John Ridgway’s article Is 3.0 Really Greater than 0.85 is, of course, worth reading in its own right. As was merited by the subject raised therein, an interesting discussion followed. In one comment, John pointed out the specific absurdity of climate change being shoehorned into a BBC article about the threat of flooding to New York, given that the city is sinking three times faster than the sea level is rising, and he made the point thus:

This narrative that the global warming impact was to blame for the exceptional New York flooding completely fails to mention that the greater problem has been the sinking of the city and the extent to which that has made it more vulnerable to flooding.

This is a common aspect of the narrative these days. It doesn’t seem to matter what the cause of a particular problem, an article appearing on the BBC or Guardian websites will usually add “and climate change”, whilst failing to make explicit the extent to which climate change is having an impact on the problem, and without even attempting to identify the relative impact of other factors compared to climate change. If there’s a problem, then climate change must be part of the mix, and that’s all there is to it.

In another comment, I drew attention to a study reported in Nature last month, which I thought was rather more promising. My take on it was as follows:

It analysed previous papers to ascertain the impact of humanity on nature, and not surprisingly it found that humanity is having a considerable negative impact. However, what interested me is that it sought to analyse the issue by reference to five separate factors, and included a table under the heading “Impacts of human pressures on homogeneity and shifts in composition of biological communities”. OK, so this is only one area, but the key results support the sceptical view that when it comes to humanity’s impact on nature, climate change is probably bottom of the list. In order it found the following numbers of cases under the following headings:

Habitat change: 1,198.

Pollution: 1,197.

Resource exploitation: 521.

Invasive species: 418.

Climate change: 333.

All of which is a rather long-winded introduction to the point I want to make. In essence, this is that the BBC (and others, most obviously the Guardian) publish article after article bemoaning the role of climate change in the decline of nature, and in the decline of bird and insect species in particular, yet once articles address the specifics of the issue, it becomes apparent in almost every case that climate change either isn’t a factor or plays only a very minor part, with the main culprit being habitat loss (or one of the other issues identified in the study published in Nature – pollution; resource exploitation; and invasive species – in that order).

Thus in 2019 the BBC offered us this heading: “Climate change ‘has affected a third of UK bird species’”. In fairness, the report mentioned that there were winners as well as losers, and it did indicate that other factors might be at work, but the headline and the bulk of the story was aimed at bigging-up the climate change factor. For instance we were told:

Dr Bond said caution should be paid between correlation and causation – the bird populations may correlate with climate changes but that does not mean they are solely caused by them.

Changing land use and habitat fragmentation were also mentioned as factors, but no attempt was made to weigh their relative importance, and the message about climate change had to be rammed home:

But he said climate change is “the big one” that needed addressing, although he added we could be in a “palliative care” state now as the “stopping climate change ship has more or less sailed”.

In the following year the BBC treated us to an article explaining how re-wilding “could help protect species in Britain”, but the emphasis remained on climate change:

This is all in an effort to help slow down the effects that it says climate change has had on Britain’s wildlife.

By the way, the words “climate change” contained an embedded link to another BBC article headed “Climate change: What is it and why is everyone talking about it?” [er, maybe because the BBC never stops going on about it?]. The main article carried on in determined fashion:

The study warned that the wildlife in Britain is already at risk and is not ready to try and fight the effects of climate change.

Climate change brings, floods, fires, rising temperatures and droughts, all things that massively impact on wildlife.

So there you have it. Habitat loss is an issue, re-wilding might help, but climate change is the threat. But is it? I idly googled for more recent BBC articles about habitat restoration and its impact on wildlife, and the following is an entirely random selection of what I found.

In August 2021 there was an article headed “Light pollution from street lamps linked to insect loss”. The article did the usual from the BBC, listing different factors (climate change, habitat loss and pesticides) and mentioning climate change first, but crucially, it said this:

Modern LED streetlights appeared to have the biggest impact.

That is the biggest impact in terms of artificial lights, not of the different factors mentioned. But still, it constitutes recognition that other factors are at play:

The researchers say their study, published in Science Advances, is the strongest evidence yet that light pollution can have detrimental impacts on local insect populations, with consequences for the birds and other wildlife that rely on caterpillars for food.

Then, in March 2022 an article about bitterns appeared: “RSPB: Bitterns make booming recovery in UK wetlands”.

Britain’s loudest bird, the “booming” bittern, is making a recovery after almost disappearing from the UK twice.

The RSPB reported the birds had had a “record-breaking year” in 2021, with 228 males counted, up from 209 in 2019.

Ornithologist Dr Alex Lees described it as a “spectacular conservation success story” thanks to the restoration of wetland habitats.

“It shows that conservation does work,” the Manchester Metropolitan scientist told BBC News…

…systematic restoration and re-creation of wetlands over recent decades has allowed their numbers to more than double in the past 10 years…

It’s evident from the article that climate change is irrelevant to the story of the bittern, but the BBC still had to find an angle:

Wetlands also play a role in flood protection and combatting climate change, by locking away carbon-rich plant matter in their mud.

In February 2023 there was another success story, titled “Cranes: Survey reveals UK’s tallest bird is making wetland comeback”.

The birds are making a comeback thanks to restoration and protection of their wetland habitats.

Neither their initial demise nor their subsequent recovery appears to have anything to do with climate change, yet the obligatory obeisance before climate change still makes an appearance:

Wetlands help lock carbon away, reducing green house gas emissions, and can also help to reduce flood risk to homes and communities as well as being wonderful areas for wildlife.

