Ten Spoonbills fledge at Holkham NNR (1 Viewer)

I do find some of the response somewhat perplexing.

Hotspur posts

"And an increase of 3 degrees is a big change, not something we have experienced"
but quotes the information I put on

"the average temperature of the atmosphere near the earth’s surface has risen by 0.74 degrees Celsius" and "So there we 2.26 degrees to go"

So quite clearly I understand we have not experienced 3 degrees temperature rise.

also
"you have a VERY tenuous arguement about a BRITISH BIRD being an indicator of global warming" and "using someone who reads the independent to predict the future is pretty dodgy"

The report uses a whole RANGE of British and European Birds as indicators of global warming.

The article taken from the paper is not my evidence the report is my evidence.

The report is supported by the RSPB, Birdlife International, the European Bird Census Council and the Universities of Cambridge and Durham.

It is not just my argument it is theirs as well (the BB Rare Breeding panel also regularly accept that a movement of many species is occuring from south to north).

Spoonbills are a British bird if you use the definition "bred in britain in historical times extensively" Elvis is still alive if you use the definition "used to sing in Germany".

Isurus posts

No. No it doesn't. Again you're implying a correlation = causation. For the reasons already elucidated (growing dutch population, increase habitat, irrelevance of temperature on past/other spoonbill populations) we cannot attribute the growth to temperature change.

I wasn't talking about spoonbills when I posted

"Very small change in average global temperatures very big changes in species distribution"

I was talking about the very big changes in species distribution that we all experience every time we go birding and described at length in the BBR breeding panel's report.

Even with spoonbills

growing dutch population: why is the dutch population growing?
increased habitat:why is there increased habitat?

irrelevance of temperature on past/other spoonbill populations. There isn't a species alive that isn't influenced by temperature.

I am implying a correlation with global warming but in conjunction with a whole range of other factors.

But many of these factors are themselves influenced by global warming.

The actions of conservation bodies are influenced by their beliefs in amongst other thing global warming.

The amount of Water in the Netherlands is influenced by global warming.

The strength of the population of spoonbills in the Netherlands and elsewhere is influenced by global warming

If Spoonbills are moving north and west away from habitat degradation further south (some-one else's post not mine) then this is influenced by global warming.

Climate is FUNDAMENTAL to species distribution. You can have the right habitat but if the climate isn't suitable then the bird won't be there.

We don't have Black Grouse in the south west because the climate has become unsuitable for them. The Dutch population of Black Grouse is now described as Relict.

One species a winner with the assistance of conservationists. One a loser despite the assistance of conservationists.

My beef isn't against Spoonbills. I am not a "conservationist" as practised by conservation bodies. I don't care where stuff ends up it is all part of the evolutionary mix.

My beef is with conservation bodies and individuals who talk about the movement of species being fantastic, great, not predicted when as I said to begin with it may be an indicator of bigger more global issues ( as the report describes very clearly).

John o'Sullivan said:

I do find some of the response somewhat perplexing.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you're not the only one.....

John o'Sullivan said:

Isurus posts

No. No it doesn't. Again you're implying a correlation = causation. For the reasons already elucidated (growing dutch population, increase habitat, irrelevance of temperature on past/other spoonbill populations) we cannot attribute the growth to temperature change.

I wasn't talking about spoonbills when I posted

"Very small change in average global temperatures very big changes in species distribution"

Click to expand...

But you were talking about spoonbills in the specific bit I quoted in which you implied correlation = causation. That is why I quoted it.

John o'Sullivan said:

We don't have Black Grouse in the south west because the climate has become unsuitable for them. The Dutch population of Black Grouse is now described as Relict.

Click to expand...

So the climate being unsuitable in the south west is the only reason we don't have them but the dutch with a very similar if not warmer climate do have them??

Look, climate change is a big issue, no-one here is denying that. It is just not relevant to a thread about spoonbills, a bird present in England since the pleistocene and lost as a breeding species for a period of only about 350 years (during which time it was a reasonably regular visitor) - a period which coincided with the only time in which their favoured habitat was being drained at a rate of knots and during which people who liked to eat them and use them for making hats had access to half decent guns?

Isurus said:

Look, climate change is a big issue, no-one here is denying that. It is just not relevant to a thread about spoonbills

Click to expand...

