Legal advice group Green and Black Cross (GBC) has taken the unprecedented step of making a public statement raising a series of legal and security concerns around Extinction Rebellion (XR).

The statement was published just days after the organisation, which provides legal support and solidarity to those involved in protest activity, entered a three month recuperation period.

The main take-away is that GBC have said that they are no longer willing to continue the work of supporting XR. They had done this through help, advice and training; legal observing; and back office support.

Policing

GBC concludes with a list of asks for XR to enact going forward. GBC’s reasons for concern cover three areas: XR’s use of legal observers; the safety of participants, particularly regarding arrests; and security in the organisation.

Legal observers “provide basic legal guidance and are independent witnesses of police behaviour at protests”. GBC says that XR’s legal observers are poorly trained and do not remain independent on actions.

Other concerns include that participants are put at heightened risk of prosecution when details of conditions imposed on actions are shared on social media, and that misleading information is provided to those risking arrest.

Regarding security, GBC says that personal data is inadequately stored and communication channels used for legal observers allow for the police to access that information.

GBC’s statement comes in the context of an ocean of think-pieces and statements commenting on XR’s politics, strategy and attitude to policing. Those that have come before have been invaluable.

Legal observers

GBC’s should be take particularly seriously. There contribution is about assuring the safety of individuals taking part in XR as well as the movement as a whole.

GBC is a rare example of institutional memory and expertise on the often transient horizontalist environmental left. Its advice should be understood as coming out of that unrivalled experience around protest law and security, rather than yet another ideological or strategic dispute.

XR’s relationship to traditional environmentalism and the left is complex. This has made a productive dialogue challenging. XR explicitly rejects much of the politics, strategy and framings of traditional environmentalism.

On the other hand, it superficially draws on some practices relating to direct-action, while stripping back the underlying politics and divorcing practices from their context.

This has led to contradictions which result in very real in issues around safety. The case of legal observers is among the most pertinent examples of this.

Insignia

XR has adopted the use of legal observers in their actions, but dispute the analysis of the police which foreground their necessity.

Roger Hallam, co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, explains in his booklet Common Sense for the 21st Century XR’s divergent attitude to policing.

He criticises an attitude that “the police are nasty for ideological reasons x and y” which leads to movements finding it “difficult to accept the police can be cooperative in a particular set of circumstances.”

His proposal is that XR activists “[treat police] consistently in a polite way when we are arrested and at the police stations” and build trust “through having regular meetings”.

Out of this attitude, XR has diluted the independence of legal observers. They often wear XR insignia or pass on information from police to protestors.

Firstly, this undermines the legitimacy of their evidence if presented in court. This could be the difference between a conviction or not.

Secondly, this negatively impacts legal observers across the movement. Their role as independent witnesses is undermined for the entire movement that relies on them for impartial evidence if they are considered as ‘part of the protest’. 

Security culture

In his booklet, Hallam is astutely critical of cultural tendencies within green and left movements which limit for building mass politics.

He argues: “Activist routines are off-putting – hand signals which are not explained, […] and new age or academic (radical left) language.”

Although he doesn’t explicitly make this link, inferring the security culture of much of the environmental left as being implicated in these limitations would be reasonable.

Security culture is largely a response to the systematic infiltration of protest movements by the police in past decades, as well as the often legally risky nature of direct action.

This culture often manifests in using secure channels of communication, such as Signal or encrypted email; vetting activists before they can fully participate in actions or organising; and informal hierarchies where key decisions are made between activists with strong affinity, behind the veneer of open consensus meetings. Rejecting this exclusivity is core to XR’s successful mobilisation model.

Conviction

Connor Woodman’s history of infiltration and the movement proposes an alternative response based on building mass politics which makes infiltration redundant.

This is preferable both to “small, isolated affinity groups” and XR’s approach of rejecting any critical analysis of the policing of protest. However, as long as arrest is being seriously risked, precautionary measures must be retained to mitigate risk of conviction.

Hallam writes: “It’s not about creating a comfort zone but about getting on with the critical work that needs to be done – it’s not going to be easy.”

He’s right. Security culture shouldn’t be about reinforcing a comfort zone to the exclusion of mass participation. But XR’s strategy is contingent on making participants vulnerable to the force of the state.

Eschewing measures to reduce the chance of conviction is irresponsible in this context. The safety and health of individuals and the movement as a whole should be paramount.

GBC’s asks

XR should take GBC’s recommendations on board in full. They include training legal observers sufficiently and treating them fairly with coordinated check ins, appropriate and verified legal guidance and buddying co-ordination.

