The
Urban Naturalist
Autumn into Winter 2014
Larch Tree Disease A Threat to Belfast’s Ancient Oaks
Walk the Wildlife Corridors Come see the Great Manchester Wetlands
Leafsnap UK Become a Citizen Scientist
FOXY PHOTOGRAPHY: HOW TO SNAP THE ELUSIVE URBAN FOX
This Issue... NEWS - Welcome to Belvoir Forest - Page 3 The Belfast forest’s fight against Larch Tree Disease
- Who forgot the birds? - Pages 4 &5 You Forgot the Birds squares up to the RSPB
FEATURES - A Walk in the Wetlands - Page 6 & 7 £2.2 million grant for conservation in the North West
- Where the fox are they? - Pages 8 & 9 Your difinitive guide to spotting an urban fox
REVIEW - Leafsnap UK - Pages 10 & 11 Look smart and help trees!
IC P S ’ OR T I D E
This season’s picture comes from one of The Urban Naturalist’s loyal conbtributors. This moggie, snapped in the mid-summer bloom, will surely be indoors now as we move from autumn into winter. Our cover picture was taken by Jo Dorning from the Mammal Research Unit at the University of Bristol. Jo’s photo was awarded BBC Wildlife Camera Trap Photo of 2013, and we can see why! Send your pictures to editor@theurbannaturalist.com for a chance to be in next season’s issue.
t s e r o F ir o v l e B o t e m o c WelHome of Belfast’s Ancient Oaks, and their most deadly disease
6,500 larch trees have been felled in Belfast's Belvoir Forest Park. The trees were infected with a common but fatal tree disease called Phytophthora ramorum.
P. ramorum is a fungus-like pathogen that spreads quickly through the trees. Infected larch trees can have sap-leaking lesions in their bark and prematurely shed their needles. Once a tree has been identified it has to be felled before it can spore and spread the disease further by air.
The disease has already caused the premature felling of over 3 million trees in the UK and Ireland since it was first discovered in the West Country in 2009.
The measures are drastic and devastating to the forest. It will take decades for the forest to resemble anything close to what it once was. The felling was done to protect the forest's oak trees.
A sposkesperson for the main department involved said there were plans to repopulate the forest, which will be reviewed this year. She said the review is no reason to be concerned, given the nature of the work, forest re-population is constantly under review.
The department is unwilling to disclose how much A spokseperson for a different department (all the trees were sold for, claiming the price paid is these overlapping remits!) said: “Within Belvoir “commercially sensitive.” Forest and the former demesne area are very old (some date to the 17th Century) and sometimes Belvoir Forest is home to what is thought to be Ire- very large broad leaved trees. These parkland land's oldest tree, a 500 year old oak tree. The tree trees are important in their own right, but also for is one of many ancient trees in the forest high- the unique assemblage of beetles, snails, fungi lighted by the Woodland Trust which are in need of and lichens which live on them.” legislative protection. “Before felling started, DoE (Department of the EnThe Trust wants a register to be drawn up to recog- vironment) mapped all of these veteran and annise the cultural importance of these trees and cient trees within and adjacent to the larch other such trees across Ireland. plantations and prepared an individual management plan for each tree to ensure that they were “These natural living not damaged during the felling process. DoE ecologists and Forest Service staff worked very closely monuments are the together to ensure that the management plans equivalent of listed were followed.”
buildings.”
Jill Butler, ancient tree specialist for the Woodland Trust said: “Our oldest trees have seen centuries come and go, witnessed historic events and are home to many species of wildlife, some rare and vulnerable. These natural living monuments are the equivalent of listed buildings, yet have no automatic form of protection.”
She added that even though there would be some displacement of birds and other animals in the short term, no specialist birds relied on the larch trees, and that the trees were being felled to minimise the risk to the ancient oak trees in the forest.
Pictures: Jamie Mackrell
WHO FORGOT THE BIRDS?
Sir Ian “Beefy” Botham's pro-shooting campaign group You Forgot The Birds has launched a large scale offensive on the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.
The former cricketer, who runs a 2,500 acre luxury shoot with his son Liam, aims to discredit the charity by pointing the finger at how it spends its donors' money.
Speaking to the Daily Mail, Beefy said: “It [the RSPB] is a massive bureaucracy where donations are spent on homes for office workers, not homes for birds. Birds don't need hundreds of campaigners in suits – they need people with spades building habitat.” The RSPB's chief executive got very defensive, putting out both a press release and an extended press release!
In it, he said: “We believe it is no coincidence that the group's campaign comes at a time when the RSPB is calling for greater controls on the environmental impact of some game shooting activities, amid growing public concern over the illegal killing of birds of prey.”
