| Lord Buxton, vice-president of the World Wildlife Fund, explains why the Government's | ||
| Wildlife and Countryside Bill could be a dangerous smokescreen. | ||
| Anybody but the most devoted townee must be stirred by the fact that in these difficult times | ||
| we have a Government that is finding parliamentary time for a Wildlife and Countryside Bill. This | ||
| seems magnificent. | ||
| Indeed it is, provided we get the Bill right. But as it now stands , it is far from right and there is a | ||
| 5 | danger that everyone will be lulled into believing that our wildlife and our world-famous countryside | |
| have at last been saved from continuous destruction. Sadly, nothing could be further from the truth. | ||
| It would be quite unjust to criticize our present Government for the Bill's shortcomings. These | ||
| have their origins in the confused policies of 'the system' over the past 35 years. We have never | ||
| managed to clear our heads about the relative priorities of agriculture and conservation. We spend | ||
| 10 | nearly t 200 m every year partly to encourage agriculture and water authorities to destroy natural | |
| habitat* , and at the same time we spend a ridiculous 10m trying to defend that habitat. | ||
| The countryside falls broadly into two categories, the special and the ordinary. First, there are | ||
| nature reserves and sites of special scientific interest (SSSIs). They cover only 5% of Britain, and are | ||
| not in themselves adequate to sustain wildlife populations and to prevent extinctions. There and more | ||
| 15 | than 2,800 of them , but the staggering thing is that the Government is considering giving proper | |
| protection to only 30 or 40. | ||
| The second category is the element that concerns the whole nation, the main mass of British | ||
| countryside under agriculture, with which the new Bill does not deal at all. Not everyone realises | ||
| that there is absolutely no protection for ordinary countryside from agricultural change; it is protected | ||
| 20 | only from development other than agriculture. | |
| The process of landscape destruction is bound to continue so long as it is subsidized by Government. | ||
| Direct stimuli to make any farming more profitable cannot as a rule be resisted by the | ||
| individual. This situation derives from the Second World War when it was useful for us to be self-sufficient | ||
| in food; but further agricultural intensification now is merely adding to the food mountains | ||
| 25 | of Europe. | |
| I get the impression when conservation matters arise in the House of Lords that some members | ||
| have an instinctive suspicion of conservationists, who they seem to see as long-haired cranks trying | ||
| to interfere with the management of their properties. 1 believe that this is because they are all | ||
| admirable landowners/farmers/conservationists themselves, and therefore perceive no need for . | ||
| 30 | interference. But they should remember th at the situation is very different in the great outside, | |
| and when they resist all legal restraints and planning requirements on agriculture, they are in effect | ||
| providing cover for the indifferent farmers and agricultural rogues who don't know a bluetit from a | ||
| scarecrow and who don't care. | ||
| Certainly the British people have the right of intervention before their descendants are deprived | ||
| 35 | of their birthright. Parliament must now guarantee the security of all SSSIs, and then take this | |
| opportunity to consider how to halt the relentless destruction of the ordinary countryside. | ||
| If they fail this time, by the time this legislation comes up again it may be too late. | ||
| The Sunday Times, January 25, 1981 |