http://www.countryside.wales.gov.uk/fe/master.asp?n1=3D366&n2=
=3D529
Organic Centre Wales (OC=
W) was
established in 2000 as a focal point for the dissemination of information on
organic food and farming to producers and other interested parties in
O=
rganic
Centre Wales is grateful that it has had the opportunity to participate in
workshops pre and post publication of the consultation document. Some of the following points were =
also
contributed at the recent workshops.
Our primary comment concerns the lack of mention of or= ganic farming anywhere in the document – not even in the various sections on agriculture and agri-environment schemes.&= nbsp;
The Welsh Assembly Government is investing in supporti= ng organic farmers because of their environmental contribution; this contribut= ion, and the integrated nature of it, should be recognised in the strategy.
Organic farming has contributions to make in many aspe= cts of the objectives, and these will be identified in the following pages.
Agriculture plays a major role in the global fluxes of= each of the greenhouse cases, but organic systems have been found to have around half the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of conventional agriculture (Philip Robertson,= Paul et al. 2000) [ In a 10-year trial of annual cropp= ing in the U.S., organic-based systems sequestered C, but despite lower than conventional CO2 costs of N fertiliser and lime inputs in the sy= stem this was insufficient to offset the impact of N2O production.]
In a recent paper in Nature, (Bellamy 2005) note that more than twi=
ce as
much carbon is held in soils as in vegetation or the atmosphere and changes=
in
soil carbon content can have a large effect on the global carbon budget.
Organic farming practice can make a positive contribut= ion in three ways:
1.&n= bsp; by encouraging return of organic matter to soils and building soil organic matters levels, representing carbon sequestration;
2.&n= bsp; by reducing stocking rates leading to reduced metha= ne and carbon dioxide emissions by livestock;
3.&n= bsp; by using fossil energy resources more efficiently, reducing the greenhouse gas emissions associated with their use.
CC1
Will the
actions described in the sections above enable us to deliver our key outcom=
e in
relation to reducing our contribution to climate change?
Proposed
outcome:
·=
; =
These activities will go some way to enabling delivery= of the outcome, however there are missed opportunities (see below)
CC2
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, individuals and other organisations?
We are supportive of moves to encourage procurement of=
local
food; however the lack of development and support for horticulture in
Clearly the delivery of a sustainable integrated trans=
port
system throughout A major contribution could be made if Assembly staff a=
nd all
ASPB’s were required to cost the impact of their travel not by money =
but
by carbon impact, so that air travel within the
All new public buildings should have strict energy efficiency targets, and should be sited to maximise access by rail or public transport.
Removing annual car tax and placing the price on fuel = would be a major incentive to reduce domestic car use.
CC3
What wo=
uld be
an appropriate indicator of success and how could we measure it?
Land area under organic management, net change in fore=
sted
or wooded area, soil carbon. =
It would be useful to keep a tally of ‘air miles’ by Assembly, =
ASPB
and local government staff, an ambitious target for a stepped reduction sho=
uld
be set.
CC4
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
High
This section should include the Welsh Assembly Government’s establishment and support of Organic Centre Wales, and t= he OFS agri-environment scheme.
CC5
The pre=
ceding
sections outline some of the potential impacts of climate change and indica=
te
what we may need to do to adapt.
The outcome we want to achieve is that:
Proposed
outcome:
·=
; =
Improved resilience to the impacts of climate change and
with flexible measures in place to adapt to future changes.
What ne=
eds to
be done by government, individuals and other organisations to achieve
this?
Ecosystem resilience is achieved by diversity; therefo= re there should be a strong focus on biodiversity targets, particularly provid= ing wildlife corridors to enable migration of species.
Organic farming should be encouraged to a greater exte= nt, with higher financial support so that the reliance on the market to compens= ate farmers for their management should be reduced.
F= arming Connect is mentioned in the ‘activities’, for Farming connect to deal with climate change the advisers would need to include aspects such as: changing cropping patterns (e.g. longer growing seasons and new crops), changing pest and disease priorities and risk periods, susceptibility to flooding etc. which are not currently included.
CC6
Should
certain sectors be a priority for planning climate change adaptation measur=
es?
Planning permission for housing and public buildings s= hould not be granted within flood plains – these should be managed to store= and slow water. All residents in = flood vulnerable areas should receive especial education regarding safety measure= s, but importantly also, information on ways they can mitigate climate change = and their environmental impact, particularly regarding transport.
CC7
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
Part of adaptation is the recognition of cause and effect. Therefore reduced air= and road miles targets are appropriate.
CC8
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
Medium. Awareness of the impact of climate change is necessary to stimulate change in behaviour.