September 2023 saw an article appear about seven bird species:

A rewilding project has led to the return of a number of bird species that are in critical decline…

…Nightingale, greenfinch, grey partridge, marsh tit, skylark, nightjar and tree pipit – all Red List species – have been recorded.

A major part of the scheme has been to “re-naturalise” the River Sherford, creating a wetland which now hosts lapwing, golden plover and common snipe.

Future plans include the introduction of grazing animals to create a mosaic of habitats that will improve biodiversity.

Good news, and nothing to do with climate change. Even the BBC failed to mention it.

In September 2023 we learned that butterfly numbers were up, ironically because of a wetter summer. Climate change wasn’t mentioned, and the key quote was this:

Dr Richard Fox, head of science at Butterfly Conservation, said one of the biggest threats facing butterflies was “habitat loss”.

“Butterflies need a place to live,” he said. “If they can feed, breed and shelter, they can thrive.”

Perhaps not surprisingly, the same month brought an article about moth recovery. The cause? Re-wilding:

A critically-endangered moth indigenous to the east Kent countryside has had a bumper year after its habitat was restored by farmers.

In 1995, the black-veined moth was close to extinction due to the loss of their chalk grassland habitat in the Wye National Nature Reserve…

…This year, surveys counted a peak of 255 moths, the highest number recorded since the project began.

Dan Turson, Natural England’s farm adviser, said: “Farmers are leading nature recovery through long-term one-to-one advice and close working to create new wildflower grasslands at scale.”

He said they were now seeing the results of the farmers’ hard work.

The butterfly recovery continued, as we were told in June 2024, with record numbers of the heath fritillary butterfly – once close to extinction – being counted at a special reserve. They are found only in specialised habitats:

“Colonies of this delicate butterfly occupy sheltered and coppiced woodland in the south-east of England where their larval food plant, common cow-wheat is present,” she said.

“The trust, alongside dedicated volunteers, have been carefully managing ancient woodland to maintain this specialised habitat for over a decade.”

Once more, habitat is key; climate change has nothing to do with it.

July 2024 brought encouraging news about bees: “Rare bumblebee numbers rise after meadows restored”:

Rare bumblebee numbers are rising in Shropshire following a successful project to restore old hay meadows.

The National Trust is leading Stepping Stones, an initiative which aims to reconnect isolated patches of wildlife habitat across the Long Mynd and Stiperstones.

Jinlye Meadows, on the Long Mynd, is now thriving with wildflowers and insects and as a result, the population of bilberry bumblebees has increased.

Restore vital habitat, it seems, and recovery follows. Again, climate change has nothing to do with the issue.

The following month it was the turn of black grouse to bring us some good news. This time the story was in the National:

REWILDING efforts in part of the Scottish Highlands have resulted in local populations of an “amazing species” of endangered bird reaching their highest level for 17 years, conservationists have announced.

Black grouse, which are seen as an important indicator species for ecosystem health, have suffered UK-wide decline over recent decades due to threats such as habitat loss and intensive land management.

Yet again, nothing to do with climate change.

In September of that year the good news was once more about moths, specifically the endangered black-vein moth:

In 1995, the black-veined moth was close to extinction due to the loss of their chalk grassland habitat in the Wye National Nature Reserve….

…Dan Turson, Natural England’s farm adviser, said: “Farmers are leading nature recovery through long-term one-to-one advice and close working to create new wildflower grasslands at scale.”

He said they were now seeing the results of the farmers’ hard work.

In December 2024 it was the turn of reptiles and ground-nesting birds: “Rare heathland species to benefit from restoration”:

Dorset Council is removing hundreds of invasive pine trees from Avon Heath Country Park to help rejuvenate the heathland.

The 210-hectare site is home to all of Britain’s native reptile species, including the elusive smooth snake, along with birds including nightjar and woodlark.

Trees, scrub and other invasive species such as Rhododendron will be removed to help reverse the habitat loss.

After a few reports when climate change didn’t get a mention (because it wasn’t relevant), this time it does – even though it still isn’t relevant to the story:

“…while removing trees during a climate emergency may seem counter-intuitive, heathlands play an important role in tackling climate change too.

“Their soils are excellent at absorbing carbon from our atmosphere and locking it away permanently.”

Finally with regard to this whistle-stop tour, an article appeared on the BBC website last month suggesting that the introduction of ponies to a site will facilitate flower growth, which will in turn help birds. My scepticism about this one is because:

The scheme is being run by Environment Bank, a company which sells parcels of land to developers to offset the environmental impact of their construction projects…

…It is hoped the ponies, which belong to local breeder and vet Michael Dewhurst, will create space for wildflowers and other plant species by grazing and trampling over the land.

It strikes me as rather tenuous and possibly nothing more than green-washing, but if it works, the idea is that the ponies will eat pervasive soft rush which has taken over much of the site, with the result that plant life valued by lapwing, curlew and redshank will return. Whatever the merits of the project, it’s another story about bird populations being linked to habitat loss and/or restoration.

Search the internet and you will find many such stories. Habitat loss is a massive issue, climate change less so. Perhaps, then, it would be a good idea to stop destroying the habitat of birds, insects, reptiles and plants by imposing tens of thousands of acres of solar panels and wind turbines on them. It’s regularly claimed that the climate crisis and the nature crisis go hand in hand, as though they are both caused by the same thing. The reality, I suspect, is that the nature crisis is being – at least in part – caused, and certainly exacerbated, by our crass attempts to deal with a non-existent climate crisis.