Book Review: Nature conservation in Britain: the formative years

Abstract

In this ‘history from the inside’ John Sheail returns, triumphantly, to the subject of his earlier book Nature in trust, published in 1976. In the intervening years much has changed. Nature conservation itself has achieved greater national prominence. Institutions, public and private, with a concern for nature conservation have been remodelled and renamed. The county wildlife trusts have established many more nature reserves. Knowledge about the requirements of individual species and of the management of nature reserves has improved. Concern over the aspects of efficient agricultural techniques has converted the land use planner’s ‘white land’ into the conservationist’s ‘wider countryside’. Notwithstanding these changes, much remains the same. The effectiveness of designations such as Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and National Nature Reserve (NNR) are still questioned. Most practical nature conservation remains a voluntary activity undertaken by farmers and landowners as an ancillary to farm and game management. Organizations such as English Nature demand greater funds to carry out research, manage nature reserves and publicize the cause of nature. This book charts the vicissitudes of organized nature conservation through most of the twentieth century. It is effectively an institutional history of the Nature Conservancy and of the Nature Conservancy Council which succeeded it. The great strength of the book is its grounding in the archives. Although the broad pattern of the history of British nature conservation is well known, not least from John Sheail’s other books, his use of archive sources and oral history allow him to rediscover forgotten episodes and throw light on key developments. He recovers, for example, the considerable hostility shown by many to the establishment of the Conservancy and the important role of Herbert Morrison in enabling its joint role as an agency and research council. He also identifies some unsung heroes, such as Lord Hailsham and the civil servant Roger Quirk, who both gave considerable support to the Conservancy in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Sheail’s analysis of committee minutes and papers shows how different definitions of ‘nature’, ‘science’ and ‘research’ were used to support and attack the Conservancy. The new organization had to distinguish itself from those amateurs with a mere fascination for wildlife in order to obtain funding under the banner of science. Miriam Rothschild noted in an editorial of Nature in 1946 that ‘the word “nature” had come to be associated in the public mind with “a somewhat childish and eccentric form of botanising, bird-loving and butterflyhunting”. If the more fashionable word “science” could replace it, there might be much better respect . . . for nature conservation’ (p. 24). This tension between a scientific understanding of nature and an amateur fascination remains powerful through the period. Landowning conservatives such as Lord Salisbury, the President of Council with responsibility for the Conservancy in the early 1950s, were concerned that its work was ‘natural history’ and not science. The treasury minister John Boyd-Carpenter, looking to cut government expenditure in 1953, saw the Conservancy as a ‘sort of advanced form of nature study’ 484 Book reviews