GBC asks that XR maximises the safety of those seeking arrest by: informing them of the risks; providing accurate resources; limiting the possibility of conviction by not broadcasting conditions imposed by police; and creating a culture of security around communications and data storage.

These are not ideological subjectivities prejudiced by a culture of hostility to the police. They are wisdoms derived from years of experience supporting those participating in direct action and relating to the police in that context.

For XR to succeed on their own terms, they need the trust of participants as well as dedicating resource to the safety of individuals and the movement.

This Author

Chris Saltmarsh is co-founder of Labour for a Green New Deal and co-director of climate change campaigns at People & Planet. He tweets at @chris_saltmarsh.

Police have made 10 arrests after environmental campaigners attempted to block access to BP’s offices by locking themselves in containers.

Greenpeace volunteers were due to spend a week locked inside the reinforced boxes as part of protests over the oil giant’s lack of action on climate change.

Protesters arrived at the company’s offices in St James’ Square, central London, at around 3am on Monday to set up the container blockade.

Business

Scotland Yard said officers were called to the scene shortly after 4am following a report of protesters scaling a building.

Activists were warned they were trespassing and risked arrest under the Public Order Act. Ten people were arrested for aggravated trespass and all remain in custody, police said.

Officers made the final arrests at about 7.40pm and are maintaining a presence at the scene, despite no protesters remaining.

Campaigners are demanding that BP immediately ends all exploration for new oil and gas and switches to investing only in renewable energy.

If it does not, Greenpeace is calling for it to wind down its operations completely and go out of business.

Excuses

Greenpeace climate campaigner Mel Evans said: “The police are right to treat the area like a crime scene. But the real crime is not what our volunteers are doing but what they’re trying to stop.

“Oil giants like BP are fuelling a climate emergency that’s threatening the lives of millions of people.

“Business as usual means mass extinction, massive economic damage, and a barely habitable planet. It’s simply not an option.”

Ms Evans said BP was “running out of excuses” and would be met by “opposition wherever they go”.

Morten Thaysen, 31, warned BP that Greenpeace activists would be in Aberdeen on Tuesday with other environmental groups for the start of the company’s annual general meeting.

Abseiled

He told the Press Association: “I think it has dawned on a lot of us that this isn’t something that will only affect the next generation, it is affecting us now.

“It is taking politicians a long time to respond to our climate emergency because of companies like this. BP has spent millions lobbying against the exact climate action that we need.

“It’s all about greed and making as much money as possible. And whether we have a liveable planet in the next 10 years does not matter to them.”

Each container at the protest had enough space for two activists who would have nothing but a week’s worth of supplies and access to Netflix to while away the time inside.

Discussion

Earlier on Monday, other Greenpeace volunteers abseiled off the building to unfurl a banner reading “Climate Emergency”.

BP staff were sent home while police officers cordoned off roads leading to St James’ Square, allowing access only to people working in neighbouring buildings. Road closures have now been lifted, Scotland Yard said.

According to Greenpeace research, BP is outspending other oil giants on lobbying campaigns against climate action and spent £12.6 billion adding to its oil and gas reserves in 2018.

Greenpeace said only £392 million was invested in alternatives to fossil fuels. A spokesperson for BP said: “We welcome discussion.”

This Author

Tess de la Mare is a reporter for the Press Association.

Legal advice group Green and Black Cross (GBC) has taken the unprecedented step of making a public statement raising a series of legal and security concerns around Extinction Rebellion (XR).

The statement was published just days after the organisation, which provides legal support and solidarity to those involved in protest activity, entered a three month recuperation period.

The main take-away is that GBC have said that they are no longer willing to continue the work of supporting XR. They had done this through help, advice and training; legal observing; and back office support.

Policing

GBC concludes with a list of asks for XR to enact going forward. GBC’s reasons for concern cover three areas: XR’s use of legal observers; the safety of participants, particularly regarding arrests; and security in the organisation.

Legal observers “provide basic legal guidance and are independent witnesses of police behaviour at protests”. GBC says that XR’s legal observers are poorly trained and do not remain independent on actions.

Other concerns include that participants are put at heightened risk of prosecution when details of conditions imposed on actions are shared on social media, and that misleading information is provided to those risking arrest.

Regarding security, GBC says that personal data is inadequately stored and communication channels used for legal observers allow for the police to access that information.

GBC’s statement comes in the context of an ocean of think-pieces and statements commenting on XR’s politics, strategy and attitude to policing. Those that have come before have been invaluable.

Legal observers

GBC’s should be take particularly seriously. There contribution is about assuring the safety of individuals taking part in XR as well as the movement as a whole.