Which just about sums up my feelings about the entire thread.

I think birds are very bad indicators of climate change and very good indicators of the state of their habitat. More marshes = more chance of breeding birds like Bittern, Spoonbill etc. Little Bittern is disappearing from the Netherlands, but wintering in Africa probably doesn't increase its chances of survival. You can forget about southern European "agricultural" birds unless insects and plenty of set-aside land are available. The disappearance of Black Grouse from the Netherlands is most likely a combined effect of heathland deterioration (especially more nitrogen from intensive farming = increase in poison in plants = loss of insects), increased disturbance by people (and their dogs) and increased predation by foxes/raptors (finishing off the last relict populations).

However: in the last ten years many dragonflies and damselflies have shown dramatical shifts northward. If the argument was about Southern Migrant Darters being a warning sign, I would agree...

John o'Sullivan said:

growing dutch population: why is the dutch population growing?
increased habitat:why is there increased habitat?

irrelevance of temperature on past/other spoonbill populations. There isn't a species alive that isn't influenced by temperature.

I am implying a correlation with global warming but in conjunction with a whole range of other factors.

But many of these factors are themselves influenced by global warming.

The actions of conservation bodies are influenced by their beliefs in amongst other thing global warming.

The amount of Water in the Netherlands is influenced by global warming.

The strength of the population of spoonbills in the Netherlands and elsewhere is influenced by global warming

If Spoonbills are moving north and west away from habitat degradation further south (some-one else's post not mine) then this is influenced by global warming.

Climate is FUNDAMENTAL to species distribution. You can have the right habitat but if the climate isn't suitable then the bird won't be there.

We don't have Black Grouse in the south west because the climate has become unsuitable for them. The Dutch population of Black Grouse is now described as Relict.

One species a winner with the assistance of conservationists. One a loser despite the assistance of conservationists.

My beef isn't against Spoonbills. I am not a "conservationist" as practised by conservation bodies. I don't care where stuff ends up it is all part of the evolutionary mix.

My beef is with conservation bodies and individuals who talk about the movement of species being fantastic, great, not predicted when as I said to begin with it may be an indicator of bigger more global issues ( as the report describes very clearly).

Click to expand...

The fact that a person put the word relict in front of the dutch Black grouse pop doesnt make them an irrelavance to your arguement. Twite have a relict distirbution yet still span 2 continents. Its a word used to describe the tye of distribution not their potential future.

The amaount of water in the netherlands is not influenced by global warming. Not until the dykes burst. The dutch control their water levels, same as east anglia.

And with regard Spoonbills - hunting and drainage led to the elimination of spoonbills, this is reversed and the natural conclusion is...global warming? Come on - and please when you try to quote scientists, quote the papers, not a university. At the university where I work half the biologists are climate change belivers, quarter are deniers and the rest are in various stages of academic and LSD related meltdown. A single paper does not speak for a university, just the author at the time of writing.

This population is relict using both meanings of the word.

I found one paper to directly quote from.

"In 2004, only fifteen males were counted at the last remaining site in the Netherlands, the ‘Sallandse Heuvelrug’ (province of Overijssel). "

"Besides the factors already mentioned, climatic warming with wetter winters and springs has had a negative effect on the Black grouse which is adapted to cold, snowy winters and warm, dry springs. Presently, high chick mortality is a key factor in the decline as a result of a lack of food (insects) and poor weather conditions."

Of course other factors may be more obvious and immediate reasons for a change in species distribution but ultimately if the species doesn't fit the climatic niche then it's almost certainly on it's way out despite the commitment of conservationists and even if conservationists can keep a species in a particular area despite "niche difficulties" the cost of doing so may not be justifiable.

The amount of water in the Netherlands is influenced by global warming (not totally due to). The reason behind the decision to reflood the "re-claimed land" (mentioned earlier in the thread) in the Netherlands was repeated present and ongoing forecasted flooding that could not be managed.

East Anglia was also mentioned but there are major plans to change the way that defences against sea water are to be managed in East Anglia due to amongst other things rises in sea-level.

Hasn't this already happened at Titchwell RSPB reserve where the nature of the reserve has had to change due to repeated flooding both present and forecast?