We are unsu=
re that
Farming Connect advisors have engaged with climate change issues and are
building those considerations into enterprise planning.
We are particularly disappointed that there is no ment= ion of organic husbandry in this section. <= /span>
Organic farming has been shown to make a significant contribution to biodiversity in lowland areas, and is believed to be able to contribute to the preservation of high nature value farming and forestry systems, particularly through the financial advantage to be derived from specialist markets. In hill and upland systems there is still scope for debate due to the comparative lack of research in these contexts. The Organ= ic Farming Scheme (OFS) is an agri-environment scheme that has been shown to be particularly successful in delivering biodiversity benefits(Ardeshir 2003) especially when combine= d with Tir Gofal which provides support for hedgerow establishment, etc.
With respect to water, organic farming practice= s are encouraged by many water companies/authorities as a means of reducing pollu= tion of water by pesticides and fertilisers and there is clear evidence that org= anic farming can contribute to improved water quality. The Water Framework Directive ident= ifies synthetic pyrethroids as an issue and there is speculation that organic far= ming may contribute to this problem. In a survey during 2003 (McLean and Frost = 2003), organic farmers were f= ound to be less likely to use these chemicals than conventional farmers: in the survey of farmers, 134 questionnaires were returned, 61.5% of conventional farmers used treatments to prevent or treat scab, compared with only 21.5% = of organic farmers. The difference in use is likely to be due in part to the f= ocus on good health promotion, through bio-security and closed herds, and lower stocking rates and mixed grazing promoted by organic standards.
As well as sheep dip, there are environmental implicat= ions of other veterinary treatments. The environmental impact of the wide range of veterinary medicines used to treat animals in the UK was recently examined and 56 substances or groups were assigned to a ‘high priority’ risk category (Boxall, Fogg et a= l. 2003). Organic standards, to which all or= ganic farms have to adhere, prohibit the use of routine prophylactic medications = and will therefore present a lower risk of environmental impact. Of particular note are the avermec= tin-based worming treatments the use of which is restricted due to the residues left = in dung which interfere with normal breakdown of the dung.
The State of
Without targeted support, farming in the uplands of
LS1
Will the
actions described above enable us to deliver our key environmental outcome =
for
the land and the sea?
Proposed
outcome:
·=
; =
A integrated, flexible approach to the management of the
land and sea will be in place to ensure that they can support our
environmental, economic and social needs while retaining their essential
character and biodiversity
This outcome is insufficiently tangible to be able to measure progress, and expresses an aspiration rather than an outcome.
LS2
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, individuals and other organisations?
Crucial linkages need to be made between planning and environmental considerations – to ensure it is not possible to get planning permission for developments that would cause cross compliance breaches.
A more helpful target would be output based targets for indicator species.
The Environmental Strategy of Farming Connect is menti= oned in activities, but the delivery of this should be considerably strengthened= . OCW is developing an environmental benchmarking system to assist farmers assess their sustainability, and this concept could usefully be adopted by Farming Connect. (Some of the funding = for development of this project may come from Farming Connect.)
LS3
How can=
we
better understand the potential impact of different management choices and =
how
can we decide what sort of landscape and marine environment we want to achi=
eve
through management?
It would not be possible to gain any widespread agreem= ent on landscape or marine management. Part of the interest of landscape in any case is the diversity of outcomes from diverse management. There are aims relating to delivering ecosystem services such as water-holding capacity and flood prevention through sacrificial areas, carb= on sequestration, habitat provision, that can be targeted. Different management choices are therefore important and a valid aim could be to achieve diversity of management.
LS4
Do you
support our proposed aim for the marine environment?
It would be difficult not to support this utopian aim;
however we have concerns over the term ‘vibrant economies’ rela=
ting
to the promotion of tourism and related use of motor boats and jet-skis.
LS5
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
Breeding bird populations are useful indicators of the= state of the environment. Given the high proportion of agricultural land, farmland breeding birds would be useful. A good target would be to recover populatio= ns to those of 10 years ago.
LS6
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
High
The Welsh Assembly Government and WDA support of Organ= ic Centre Wales should be mentioned.
The Organic Farming Agri-environment scheme should be mentioned.
Again we are
disappointed at the lack of mention of organic farming, which is based arou=
nd
the principles of sustainable use of nutrients, soils, water. Organic
farming combines strong standards for sustainable resource use and a good
record of actual achievement with a focus on quality food production and
specialist marketing to meet consumer demand and maintain/enhance financial
viability.
RES1
Will the
actions described throughout this section enable us to deliver our key outc=
omes
for sustainable material use?