GBC is a rare example of institutional memory and expertise on the often transient horizontalist environmental left. Its advice should be understood as coming out of that unrivalled experience around protest law and security, rather than yet another ideological or strategic dispute.

XR’s relationship to traditional environmentalism and the left is complex. This has made a productive dialogue challenging. XR explicitly rejects much of the politics, strategy and framings of traditional environmentalism.

On the other hand, it superficially draws on some practices relating to direct-action, while stripping back the underlying politics and divorcing practices from their context.

This has led to contradictions which result in very real in issues around safety. The case of legal observers is among the most pertinent examples of this.

Insignia

XR has adopted the use of legal observers in their actions, but dispute the analysis of the police which foreground their necessity.

Roger Hallam, co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, explains in his booklet Common Sense for the 21st Century XR’s divergent attitude to policing.

He criticises an attitude that “the police are nasty for ideological reasons x and y” which leads to movements finding it “difficult to accept the police can be cooperative in a particular set of circumstances.”

His proposal is that XR activists “[treat police] consistently in a polite way when we are arrested and at the police stations” and build trust “through having regular meetings”.

Out of this attitude, XR has diluted the independence of legal observers. They often wear XR insignia or pass on information from police to protestors.

Firstly, this undermines the legitimacy of their evidence if presented in court. This could be the difference between a conviction or not.

Secondly, this negatively impacts legal observers across the movement. Their role as independent witnesses is undermined for the entire movement that relies on them for impartial evidence if they are considered as ‘part of the protest’. 

Security culture

In his booklet, Hallam is astutely critical of cultural tendencies within green and left movements which limit for building mass politics.

He argues: “Activist routines are off-putting – hand signals which are not explained, […] and new age or academic (radical left) language.”

Although he doesn’t explicitly make this link, inferring the security culture of much of the environmental left as being implicated in these limitations would be reasonable.

Security culture is largely a response to the systematic infiltration of protest movements by the police in past decades, as well as the often legally risky nature of direct action.

This culture often manifests in using secure channels of communication, such as Signal or encrypted email; vetting activists before they can fully participate in actions or organising; and informal hierarchies where key decisions are made between activists with strong affinity, behind the veneer of open consensus meetings. Rejecting this exclusivity is core to XR’s successful mobilisation model.

Conviction

Connor Woodman’s history of infiltration and the movement proposes an alternative response based on building mass politics which makes infiltration redundant.

This is preferable both to “small, isolated affinity groups” and XR’s approach of rejecting any critical analysis of the policing of protest. However, as long as arrest is being seriously risked, precautionary measures must be retained to mitigate risk of conviction.

Hallam writes: “It’s not about creating a comfort zone but about getting on with the critical work that needs to be done – it’s not going to be easy.”

He’s right. Security culture shouldn’t be about reinforcing a comfort zone to the exclusion of mass participation. But XR’s strategy is contingent on making participants vulnerable to the force of the state.

Eschewing measures to reduce the chance of conviction is irresponsible in this context. The safety and health of individuals and the movement as a whole should be paramount.

GBC’s asks

XR should take GBC’s recommendations on board in full. They include training legal observers sufficiently and treating them fairly with coordinated check ins, appropriate and verified legal guidance and buddying co-ordination.

GBC asks that XR maximises the safety of those seeking arrest by: informing them of the risks; providing accurate resources; limiting the possibility of conviction by not broadcasting conditions imposed by police; and creating a culture of security around communications and data storage.

These are not ideological subjectivities prejudiced by a culture of hostility to the police. They are wisdoms derived from years of experience supporting those participating in direct action and relating to the police in that context.

For XR to succeed on their own terms, they need the trust of participants as well as dedicating resource to the safety of individuals and the movement.

This Author

Chris Saltmarsh is co-founder of Labour for a Green New Deal and co-director of climate change campaigns at People & Planet. He tweets at @chris_saltmarsh.

Legal advice group Green and Black Cross (GBC) has taken the unprecedented step of making a public statement raising a series of legal and security concerns around Extinction Rebellion (XR).

The statement was published just days after the organisation, which provides legal support and solidarity to those involved in protest activity, entered a three month recuperation period.

The main take-away is that GBC have said that they are no longer willing to continue the work of supporting XR. They had done this through help, advice and training; legal observing; and back office support.

Policing

GBC concludes with a list of asks for XR to enact going forward. GBC’s reasons for concern cover three areas: XR’s use of legal observers; the safety of participants, particularly regarding arrests; and security in the organisation.

Legal observers “provide basic legal guidance and are independent witnesses of police behaviour at protests”. GBC says that XR’s legal observers are poorly trained and do not remain independent on actions.