There's been a lot of public back and forth between the two groups, but it's not all name calling. You Forgot The Birds have their sticks and stones out. The group of wealthy landowners have reported RSPB to the charity commission, claiming the RSPB spends far less than the “90p-in-the-pound” on conservation that it claims. You Forgot the Birds say the RSPB spends only £29 million of its £122 million revenue stream on running its nature reserves.
And they may have been right, since then the RSPB has admitted some of the figures on their website could have been misleading and have changed them. Critics are now lining up to attack the RSPB further, many saying the charity has become a victim of its own success. They say it's a charity behemoth, sucking donations away from other charities, with its main focus now on raising more money.
Farmers groups have also added their voice. They say the RSPB are too interested in micromanaging them and won't work with them.
It would seem each group has valid points to be made about the other. But who ultimately is right? I wonder what the birds would think.
Pictures: Great Manchester Wetlands Trust
A Walk in th
The Great Manchester Wetlands Trust is to create “wildlife corridors” in the North West of England following a £2.2 million grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund. Chair of the Greater Manchester Local Nature Partnership and Chief Executive of the local Wildlife Trust, Anne Selby said: “Corridors already exist along rivers, canals and former railway lines which act as vital stepping stones for
populations of creatures, but these will be enhanced to join up the landscape.”
“Within these corridors, appropriate and complementary wetland habitat will be created that will deliver wide scale and coherent ecological networks of wetland habitats that will help not only to buffer the identified current ecologically important sites but also to link up all the
biodiversity hotspots to allow free movement of key species into, out of and between local wildlife sites.” “We are committed to improving the environment for our wonderful wildlife so it is heartening that the Heritage Lottery Fund has recognised the project as worthy of funding. The Great Manchester Wetlands will not only benefit wildlife it
he Wetlands
will make a huge difference to the lives of people in the North West of England.�
This part of the scheme is just one piece of an ongoing campaign to rejuvinate 40,000 hectares of land stretching from Wigan and Bolton in the north, down to Woolston on the edge of Warrington in the south and Salford in the east, taking in Chat Moss, Wigan Flashes and Woolston Eyes.
The Trust wants to deliver this by 2025.
The mosslands in the area were once a hotspot for rare UK species, now the area has lost 99% of its natural resources and is only 300 hectares in size. The conservation efforts to make this a home for animals once again will help many creatures, not least the water vole, a member of the rodent family that lives in reed beds and loves to eat pretty much
pretty much anything. The water vole is suffering from a huge population decline, the fastest decline of any UK mammal.
Great Manchester Wetlands Trust is keen for local people to come out and volunteer. Conservation volunteering can help people connect with nature and help them live healthier lives.
Pictures: Great Manchester Wetlands Trust
Where the fox ar
The fox; possibly the most adaptable mammal on the planet, it's up there with rats and humans anyway. They live in almost every habitat across the globe, from barren mountains to Arctic wildernesses.
Here in the UK we know them more for their appearances in local forests and in cities. Once known for nicking Farmer Jones' chickens, our experience with foxes now is changing. I was in a taxi recently that hit a fox. We stopped and went back, much to the reluctance of the driver. “He's fine,” he said, “I saw him run off.” And he had run off.
It's estimated around one third of all of London's foxes have had at least one fractured bone that's healed naturally. A mark of their incredible resilience. Although even though the fox can take a few knocks, car crashes are the main cause of death in cities. Wild foxes aren't likely to see their second birthday. However, it's that physical resilience that has allowed the fox to go from the relative peace of the countryside to the city. Sure enough, as a fox you don't get battalions of red coats chasing you in the city, but you still get uncaring motorists not bothering to stop for you, and the odd local council advocating people shoot you. In London, where guns are illegal, Conservative-led Wandsworh Council told people to shoot foxes to control their numbers. Something that the foxes don't need any help with. Foxes are very good at regulating their population. Fox populations in the UK have stayed steady for decades. When the going's good, more cubs are born, when things aren't so good, there are less cubs.
So with the hazards of cars and the occasional problem with people, why have so many foxes taken up residence here? Isn't it obvious? They can eat more! In Bristol scavenged food makes up to two thirds of an urban fox's diet. In more industrial cities like London, the fox can gorge on rats and pigeons, and every suburban back garden has a steady supply of earthworms and other juicy insects. By and large, foxes avoid pets. Dogs are too big, and cats are too many. Cats and foxes both know it's pointless to fight. Foxes in the city are outnumbered by one fox to every hundred cats, they would be fighting in every garden the visited, probably more than once. It would be like Batman having to fight through Gotham City any time he wanted a kebab. Cats and foxes might fight every now and then, but generally give each other a wide berth. And why would they need to fight? Cats get their food at home, and in cities there is 150 times as much food needed for each fox. So why do we even bother giving them food? Well, maybe it's because many of us city dwelling people aren't the 9-5 workbots you'd expect. A Channel 4 survey of almost 10,000 people in 2012 showed that the like to dislike ratio of foxes was 86% like to 14% dislike.
