Assessing the importance of spatial location of agri environment options within the landscape to butterflies

Published source details Oliver T. (2014) Assessing the importance of spatial location of agri environment options within the landscape to butterflies. Natural England report, Natural England Commissioned Report 157.
Share Tweet Email

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

	Action	Category
	Legally protect habitat Action Link
	Pay farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes or conservation incentives) Action Link

Legally protect habitat

A replicated, site comparison study in 2006–2011 in 850 sites across England, UK (Oliver 2014) found that sites surrounded by more habitat legally protected as Sites of Special Scientific Interest had a higher population density of butterflies than sites surrounded by no protected areas in one of two analyses. One analysis, using data from 399 randomly placed transects, found that there were more butterflies on sites with more protected habitat in the surrounding 1 or 3 km than on sites surrounded by no protected areas (data presented as model results). A second analysis, using data from 451 transects that were less likely to pass through farmland, found no difference in the number of butterflies on sites surrounded by protected areas or with no protected areas nearby (data presented as model results). The area of land protected by a Site of Special Scientific Interest designation within 1- or 3-km around each survey site was calculated. From 2006–2011, butterflies were surveyed once/week throughout the flight season (up to 26 weeks) along fixed transects at 451 sites as part of the UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme. In July–August 2010–2011, butterflies were surveyed at least twice/year on two parallel transects within 399 1-km squares as part of the Wider Countryside Butterfly Monitoring Scheme.

(Summarised by: Andrew Bladon)
Pay farmers to cover the costs of conservation measures (as in agri-environment schemes or conservation incentives)

A replicated, site comparison study in 1995–2011 in 850 sites across England, UK (Oliver 2014) found that sites surrounded by a larger area or greater number of individual agri-environment scheme (AES) options targeted at butterflies had more butterflies than sites surrounded by a smaller area or fewer individual AES options. There were more butterflies on sites with more AES options in the surrounding 3 km than on sites surrounded by fewer AES options (data presented as model results). However, the introduction of AES schemes near to individual sites did not alter local butterfly population trends (data presented as model results). Three agri-environment schemes, Environmentally Sensitive Areas (open from 1987–2005), Countryside Stewardship Scheme (1991–2005) and Environmental Stewardship (2005 onwards), were used to pay landowners for managing wildlife habitat on their land. The area of land managed to benefit butterflies under AES, and the number of individual AES options in place, around each survey site was calculated. Options for butterflies included conservation headlands, hedge planting or restoration, pollen and nectar mixes, and species-rich, semi-natural grassland. From 1995–2011, butterflies were surveyed once/week throughout the flight season (up to 26 weeks) along fixed transects at 451 sites as part of the UK Butterfly Monitoring Scheme. In July–August 2010–2011, butterflies were surveyed at least twice/year on two parallel transects within 399 1-km squares as part of the Wider Countryside Butterfly Monitoring Scheme.

(Summarised by: Andrew Bladon)