Other concerns include that participants are put at heightened risk of prosecution when details of conditions imposed on actions are shared on social media, and that misleading information is provided to those risking arrest.

Regarding security, GBC says that personal data is inadequately stored and communication channels used for legal observers allow for the police to access that information.

GBC’s statement comes in the context of an ocean of think-pieces and statements commenting on XR’s politics, strategy and attitude to policing. Those that have come before have been invaluable.

Legal observers

GBC’s should be take particularly seriously. There contribution is about assuring the safety of individuals taking part in XR as well as the movement as a whole.

GBC is a rare example of institutional memory and expertise on the often transient horizontalist environmental left. Its advice should be understood as coming out of that unrivalled experience around protest law and security, rather than yet another ideological or strategic dispute.

XR’s relationship to traditional environmentalism and the left is complex. This has made a productive dialogue challenging. XR explicitly rejects much of the politics, strategy and framings of traditional environmentalism.

On the other hand, it superficially draws on some practices relating to direct-action, while stripping back the underlying politics and divorcing practices from their context.

This has led to contradictions which result in very real in issues around safety. The case of legal observers is among the most pertinent examples of this.

Insignia

XR has adopted the use of legal observers in their actions, but dispute the analysis of the police which foreground their necessity.

Roger Hallam, co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, explains in his booklet Common Sense for the 21st Century XR’s divergent attitude to policing.

He criticises an attitude that “the police are nasty for ideological reasons x and y” which leads to movements finding it “difficult to accept the police can be cooperative in a particular set of circumstances.”

His proposal is that XR activists “[treat police] consistently in a polite way when we are arrested and at the police stations” and build trust “through having regular meetings”.

Out of this attitude, XR has diluted the independence of legal observers. They often wear XR insignia or pass on information from police to protestors.

Firstly, this undermines the legitimacy of their evidence if presented in court. This could be the difference between a conviction or not.

Secondly, this negatively impacts legal observers across the movement. Their role as independent witnesses is undermined for the entire movement that relies on them for impartial evidence if they are considered as ‘part of the protest’. 

Security culture

In his booklet, Hallam is astutely critical of cultural tendencies within green and left movements which limit for building mass politics.

He argues: “Activist routines are off-putting – hand signals which are not explained, […] and new age or academic (radical left) language.”

Although he doesn’t explicitly make this link, inferring the security culture of much of the environmental left as being implicated in these limitations would be reasonable.

Security culture is largely a response to the systematic infiltration of protest movements by the police in past decades, as well as the often legally risky nature of direct action.

This culture often manifests in using secure channels of communication, such as Signal or encrypted email; vetting activists before they can fully participate in actions or organising; and informal hierarchies where key decisions are made between activists with strong affinity, behind the veneer of open consensus meetings. Rejecting this exclusivity is core to XR’s successful mobilisation model.

Conviction

Connor Woodman’s history of infiltration and the movement proposes an alternative response based on building mass politics which makes infiltration redundant.

This is preferable both to “small, isolated affinity groups” and XR’s approach of rejecting any critical analysis of the policing of protest. However, as long as arrest is being seriously risked, precautionary measures must be retained to mitigate risk of conviction.

Hallam writes: “It’s not about creating a comfort zone but about getting on with the critical work that needs to be done – it’s not going to be easy.”

He’s right. Security culture shouldn’t be about reinforcing a comfort zone to the exclusion of mass participation. But XR’s strategy is contingent on making participants vulnerable to the force of the state.

Eschewing measures to reduce the chance of conviction is irresponsible in this context. The safety and health of individuals and the movement as a whole should be paramount.

GBC’s asks

XR should take GBC’s recommendations on board in full. They include training legal observers sufficiently and treating them fairly with coordinated check ins, appropriate and verified legal guidance and buddying co-ordination.

GBC asks that XR maximises the safety of those seeking arrest by: informing them of the risks; providing accurate resources; limiting the possibility of conviction by not broadcasting conditions imposed by police; and creating a culture of security around communications and data storage.

These are not ideological subjectivities prejudiced by a culture of hostility to the police. They are wisdoms derived from years of experience supporting those participating in direct action and relating to the police in that context.

For XR to succeed on their own terms, they need the trust of participants as well as dedicating resource to the safety of individuals and the movement.

This Author

Chris Saltmarsh is co-founder of Labour for a Green New Deal and co-director of climate change campaigns at People & Planet. He tweets at @chris_saltmarsh.

Environmental activists have blocked access to BP’s headquarters ahead of its annual general meeting demanding it ends all exploration for new oil and gas.