As we are sucked further and further into city life, we do what we can to catch any glimpse of the wild that we can. There's a loveable envy to foxes. The freedom to jump in and out of gardens, to escape at the first sign on danger, the mystery that surrounds them, and as humans, we instinctively want to learn more about how life exists in the world around us.
In researching this article, I was learning a lot about these elusive creatures. I had to see how they got on for myself.
In a blaze of overconfidence, I decided to take to the streets of Manchester, camera in hand, to find some foxes. I was armed with cat food and some apples. I had absolutely no idea how to use them. The Manchester Evening News did a survey of fox hotspots just last year, this would be my treasure map. I had my tracking mode on, so I feeling like Aragorn chasing some cute, hairy orcs, I headed for the nearest park.
Once I got there, I realised I had no tracking mode. After about 15 minutes of walking around a dimly lit park, I left, before I was mugged.
Why was I making this so hard? I'd seen foxes before, not in parks, but where? Well, when I'd seen them close up they usually kept to the privacy of gardens and the car park at Aldi. Feeling slightly dejected, but no less enthused, I took to the streets confident I'd nailed it this time. I knew where they were! Two hours later and my confidence had finally started to wane. Two hours of checking under hedges and peering over walls. I headed for home.
I turned off the main road and on to my own street when I caught a glimpse! A pointed muzzle rounded a corner and two auburn eyes looked right at me. Excitement first, then panic. I'd been out for hours, I had to get at least one picture, but as soon as I was spotted reaching for the camera, he/she was off into nearest driveway. Not to be deterred, I followed straight away.
My final mistake of the evening was probably my heavy run. I'd probably scared the poor thing half way up the street, but in my excitement it was something I didn't even consider, and so I checked the garden anyway.
I looked everywhere; in the flower bed, under the car, under the shed. I was midway through picking up one of those kids' tractor things when I realised I'd probably gone a bit far. If someone were to see me at half two in the morning, hood up, camera out, standing in their back garden, it probably wouldn't go down to well. It was time to give up for now.
re they?
So how could I be more successful next time? The University of Bristol runs a website dedicated to foxes. It's based on decades of research done there at the university's Mammal Research Unit. Professor Steve Harris was the person to speak to, so I gave him a ring to see how I could get the edge for my photography: Professor Harris: “Most of them try to avoid the streets. They're on them less often than you think. They tend not to come on to the streets until after midnight when the traffic goes down. And they don't cross the street as often as you'd expect, they're wary of roads.” “So, being on the streets isn't that easy. It's often easier stick to back gardens. Most of what they do is in back gardens, not on streets. Often, they're just slipping across the road.”
As to the photographs, at the University of Bristol they use camera traps. Professor Harris told me you can use flash photography though. The trick is to bring them to your own garden for that.
Professor Harris: “Foxes will eat anything. They really are omnivores. Most of the food they get in urban areas is actually given to them. I feed them every night in my garden. We give them cooked chicken cut up into little pieces. You can give them dog food, cat food, scraps from the butchers. They love peanuts. Fruit's good, even chocolate, you name it!”
“I'd recommend something meaty though, and don't give it to them all in one lump, that way they can't lift it and run away with it. Chop it into little bits and they'll stay there and eat it.” There are a lot of warnings about not letting foxes get to used to relying on us for food, a point Professor Harris said was very important to remember, but he explained the best way to go about this: Professor Harris: “We have about four or five foxes come to us each night, we give them around 70 grams of food each. Foxes need around 350 grams of food each night, so they don't rely on us.”
“They come, we see them, we like having them around, then they go away. If we don't feed them one night, it doesn't matter.”
“The other myth is there's not enough food in urban areas, but there's vastly more food than they'd need.” I wondered if it was the fox equivalent of having a takeaway instead of cooking for yourself. Professor Harris agreed.
Professor Harris: “If you know the Harris's are going to give you a bit of chicken each night, you may as well stop in there before you move along.”
“People can watch Attenborough in their living rooms until the cows come home, but foxes are probably the biggest, most exciting animal they'll ever see in their lives.”
“I would tend to believe that an animal or wildlife has an intrinsic value in its own right. Foxes have an intrinsic value. They do have a utilitarian value as well. A lot of rats aren't accessible, because they live in houses and sewers, but you don't get many rat infestations in gardens where you have foxes coming in regularly. You don't get so many mice either.”