I quoted the universities as the press releases and general blurb often stated as supported by the universities of Cambridge and Durham or at least in association with the universities of Cambridge/Durham and calling the Climatic Atlas of European Breeding Birds one paper implies a small piece of work. It is 521 pages long and supported by the RSPB, birdlife international etc etc

Has any one got the atlas and if so what does it say about Spoonbill distribution in relation to climate??

Birds are good indicators of climate change mostly because they are big and even people who don't like the idea will eventually struggle to deny the evidence of their own experience.

They are of course not the most sensitive indicators but if we can see major changes in bird distribution then it is obvious that at a more fundamental level significant change to more or less everything (dragonflies included) is happening.

Most people don't notice insects and even if they do, do not know if they are different to the ones they used to see in the same area 20years ago.

quoted from Xenospisa

"in the last ten years many dragonflies and damselflies have shown dramatical shifts northward. If the argument was about Southern Migrant Darters being a warning sign, I would agree..."

Read the British Birds Rare breeding Birds report there is masses of evidence demonstrating a movement of species northwards.

With regards to Spoonbills themselves I might be changing my position somewhat as I might be using the "wrong type of european spoonbill" to underpin my argument.

Xenospiza said:

However: in the last ten years many dragonflies and damselflies have shown dramatical shifts northward. If the argument was about Southern Migrant Darters being a warning sign, I would agree...

Click to expand...

Or moths: http://www.springerlink.com/content/l8634852u613877t/

"Species found throughout Great Britain are decreasing most rapidly in the south and especially the southeast but species with a southerly distribution are increasing. Results of a preliminary overview suggest habitat and climate change may both play a role in changing species dynamics."

I was looking up information on RBS found this paper free to view (Birdstudy Colin Bibby) describing the imminent loss of RBS from UK in the 70's.
I thought it might amuse people.

It may be no coincidence that while the shrike vanishes, several northern
species such as Snowy Owl Nyctea scandiaca, Wood Sandpiper
Tringa glareola, Redwing Turdus iliacus and Fieldfare T. pilaris, have recently
colonised northern Britain and others such as Great Northern Diver
Gavia immer, Goldeneye Bucephala clangula, Temminck's Stint Calidris
ternminckii, Bluethroat Luscinia svecica, and Brambling Fringilla montifringilla
have nested at any rate sporadically. Perhaps the Red-backed
Shrike will start breeding in Scotland like the Wryneck (Burton et al.
1970), for in 1970 a pair summered and many possibly have bred in the
Orkney Islands (Balfour 1972).

I took this out of http://www.waddensea-secretariat.or...s-2007/WSE-23-Migratory-Birds-Proceedings.pdf

"There is overwhelming evidence that animals and plants have been affected by recent climate change (e.g. Climate Change and Migratory Waterbirds in the Wadden Sea Franz Bairlein & Klaus-Michael Exo Institute of Avian Research Wilhelmshaven, Germany
Walther et al., 2002; Parmesan and Gallbraith,2004; Root et al., 2003; Crick, 2004, Robinsonet al., 2005). These effects include changes in timing of migration, earlier breeding, changes in breeding performance, changes in population sizes, changes in population distributions, and changes in selection differentials between various components of a population (e.g. Bairlein and
Winkel, 2001; Bairlein and Hüppop, 2004; Crick,2004).

Historically, fauna and flora adapted to changes in environmental factors as weather, but the question arises if waders and waterfowl are plastic enough to adapt a far greater and faster change than previously encountered. Climate change could also matter to shorebird
populations (Piersma and Lindström, 2004). Global change is affecting the extent and quality of coastal intertidal habitats now and in the futureand this has serious consequences for coastal shorebirds breeding, staging and wintering in the Wadden Sea."

also
"Arctic birds are the majority of the species and numbers visiting the Wadden Sea (Figure 6). Declining Arctic populations represent all taxa and ecological guilds, including geese, swans, waders and larks, but also among grazers, mussel and worm feeders, predators and seedeaters."

Strangely enough Spoonbill numbers have increased in this more northerly area at the same time as Arctic numbers have decreased.

Even if we accept Spoonbills are in the UK due to climate change, along with recolonising Red-backed Shrikes and the arrival of Bee-eaters, etc, I still fail to see reason not to celebrate.