Greenpeace volunteers arrived at the oil giant’s offices in St James’ Square, central London, at around 3am on Monday where they encased themselves in specially designed containers.

The containers, which weigh several tonnes each, are being used to blockade all the main entrances to prevent staff from entering.

Business as usual

The boxes feature photos from photographer Gideon Mendel’s Drowning World project, which looks at the impact of the climate emergency on people across the globe.

The campaigners are demanding that BP immediately ends all exploration for new oil and gas and switches to investing only in renewable energy. If it does not, Greenpeace is calling for it to wind down its operations completely and go out of business.

The blockade comes ahead of BP’s AGM with shareholders this week, and volunteers have set up a camp to attempt to keep the building closed for the next seven days.

A spokesman for Greenpeace said that by 8am police had attempted to clear the area of pedestrians but had not made any arrests.

Paul Morozzo, one of the volunteers in the containers, said: “We’re shutting down BP’s HQ because business as usual is just not an option.

Fossil fuels

“BP is fuelling a climate emergency that threatens millions of lives and the future of the living world. The science is clear – we must stop searching for new oil and gas if we want a liveable planet. BP must clean up or clear out.”

Mr Morozzo added: “For too long, BP and the oil industry have paid lip service to climate action while lying and lobbying against it behind the scenes and spending billions scouring the world for more oil and gas.

“The reality is that BP’s whole business plan is a heavy bet against our hopes to avoid a climate catastrophe and must change.”

According to Greenpeace’s research, BP is outspending other oil giants on lobbying campaigns against climate action and spent 16 billion US dollars (£12.6 billion) adding to its oil and gas reserves in 2018.

Greenpeace said only 500 million dollars (£392.8) was invested in alternatives to fossil fuels.

This Author

Tess de la Mare is a reporter for the Press Association.

Katharine Hayhoe, a prominent Canadian climate researcher and political science professor, based in Texas, argues that the crux of winning people over on climate change is not so much about battling with climate science deniers as it is about overcoming a wide aversion to perceived solutions.

Hayhoe announced on her UK tour last week: ““Frankly I don’t care if we all agree on the science!”

Her team’s research suggests that people reject or fail to act on the science of climate change because they misunderstand the extent of the impact that climate change itself, and the solutions, will have on their lives. 

Solution aversion

Hayhoe told a Bristol audience last Friday that she’s stopped caring whether people believe the science or not. Instead, she encouraged people to move away from believing the solutions consist of things that are “unpalatable and unpleasant.”

Crucially, what matters is showing everyone that they can be part of the solution and that the necessary changes will improve their lives.

Giving a speech at the Cabot Institute, Hayhoe highlighted how she thinks we should be tackling social attitudes and how to move away from endlessly attempting to explain the science to people who don’t want to listen and instead look at achieving action and beneficial solutions that people will welcome, regardless of beliefs. 

She highlighted interesting social research on climate change denial, and how rejecting the problem of climate change comes down to peculiar demographic factors, a fear of the unknown and a problem of ‘solution aversion.’  

She listed examples of frequent but extreme accusations that she is confronted with by deniers and those resistant to moving away from fossil fuel driven economies: “We are told that solving climate change will destroy the economy and let the communists and socialists run the world. Worst case scenario: that the United Nations is led by the Anti Christ! That’s not a joke – I get emails that literally say that!”

Threat meter

Hayhoe continued: “We are told that tackling climate breakdown will allow China to destroy the United States’ technological capacity and leadership, which frankly they are already doing in the clean energy sector. 

“We are told these things and we are also told we can only fix climate breakdown if we stop having any children, if we never travel again, if we all go vegan, and a whole host of things which, for many people, are not acceptable. 

“Our threat meter is unbalanced, we feel that the impacts don’t matter, but the solutions pose an imminent threat. And that is what drives our rejection of the problem.”

Hayhoe also quoted research from the 2018 US National Assessment on Climate Change, which showed strong positive correlations between areas of global poverty and the worst predicted climate change impacts.

However there appeared to be a low level of belief among those in countries with lower predicted impacts that they would be personally affected. 

Science literacy 

In a separate study carried out in 2018 on British social attitudes to climate change, whilst around 90 percent of people responding to research questions said they believed climate change was happening, less than 40 percent believed it was caused by humans, and less than 30 percent said they were worried about it, Hayhoe revealed.

And it’s not about level of education. Hayhoe’s team found that apathy over climate change is often surprisingly and wrongly attributed to education level: “We conducted a study to test this account and found no support for it.

“Members of the public with the highest degrees of science literacy were not the most concerned about climate change. Rather they were the ones among whom cultural polarization was greatest.”