Even though foxes scavenge most of their food, and will come into people's gardens, it is very unlikely they will go through your bins. A fox is not a tabloid journalist. Foxes may have the same mercenary instinct, but they don't have the thumbs you see.
Professor Harris: “They don't knock bins over, because they're not big enough to do it. They weigh around five or six kilograms each. In the old days, when they had dustbins, they'd knock the lids off and dig in, but they can't do it to modern day bins. Wheelie bins are designed to be animal proof and they are.”
Plenty more tips for me to go on in my search for urban foxes. The general idea to remember is bring them to your own garden, and not go hoking around in someone else's. With that in mind I've got some pastrami and some cheddar cheese out tonight, and if I don't see any foxes, well at least it'll do for the birds.
Pictures: Han Kim Jo Dorning, University of Bristol
Leafsnap UK: Look smart and help trees!
Here at The Urban Naturalist, we have a reluctant acceptance of the smartphone. Too often we are stuck in our own bubbles within them, and they aren't always the benefit you think they are.
Psychologists have shown that our cognitive responses to aural and visual information is much more closely linked than we like to believe. So while we might think a nice walk in the forest while listening to that natural history podcast will help you connect with nature, it won't do it as well as you'd think.
The best thing to do to connect with life around you is to get in and experience it. Pop out the headphones on your morning walk to the train and listen to birds getting ready for the day ahead. Get off Facebook and have a browse through that hedgerow, see what's growing. All this led into my no-phone-outdoors philosophy, and it worked... up to a point.
One day, I was out in the forest with my daughter. She's six years old, and like all children, she thinks her daddy knows everything. Like all daddies, I like to keep that premise going. “Daddy, what type of tree is that?”
Ok, erm, right. What to do now? Ok, Google. Right, no, no phones. Of course. “Just grab a leaf, darling, and we can look it up later.”
The leaf goes into the pocket, and comes out later resembling something like a tissue after it's come out of the washing machine. Perhaps I should have made some notes.
Or perhaps I should relax my use of a phone outdoors. Instead of using smartphones to disconnect and retreat into my personalised little bubble, smartphones can be given a much more valuable use. A use that aids their user to discover and learn through interaction, instead of just looking at something with some sounds going into your ear.
Let's give that a go then!
“Ok, honey, describe your leaf so we can look it up on my phone.”
“It's round and it's green and it's got little spikes on it.”
“Ah...”
If you type “uk leaf green round with spikes” you'll get 32 million results back, including a picture of some cannabis cufflinks. Not very helpful. If only there were some sort of app that told me what type of leaf I had just from taking a picture of it. That's when I found Leafsnap UK.
Leafsnap was originally developed in the USA by researchers from Columbia University, the University of Maryland and the Smithsonian Institution, focussing mainly on Northeast America. Since then, the team has worked with the British National History Museum to create a UK version of the app. Leafsnap UK has 977mb of images which it uses to match your snap with the 156 tree species it has in its dataset. Like apps like Project Noah and websites like Galaxy Zoo, Leafsnap UK also turns the user into a citizen scientist. Your image and location are used by researchers to build a more accurate picture of the UK's tree population. How well does the app work in practice then?
I took to the park to give it a go. The first test was a holly leaf. Open the app, hit “Snap It!” Ah, the leaf needs to be on a white background... I probably should have checked that. Back home then, and into the back garden with a blank sheet of printer paper for a trial run there. I tested it on some of the shrubs that grow in the garden, and the app passed with flying colours. It was even able to identify the tricky Bull Bay leaf as its number one result. The Bull Bay has green, oval shaped leaves. The main defining feature of these leaves is that they are waxy, and Leafsnap picked up on that. To avoid any doubt, users can select an individual result, where they will see more pictures of the leaves, the flowers, fruits, seeds and bark. Ok, so that tricky test proved no problem, what about this shrivelled up, old Sycamore leaf?
This time Leafsnap wasn't quite so good, with the Sycamore coming in at 7th on the top results. I can't be too harsh though, it was a fairly battered leaf, and as before, users can verify the leaf against the database of other leaves, flowers, fruit, seeds and bark. The final test, can it identify this Sycamore seed?
No, it can't. You can use seeds to verify leaves, but you can't snap seeds.
Leafsnap looks good and works well. Building a database of trees is a great conservation tool for scientists. Most importantly, it will make daddy look smart again, just as long as daddy doesn't leave the house without a piece of white paper.
Pictures: Leafsnap UK commons.wikimedia.org
THE UGLY GOSLING
Winter into Spring in next season’s Urban Naturalist Pictures: Jamie Mackrell