On a tangent I’ll admit, but as there is an official balloting going on to your north today I’m curious if you’ve an opinion about how a possible Scottish independence vote might alter the politics of ecology and the issues raised here.
BTW, I’m on the other side of the pond. I’ve been told we didn’t have an opportunity to simply vote on independence – blood spilling being required at that time.
Hi Clem – the vote result is in and it’s a “No”, much to the relief of most of the UK! I was at a meeting in London yesterday and the Scottish referendum was the topic of conversation for many of us.
With regard to how a vote for independence might have affected conservation, the answer is almost certainly negatively. First of all, political focus of all government departments would move from environmental issues and on to trying to manage the split, which would take up a lot of time and resources that could be better spent elsewhere.
Secondly, NGOs such as the RSPB would have to consider how they manage and fund their organisations, given their cross-border roles. That would certainly be to the detriment of Scottish conservation given that most of the funding is flowing south to north (a function of population size).
We were glad there was no blood spilling linked to the referendum, despite the passion 🙂
Prof. Jeff Ollerton - ecological scientist and author 
Apologies for the misspelling of “government” in the original post – that’s what happens when you do things in a rush! Someone has also sent me the following link which is useful: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/environmental-audit-committee/news/environmental-scorecard-report/
On a tangent I’ll admit, but as there is an official balloting going on to your north today I’m curious if you’ve an opinion about how a possible Scottish independence vote might alter the politics of ecology and the issues raised here.
BTW, I’m on the other side of the pond. I’ve been told we didn’t have an opportunity to simply vote on independence – blood spilling being required at that time.
Hi Clem – the vote result is in and it’s a “No”, much to the relief of most of the UK! I was at a meeting in London yesterday and the Scottish referendum was the topic of conversation for many of us.
With regard to how a vote for independence might have affected conservation, the answer is almost certainly negatively. First of all, political focus of all government departments would move from environmental issues and on to trying to manage the split, which would take up a lot of time and resources that could be better spent elsewhere.
Secondly, NGOs such as the RSPB would have to consider how they manage and fund their organisations, given their cross-border roles. That would certainly be to the detriment of Scottish conservation given that most of the funding is flowing south to north (a function of population size).
We were glad there was no blood spilling linked to the referendum, despite the passion 🙂
Best wishes,
Jeff
Pingback: Nature Improvement Area Annual Forum 2014 – influencing the future of conservation in England | Jeff Ollerton's Biodiversity Blog
Would “fracking” be a suitable answer to your question?
I think there are quite a number of one-word answers Philip 🙂
Pingback: Should biodiversity scientists be campaigners and polemicists? | Jeff Ollerton's Biodiversity Blog