In contrast to those perceptions, Hayhoe said: “Climate change isn’t a distant issue any more. It’s affecting every single one of us, in every part of the US, across almost every sector.’’

“Frankly I don’t care if we agree on the science, at this point, as long as we can agree on the solutions, and agree that clean energy is good, it helps our economy, it improves energy, it cleans up our air pollution, it doesn’t use any water – which is a very important issue in Texas where I live – and it brings home the cheque.”

Dangerous myths

Hayhoe added: “And studies have shown that when people are actually invested in a part of the solution then all of a sudden the science isn’t such a big deal any more. In fact they might even be willing to agree with it because they are part of the solution already.

“I don’t think changing people’s mind about the science is nearly as effective as changing people’s minds about the solutions – explaining the positive, beneficial outcomes. The biggest thing I learned from the US National Climate Assessment process is how we interact with information.”

Katharine noted that in Texas, where she works as a climate researcher at Texas Tech University, a large number of people still don’t believe climate change is caused by humans, despite an increase in the intensity of extreme weather events, but they are nevertheless more receptive to hearing how solutions will improve their lives:

“Where I live is already naturally most at risk because we get pretty much everything – ice storms, blizzards, hail, severe thunderstorms, dust storms, tornadoes, hurricanes, drought, heatwaves, floods!” 

Showing social research evidence from the Assessment, she pointed out: “The most dangerous myth we’ve bought into is that climate change is a distant issue, only affecting future generations and places that are far away:

“Climate change is not a distant issue for the US any more, but is now affecting virtually all US citizens in some way, across almost every sector.”

This Author 

Alex Morss is a freelance ecologist, writer, editor and educator and one of Avon Wildlife Trust’s Wildlife Champions.

Image: Katharine Hayhoe. 

Many species of bees are on the brink of extinction in parts of the UK with some types lost entirely, a report has found.

Climate change, habitat loss, pollution and disease are revealed to be threatening the pollinators following research at centres in the east of England.

It concluded that 17 species were regionally extinct – including the Great Yellow Bumblebee, the Potter Flower Bee and the Cliff Mason Bee – with 25 types threatened and another 31 of conservation concern.

Biodiversity

Published today on World Bee Day, The Bees Under Siege report by WWF and Buglife analysed data recorded for 228 species of bees. The pollinating services of the insect are worth £690 million per year to the UK economy.

An important region for agriculture, the research centres were in Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Essex, Hertforshire, Norfolk and Suffolk – all home to nationally and internationally significant pollinating populations.

The report recommends a number of conservation actions to help stabilise populations of bees and reverse declines.

– Ensure that coastal management plans protect coastal habitats and promote the management of sea walls

– Safeguard wildlife-rich brownfield sites and promote beneficial management

– Identify opportunities to connect disjointed habitat fragments and promote coordinated management between landowners and landholdings

-Local Authorities can work with and support local communities in urban areas to restore and create new habitats

– Ongoing survey and monitoring of bee populations

– Maintain and increase awareness, advice, support and funding for practical delivery projects.

The report also called on the upcoming Westminster Environment Act to be “ambitious enough” to develop a nature recovery network for bees.

It comes as a report by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) revealed an alarming loss of biodiversity.

Landscape

Tanya Steele, chief executive at WWF, said: “The UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world and the fact that our precious pollinators are in peril is a sad illustration of the dramatic decline in wildlife we’re seeing all around us.

“We desperately need targeted action if we’re going to bring under-pressure wildlife back from the brink.

“The upcoming Environment Act gives us a golden opportunity to restore our natural world – we need to ensure it’s ambitious enough to do that.”

Matt Shardlow, chief executive at Buglife, said: “Our study found that many of the rarer, more specialist bees are battling to keep up with the changing face of their landscape and increasingly hot weather.

Habitats

“Although a few species have expanded their populations and range, more species are in decline, 17 species are already extinct in the region and another six species are now so endangered they are only known to survive on single sites – this is a very unhealthy picture.”

A Defra spokesman said: “We are working hard to support our bees and other pollinators – as these species are essential for pollinating crops and in turn human survival.

“Through our 25 Year Environment Plan, we have already committed to developing a Nature Recovery Network to protect and restore wildlife, and our Biodiversity and National Pollinator strategies have helped to create over 130,000 hectares of wildlife-rich habitat.

“Furthermore the Bees Needs campaign brings together conservation groups, farmers, beekeepers to promote good practical advice so we can all do more to provide suitable habitats for bees and other insects.”

This Author

Emma Bowden is a reporter for the Press Association.

Captive cetaceans wake up every day living without their families, confined to small concrete tanks, and forced to perform for human entertainment.