Proposed
outcomes:
·=
; =
Reduce, re-use and re-cycle is universally accepted and =
becomes
‘normal behaviour’ for government, business, industry and home =
life
·=
; =
The increase in household municipal waste has stopped and
reversed
·=
; =
Business produces well designed products that maximise
resource efficiency and reduce waste during their production, use, and end =
of
life requirements.
The main action missing from this section is an emphas= is on education.
There is also a difficult issue concerning the footpri= nt of imported goods – again this comes down to information needs. If we have very high environmental standards which in the short term increase financial costs, then consumers = may buy in goods without such environmental credentials, hence negating improvements made within our borders. This suggests support for information on home-produced items as a selling point. Again, environ= mental benchmarking would be an asset to build knowledge and awareness.
RES2
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, industry, individuals and other
organisations?
Education. A sense of responsibility needs to be engendered – this will need to co= me from the top.
More needs to be done by local authorities to encourage re-cycling of household waste, for example by kerb-side collections.
Non-renewable fuels needs to be more expensive, but the focus should shift from producing more renewables (which in a way ducks the problem) to reducing fuel usage.
RES3
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
Reduction in electricity consumption. Reduction in was=
te to
land-fill (alongside reductions in fly-tipping.) Use and publication of environment=
al
benchmarks for products from
RES4
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium, high)?
High
RES5
Will the
actions described throughout this section enable us to deliver our key outc=
omes
for water resources and water quality?
Proposed
outcomes:
·=
; =
Water resources are managed sustainably meeting the need=
s of
society without causing damage to the environment
·=
; =
Water is used more efficiently across all sectors
·=
; =
The high quality of our drinking water is maintained
·=
; =
The quality of our rivers, lakes and coastal waters is
maintained and enhanced
·=
; =
Diffuse pollution is better understood and action is bei=
ng
taken to reduce the causes of diffuse pollution
‘Sustainable management’ is not a measurab= le target. Needs are also subjective. This fi= rst outcome is not helpful at all, more an aspiration. A better outcome would be to apply= the ‘reduce, re-use, recycle’ aims – our water use should be reduced, grey water should be re-used (e.g. new buildings re-use grey water= or rain water for loo flushing, etc.), and water should be cleaned at point of= use wherever possible and appropriate through the use of natural systems such as reed beds. The current nonsen= sical system where all water is produced to drinking standards when only a very s= mall proportion is used for drinking is not sensible.
RES6
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, water companies, individuals and other
organisations?
See above. [RES5]
Agro-chemical use by agriculture should be targeted wi= th further resources into educating farmers of the environmental implications = of their use, and support to improve husbandry so that resorting to medication= s is reduced, for example by organic farming practices.
RES7
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
See above [RES 5]
RES8
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
Different aspects have a different priority. Our water use patterns are likely = to change with climate changes. = We should put in place improvements in water-use in building soon, but the dif= fuse pollution issue is difficult to prioritise until we have better data.
RES9
Will the
actions described throughout this section enable us to deliver our key outc=
omes
for soils?
Propose=
d outcomes:
·=
; =
Soil resources are better understood and managed sustain=
ably
through the adoption of good land management practices
·=
; =
The extent of soil contamination is better understood and
actions are being taken to remediate contaminated land for beneficial use
The Actions listed as Farming Connect and Tir Gofal an= d Tir Cynnal are insufficiently strong to have an impact on the first aim. Greater adoption of organic farmin= g practices and take-up of the OFS would deliver the first aim.
RES10
If not,=
what
else needs to be done, by government, individuals or other organisations?
There is not mention of the report Wales Soil Strategy - Final Report to Welsh Assem= bly Government, September 2002 developed for the Welsh Assembly Government. A Welsh version o= f the English Soil Protection Strategy would be useful. A soil protection strategy will be needed to ensure compliance with key European Directives.
Greater emphasis needs to be put on soil management by
Farming Connect advisers.
RES11
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
Reduced sediment loading. Reduction of land without green co= ver over winter.
RES12
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
First aim is high, particularly relating to the soil c= arbon storing capacity and climate change.
RES13
Will the
actions described throughout this section enable us to deliver our key outc=
ome
for minerals and aggregates?
Propose=
d outcome:
·=
; =
Extraction of minerals and aggregates will balance curre=
nt
needs for economic development, with protection of the environment, securing
supplies for future use and the impact on local communities
This is also meaningless, as there are no criteria for economic development needs, and balancing is subject to interpretation.
RES14
If not,= what else needs to be done, by government, individuals and other organisations?<= o:p>
Efforts should move to re-using materials rather than extracting aggregates – all such finite resources should be taxed hig= hly to provide an economic incentive to find other materials.