There are many doom-mongers that decree, or would like us to believe, that global warming is going to be universal destruction all round. Shifting distribution patterns and colonisation of new areas can only be deemed good, suggesting that for some species at least, there is scope for adaption to new conditions. If we accept that distributions are changing, then all the more important are the current conservation efforts across Europe, creating habitats north to south, thus creating habitat for birds displaced.

Thus, whether climaticaly induced or not, I see no reason not to welcome the arrival of a colony of Spoonbills. And anyway, Spoonbills are big cuddly type things, not nice to be not nice to them

Hi JOS. Very good question.

As I said earlier. I'm not a conservationist in the sense that it is practised by conservation bodies. I don't care where species end up.

I also accept whole heartedly that the "conservation Zitgeist" is unstoppable and nothing I say or do will make any difference to this. I like to think about processes and systems however so every now and again I throw some ideas out onto BF to help me think about these things.

So this discussion began because I had an impression that species distribution was changing (South to North) and I wanted to check that out.

All the evidence I've come across has supported that initial perspective. Although I've become aware that North/South is much too simplistic a position and you have to consider European Species distribution in terms of e.g. North/North Central/Central/South Central and South also East/West and take into account localised climatological effects like the oceanic conditions off the west coast of the U.k.

I'm sure the good people who published the atlas have factored this sort of data.

Generally however there is a shift northwards, not only for birds but also for Moths, dragonflies and damselflies.

Conservationists seem to act as if climate is irrelevant and that despite a changing climate all species can be conserved where they are currently found. So in the U.k. for example conservationists want southern species, central species and northern species.

Despite the overwhelming evidence suggesting that already with a relatively limited but progressive change in climatological conditions, species distribution is changing.

Also despite the fact that they have published the Atlas showing what the changes are likely to bring about.

They can't have them all, not even in the U.K. which has a very diverse climate from south to north, east to west.

I have some major concerns about some conservation practices. One of them being the use of conservation resources on attempting to shore up populations of species that are probably on the way out. Even if they can be shored up sometimes I believe that the ends do not justify the means.

Conservationists should be working with the fundamental underlying processes
(evolution, climate change) not against them.

Conservation is based on preserving stasis and yet the world is changing.

I'm off to pembrokeshire now for two days birding.

John

Jos, whilst in the main I agree with the sentiments of your post I have to take issue with the following:

Jos Stratford said:

Shifting distribution patterns and colonisation of new areas can only be deemed good, suggesting that for some species at least, there is scope for adaption to new conditions.

Click to expand...

This may be true if we are solely talking about birds. However if we take this statement to include, say, viruses and their vectors, then personally I wouldn't deem that as good.

e.g.: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15685226
or this powerpoint presentation: http://www.iah.bbsrc.ac.uk/events/docs/Climate_Change_BTV.pdf

Imaginos said:

Jos, whilst in the main I agree with the sentiments of your post I have to take issue with the following:

Click to expand...

Maybe, malaria after popping down to the local patch wouldn't have screw your plans for the following week's birding

John o'Sullivan said:

Hi JOS. Very good question.

As I said earlier. I'm not a conservationist in the sense that it is practised by conservation bodies. I don't care where species end up.

I also accept whole heartedly that the "conservation Zitgeist" is unstoppable and nothing I say or do will make any difference to this. I like to think about processes and systems however so every now and again I throw some ideas out onto BF to help me think about these things.

So this discussion began because I had an impression that species distribution was changing (South to North) and I wanted to check that out.

All the evidence I've come across has supported that initial perspective. Although I've become aware that North/South is much too simplistic a position and you have to consider European Species distribution in terms of e.g. North/North Central/Central/South Central and South also East/West and take into account localised climatological effects like the oceanic conditions off the west coast of the U.k.

I'm sure the good people who published the atlas have factored this sort of data.

Generally however there is a shift northwards, not only for birds but also for Moths, dragonflies and damselflies.

Conservationists seem to act as if climate is irrelevant and that despite a changing climate all species can be conserved where they are currently found. So in the U.k. for example conservationists want southern species, central species and northern species.

Despite the overwhelming evidence suggesting that already with a relatively limited but progressive change in climatological conditions, species distribution is changing.

Also despite the fact that they have published the Atlas showing what the changes are likely to bring about.