Within these conditions they face issues such as isolation, harmful chemicals, and dorsal fin collapse all leading to an eventual early grave. 

Wild and Free Beings hopes to combat this cruelty. Our recent launch outside Manchester Town Hall saw people from across the North West unify with an aim to spread an understanding of the struggles faced by animals in marine entertainment centres across the world. 

Cetaceans

Attendees were encouraged to promote the organisation’s three simple founding values: a world where every cetacean has freedom; inspiring people from all around the world to understand the reality of captivity; putting an end to cetacean captivity through education and awareness.

Cetaceans are a family group of aquatic mammals made up of whales, dolphins, and porpoises. Within this group are around 90 species that can be divided into two groups; baleen whales and toothed whales. 

When most large whales open their mouths, you can see comb like bristles called baleen plates that hang from the upper jaw. This is allows them to filter-feed, meaning, when a whale has caught prey and water in their mouth the water then pours out, but the baleen filters out the prey for the whale to swallow.

Blue, humpback, gray, and right whales are just some that are included in this group of Baleen Whales.

The majority of whales and dolphins belong in the toothed category. They feed on prey in a similar manner to most carnivores. These include the dolphins, the porpoises, the beluga and narwhal

Choice

We believe in freedom, and beyond that choice. All living things should have the opportunity to choose the course of their lives.

Whilst the capacity to do this differs between different animals, with different levels of intelligence, their opportunity for choice shouldn’t be taken away simply to provide entertainment to humans. 

Just like humans, cetaceans are family orientated, maintaining lifelong bonds with their pod. Marine parks break these bonds firstly by stealing animals away from their families in the wild, and secondly, stripping offspring away from their mothers in captivity for financial development in other parks.

Taking a child from a mother, as within humans, can have a serious affect on the wellbeing of a Cetacean. Depression as a result of this can be common within Cetaceans in captivity. 

These feelings are often heightened by the conditions the animals are kept in. In the wild, cetaceans can swim up to 140 miles per day. In captivity, they would have to swim more than 1,400 times around their tanks to travel as far as they would in the wild.

Unnatural conditions

Their pools are often completely covered and tiny. In total darkness and isolation, the creatures develop fear, stress, and mental illness. 

In the same way environment can have drastic impact on the development and lifestyle of a human, Cetacean development can be severely hindered through these unnatural conditions. 

In the wild, an Orca can live up to 80 – 90 years old. In captivity, 92 percent of orcas die before the age of 25.

Dolphins living in the wild can live for at least 40 years, however in captivity, statistics show the average lifespan of a captive Bottlenose dolphin is a mere 5 years.

This difference in lifespan seems, to us, an unacceptable cost to justify captive entertainment from Cetaceans. 

How?

Wild and Free Beings was born from passion for seeing freedom for creatures unable to voice their own concerns.

Whilst this is also true for many other animals and people across the world, currently our impact can be maximised through focused campaigning for this group of animals for whom we have great love.

Our journey has recently begun, having launched recently with an event raising awareness of this issue. We don’t, however, plan to stop there. 

We plan to continue this work and inspire a new generation with a love for these creatures, drawing on the founder’s passion for music and creative arts. She plans to combine our cause with her skills from a degree in Musical Performance from the prestigious Royal Northern College of Music and a wealth of experience and contacts within the music industry. 

Music is a powerful tool. We have written a range of songs designed to highlight issues in an accessible and engaging way, the first snippet of which can be heard on the highlights video from our recent event in Manchester.

Change 

Alongside this we are developing school workshops and lessons. These will incorporate the music in an effort to inspire the next generation, raising their awareness of issues around animal welfare. 

Erica Memphis, founder of Wild and Free Beings, said: “Through engaging and interesting approaches, we believe we can help educate the public about the fascinating creatures of the sea and why keeping them in tiny concrete tanks is wrong.

“The time for captive animal entertainment is over. We now step into a time of freedom. Together, we can put an end to their suffering.”

It takes time to bring change. Hard work, commitment, and a great deal of nerve are needed to stand by what you believe.

Though change won’t come quickly, in time, the importance of looking after these creatures will be widely acknowledged. Until then we will continue to step out into change, in whichever way we are able. 

Get involved 

We’d love your support and to hear what you think.

If you’d like to find out more about us, sign up to our mailing list, or get in touch visit our website or connect on Facebook or instagram.

This Author 

Peter Bonnebaigt is operations manager  at Wild and Free Beings. He draws on a wealth of experience managing and growing businesses, events, and campaigns across the world.

Forest Europe, European health and wellbeing experts, have been reviewing evidence on the benefits of spending time in forests. 

