank declares that we have a ‘defective economic compass’ in the use of GDP/GNP/GVA growth as ‘the yardstick for progress’, then it is clearly to the benefit of people in business, finance and economics to engage with the debate around what the economy is mis-measuring with regard to ignoring biodiversity, natural capital and ecosystem services in its accounting system (TEEB Interim Report, 2008).  As many will be aware, there are some really excellent reports from a variety of sources and organisations on this issue (e.g. TEEB, the MA and WRI – links below). From my perspective the ‘Bank of Natural Capital’ http://bankofnaturalcapital.com/ does a good job in bringing this issue out from the field of ‘environmentalism’ into everyday life – and maybe has some resonance for people in these days of global financial insecurity and doubts over the conventional banking system?!!

 

This brings us back to Tony’s original point, suggesting that the SDNP Management Plan adopts an ‘ecosystem assessment’ approach with a view to giving real priority to enhancing core ecosystem processes and so-called ‘supporting services’ (see NEA key Synthesis) such as water cycling, mineral and nutrient cycling, etc. and maybe pollination (normally classed as a ‘regulating service’, but which has many ‘supporting service’ characteristics too!). If the management plan gets this going, then all the other services (provisioning – like food, timber, etc.; regulating – like climate regulation, flood protection, etc.; and cultural services – like aesthetic pleasures, education, recreation, etc.) will flow in increased amounts too. This then gives the basis for enterprises of all sorts to arise and thrive. This is putting investment in the founding ecological processes first, so underpinning not only the Park’s environment and human wellbeing in the Park, but all business ventures too. Surely a win-win-win?!

Of course, at a local level, decisions will still need to be made about what sort of ecosystem services will flow from particular sites given different management and such decisions will need wide stakeholder consultation (and hopefully informed debate) to reach agreement on favourable outcomes for the greatest number of people and institutions …. not simple, but potentially highly productive and constructive. This, hopefully is where Phil’s and Merrick’s points about the benefits of multifunctional landscapes and where examples of successes (mentioned by Christine) can be highlighted.

I think Emily’s point about how we can help people connect with the landscape in a way that is meaningful to them really is ‘key’ (as, hopefully is evident from the starting point I chose). Something that is missing so far and that may really help more people to both see and feel how all this stuff is actually relevant and important to them, is local examples. How does a particular market town’s local economy benefit from investment in the health and wellbeing of its local environment? What does a given enterprise within the town get from the environment that benefits it? Which particular sites, habitats, landscapes provide those benefits? Approaches for local authorities to take on this are suggested in TE

[Colin Tingle]

Oh dear! Just noticed that the ending of my 'post' above got cut off! So here's how it continued .......

Approaches for local authorities to take on this are suggested in TEEBs report for local decision-makers (see links below). However, specific examples within local communities and mechanisms for engaging local communities are few and far between, if it’s been tried at all? There are the first steps on the go to try to look at this in Lewes (http://www.transitiontownlewes.org/landove-group.html), but it’s early days yet! Maybe this can be part of a process of increasing awareness within communities of just how important the issues of natural capital and ecosystem service provision are to businesses, community enterprises, local authorities and people in general. Getting this message spread more widely is surely key! (But probably not using the words and phraseology that I have for this posting!!!)  Hopefully, the Learning Partnership that Emily mentions will be part of this process.

TEEB, 2008 – http://www.teebweb.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=u2fMSQoWJf0%3d&...

TEEB reports - http://www.teebweb.org/InformationMaterial/TEEBReports/tabid/1278/D...

MA reports - http://www.maweb.org/en/index.aspx

WRI reports - http://www.wri.org/project/mainstreaming-ecosystem-services

 

[Colin Tingle]

Very many thanks to John Parry for answering my plea and posting up a new word to help access these concepts to a wider audience - see main Forum! Really hope the word takes wing and helps get the message out into the community.