They can't have them all, not even in the U.K. which has a very diverse climate from south to north, east to west.

I have some major concerns about some conservation practices. One of them being the use of conservation resources on attempting to shore up populations of species that are probably on the way out. Even if they can be shored up sometimes I believe that the ends do not justify the means.

Conservationists should be working with the fundamental underlying processes
(evolution, climate change) not against them.

Conservation is based on preserving stasis and yet the world is changing.

I'm off to pembrokeshire now for two days birding.

John

Click to expand...

I think it is sad that you make sweeping generalisations about 'conservationists' as you call people who work in the environmental/wildlife conservation sector.

I think they can be congratulated for identifying the biggest challenge imposed by climate change, that of habitat fragmentation. When the climate has changed previously (as it does all the time) species of all taxa could move freely in response to changing conditions. However, this time, the problem is that there are huge areas of unsuitable farmland, urban areas, roads etc in the way, preventing the move. Maybe not too bad for birds and others with wings, but not so favourable to others...
Your conservationists have recognised this - see Wildlife Trusts Living Landscapes vision or RSPB's Future Scapes. They are trying to work with landowners, gardeners, everybody to reconnect the landscape. They and us can't stop climate change - it is too late, and probably too big a problem for us to do anything about. What we can do, is try and restore as much habitat as possible and reconnect all this isolated fragments, so species can move and adapt in the face of this pressure.
I am sad that someone clearly as educated and as passionate as yourself, John, could write-off so many people working or volunteering so hard to try and do their bit to help the birds and wildlife you love. I am sure the NE staff who celebrated the Spoonbills would be the last to want any credit for the nesting success, but hey, maybe they deserve a bit of credit for all the un-newsworthy species that they are helping, with long hours and little pay. Give them a break eh?

Jono

ColinD said:

every 30 years!

Back on topic, I like Spoonbills and I'm pleased to see them breeding, and yes it is interesting that they chose to breed in North West England 10 years before they bred at Holkham, and it's also interesting that Black-winged Stilts did the same (Frodsham, Martin Mere, Neumans Flash).

Click to expand...

The NW is the warmest place in the UK

John o'Sullivan said:

And Firecrests and LRP's are recent arrivals too.
.

Click to expand...

I thought LRP's spread wth the creation of gravel pits?

Himalaya,

it doesn't have to be the warmest it just has to be warm enough. The fact that it is warm enough that far north should be more concerning not less. It doesn't undermine my argument it indicates the degree of climate change that has already occured.

And LRP's spread was assisted by the presence of gravel pits. If you dug gravel pits too far north or too far south you wouldn't get LRP on them. LRP were spreading and found the opportunities provided by gravel pits within the appropriate climate zone to their advantage.

I'm not against habitat formation,I'm very keen on habitat formation, but habitat formation that works with underlying processes not habitat formation that is at odds with underlying processes.

Jono, very nice respectful post. I am plagued with guilt.

Many conservationists are lovely people who are working very hard with the best of intentions. There are lots and lots of things that conservationists do that I am very much in favour of and that I believe are very beneficial to a whole range of species.

There are a few things that are done that I am very much against
1. Nearly all Culls
2. Most Re-introductions
3. Claiming conservation credit for species that are changing distribution primarily due to climate changes.

There are undoubtedly others that I can't think off athe moment (too tired after two days in Pembrokeshire) but these are the ones that bug me the most.

I think LRP's breed in some warm countries where the temperature is over 45 degrees in summer and I do not know how far north they breed but most likely Cumbria if not scotland an they do breed around in some suitable areas of the Pennines.

John, if you're so keen on preserving the right of invasive species to invade because it's just "evolution," than why are you so concerned about global warming? After all, humans are a part of nature, so everything we do is "natural." We're just putting the carbon back into the atmosphere, where it came from in the first place. Shifting distributions of birds, bugs, and even diseases are just part of the evolutionary process. Who are we to stand in its way? Even overpopulation shouldn't be a concern, as that will most assuredly take care of itself eventually.

Himalaya said:

I think LRP's breed in some warm countries where the temperature is over 45 degrees in summer and I do not know how far north they breed but most likely Cumbria if not scotland an they do breed around in some suitable areas of the Pennines.

Click to expand...

They breed fairly regularly in very small numbers as far north as Aberdeenshire