The experts say that just two or three short visits a week can dramatically improve mental health.

In response, Forestry England & television presenter Kate Humble are encouraging people to visit the nation’s forests during mental health week (13 – 19 May) to enjoy the natural health benefits they provide.

Health benefits

Over half the population lives within six miles of a Forestry England woodland or forest and as part of their centenary in 2019, Forestry England is encouraging people to explore the nation’s forests.

There is strong scientific evidence that visiting a forest can improve your mood, your attention span, and even enhance psychological stress recovery.

Walking among trees can reduce levels of cortisol, the stress hormone, while improving mood and lowering anxiety. It also boosts the immune system from breathing in phytoncides, which trees emit to protect themselves from germs and insects.

Kate Humble, TV Presenter said: “Walking for me is a form of mediation, and the simple act of putting one foot in front of another has extraordinary benefits to my mental wellbeing. It helps me feel relaxed, less anxious and more creative.

“Walks enjoyed in the nation’s forests can be particularly special. I love to follow trails through the trees where with every step you can enjoy the sounds, sights and smells of nature.” 

Restorative environments

Humble continued: “Never knowing what wildlife is going to appear on my pathway makes me excited! There is something so simple about walking but the benefits are huge.”

Liz O’Brien, Forest Research continued: “Woodlands can be restorative environments. If you visit the forest now in spring, your senses can be stimulated by the sight of bluebells, the smell of blossom, the sound of the wind blowing through the trees and the touch of wood.

“These sensory benefits are an important part of a woodland visit and can have a positive effect on your wellbeing.”

The nation’s forests have been encouraging people to visit since 1963 to benefit their health and well-being when Dame Silvia Crowe was appointed as their first landscape architect.

Bridgette Hall, Forestry England’s Head of Recreation said: “We plan our forests to benefit people, as well as wildlife and the supply of sustainable timber. They are so important for our well-being and we know that simply spending time in them can boost our mental health.”

Seeking adventure

Hall continued: “We work with lots of businesses and partners to make it an easy choice for visitors to come.

“Forests are places where you can play, seek adventure or find escape to take care of yourself.  For 100 years we have been taking care of your forests, so that they can now take care of you.”

The nation’s forests are so much more than just rural landscapes. With over 1,500 forests across the country, there are limitless ways for you to find your connection and enhance your wellbeing. To find out what your forest can do for you forest, visit the website. 

The Forestry Commission is marking its centenary in 2019 by inspiring people to visit its forests and woodlands, to help protect them for generations to come.

The centenary year includes the largest ever survey of forest wildlife, new works by sculptor Rachel Whiteread and poet laureate Carol Ann Duffy, a show garden at RHS Chelsea Flower Show and commemorative tree avenues planted to celebrate 100 years of forestry.

This Article 

This article is based on a press release from Forestry England. 

The Green and Black Cross has announced that it will no longer work with climate change activists Extinction Rebellion (XR) – saying that its core group had frequently ignored advice on legal issues.

Green and Black Cross (GBC) provides training about the law governing protests to those taking part, and coordinates legal observers who collect an independent set of evidence to be used by those arrested during direct action.

However, it is no longer willing to carry out such work with XR, according to a statement on the organisation’s website.  

Police

This states: “We do not usually make public statements because of the sensitive nature of our work, and because our role is to support people at risk of police and state violence, not to be involved in discussions around how people are engaging in activism.

“In this instance however, we have serious concerns about the safety of both legal observers and of those taking part in actions associated with Extinction Rebellion (XR), based on how XR’s core working groups have been dealing with legal and security aspects of their activity.”

It claims XR has provided inadequate and inconsistent training to legal observers; that these legal observers are not independent.

Further, it warned that the way XR stores personal data is inadequately secure – for example, in Google documents – so that it can be accessed by police and that the communication channels it uses – such as Whatsapp and Facebook messenger groups – are also not secure.

Democratic

The organisation also says that information published by XR for activists who have been arrested is misleading and inaccurate, meaning that people do not fully understand the risks that they are being asked to take.

The GBC says that it has raised its concerns with XR. Although XR acted on the advice in some cases, the organisation added that the boundaries it set were often pushed back, and “many times our advice was simply ignored if it did not align with XR’s aims and values”.

The organisation will not support XR “until a culture of solidarity, democratic accountability and security develops within the organisation”, it said. It will continue to support those arrested in XR action to date, it added.

XR did not respond to a request for comment on the allegations.

This Author

Catherine Early is a freelance environmental journalist and chief reporter for the Ecologist. She can be found tweeting at @Cat_Early76.