The British Government (who else!) is spearheading a move to roll out biodiversity offsetting throughout the world. It has just hosted in London “the first global conference” on it (called“To No Net Loss of Biodiversity and Beyond”). At the same time those opposed to the concept have held a counter-conference of their own called “Nature is not for sale -the 2nd Forum on Natural Commons” in Regent’s Park right opposite the Government’s one. In their own words their belief is that “biodiversity offsetting ignores the difficulties in recreating ecosystems, it overlooks the uniqueness of different habitats, and it disregards the importance of nature for local communities. Once a harmful development project goes ahead, communities lose access to it forever.”
But has this relevance to heritage? It must have, for often enough if you rip up fields or forests to build houses you also destroy heritage features and knowledge, things that can’t be “offset” for once they’re gone they’re gone. On that basis it follows that archaeologists should be involved in many of the anti-biodiversity offsetting battles which the “nature lobby” is currently fighting. As well as the “Nature is not for Sale” forum perhaps there should have been a “Heritage is not for Sale” forum.
So it was pleasing to see one recent instance of archaeologists joining with the nature lobby – The CBA is supporting the Woodland Trust’s campaign to exclude ancient woodland from biodiversity off-setting schemes. The original biodiversity offsetting green paper indicated that some habitats (including ancient woodland) are irreplaceable and should be excluded from the scheme. However recent comments from (who else!) Environment Minister Owen Paterson suggest that this advice has so far been ignored. The Woodland Trust calculates there are at least 380 Ancient Woodland sites across the UK currently under threat from development – and it is inevitable that archaeology will be threatened at many of them. It will be interesting to hear Mr Paterson explanation of how the irreplaceable can be replaced!

The Paterwock: “Relax, our favoured lobbyists will plant the ancient trees elsewhere and as for the archaeology, none of it will be lost as it will all be offset by record….
7 comments
Comments feed for this article
06/06/2014 at 11:48
Diana Baur
If this government can bring in laws to allow franking under our houses it can require developers to build on all brownfield sites before any consideration is given to building anywhere on sensitive sites – if indeed that would prove necessary at all ever . I would also suggest that Paterwocky has a compulsory brain transplant or steps down
06/06/2014 at 13:50
Diana Baur
Predictive text is unable to deal with the word fracking
06/06/2014 at 14:21
heritageaction
We’ll do it for you for a fee.
06/06/2014 at 15:05
lanceleuven
Is there any part of this country that the Tories aren’t willing to tear up and sell of for profit?
06/06/2014 at 17:31
calmgrove
The Thatcherites certainly did it, and we called it by what it was: selling off the family silver.
09/06/2014 at 15:10
ntcomms
It is good to see you are worried about our ‘irreplaceable’ environmental and heritage assets. Our ‘Places’ blog (ntplaces.com) focuses on a lot of this unnecessary destruction, especially in the wake of HS2!
14/01/2015 at 13:15
kirunya
Reblogged this on Biodiversity Offsets Blog.