RES15
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
Targets should be set for reducing extractions.
RES16
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
In the context of other priorities, this is low.
RES17
Will the
actions described throughout this section enable us to deliver our key outc=
ome
for fish stocks?
Proposed
outcome:
·=
; =
Marine and freshwater fisheries are improved and maintai=
ned
through sustainable management
No comments on these issues.
RES18
If not,= what else needs to be done, by government, individuals and other organisations?<= o:p>
RES19
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
RES20
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
The Organic Farming Scheme is a key agri-environment s= cheme contributing to sustainable resource use and should be listed in the current activities, and strengthened.
BIO1
Will the
actions described above enable us to deliver our key outcomes for biodivers=
ity?
Proposed
outcomes:
·=
; =
the loss of biodiversity has been halted and we can see a
definite recovery in wildlife=
, in
particular those species that need very specific conditions to survive
·=
; =
better habitat management practices will be in place and
habitat fragmentation will be reduced
·=
; =
the wider environment in
·=
; =
impacts on biodiversity will be integral in the decision
making process for all policies and activities
·=
; =
sites of international, Welsh and local importance will =
be
in favourable condition to support the species and habitats for which they =
have
been identified and other species of high conservation value
·=
; =
a co-ordinated, joined up approach to biodiversity management will be in place
We are supportive of the statements regarding the most restrictive policy possible on GM crops.&n= bsp;
BIO2
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, individuals and other organisations?
The fourth outcome is the most challenging and most important, however considering impacts does not necessarily mean the impacts will be considered as a high priority.&nbs= p; It is unclear if the word ‘environment’ could be interchanged with biodiversity and mean anything different, as considering variety is easy, but preventing environmental damage is another matter entirely.
The other aspect that needs more resource is in the co= ntrol of invasive pests and weeds; working with the Non Native species policy rev= iew group sounds a good start, but at some point some resources will be needed. We would particularly= like to see imaginative schemes that avoid the use of pesticides in the environm= ent, and that engage communities in their surroundings. There are lessons to be learned th= rough organic management techniques that would provide positive solutions.
BIO3
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
Breeding populations of key species (by survey). Interlinked areas of wildlife corr= idors – aerial surveys and mapping from schemes.
BIO4
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
High.
QL1
Will th=
e actions
described above enable us to deliver our key environmental outcomes for the
built environment?
Proposed
outcomes:
·=
; =
our urban spaces will be high quality and vibrant,
supporting strong communities
·=
; =
buildings in
Again, quality is a subjective term, and it is difficu= lt to know how strong communities could be measured.
QL2
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, individuals and other organisations?
The built environment needs to be seen as a whole with= the recreational space and space for nature, this will impinge heavily on the planning system, which will need a thorough shake-up to engage with biodiversity and environmental issues.
QL3
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
High – unless the urban community engages with g= reen space and nature their understanding of the environment and interconnectedn= ess of ecosystems will be limited.
QL4
Will the
actions described above enable us to deliver our key environmental outcomes=
for
the urban green spaces and access to the countryside?
Proposed
outcomes:
·=
; =
there will be good access to the countryside and coast a=
nd
ample green space in urban areas and everyone will be encouraged to use the
outdoors for recreation and to enhance health.
·=
; =
our use of the natural environment for recreation and he=
alth
benefits will be sustainable and lead to environmental improvement.
QL5
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, individuals and other organisations?
There are three interconnected issues – one is permission to access land, one is ability to get to the area – i.e. transportation issues, and the third is encouragement of the desire to acce= ss the countryside, all of which need separate actions. The second and third issues do not= appear to be addressed by the strategy.
QL6
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
Health targets would be the highest level indicator, b= ut clearly subject to many other factors.&nbs= p; Otherwise targets for particular ‘indicator’ communities could be set – a survey of their current use of the countryside and monitored increased usage.
QL7
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
This is a high priority for the reasons given under QL= 3.
QL8
Will the
actions described above enable us to deliver our key outcome in relation to
litter, flytipping, dog fouling, light pollution and neighbour noise?
Proposed
outcome:
·=
; =
our cities, towns, villages and countryside will be clean
and well maintained. Litter,
graffiti, dog fouling, neighbour noise and light pollution will be minimise=
d
Issues of litter and dog fouling relate to a sense of ownership and responsibility, largely dependant on the attitudes of society which will be slow to change but needs targeted input.
QL9
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, individuals and other organisations?
Engaging young people in litter picking activities, on= the beach, countryside or towns will help.&nbs= p; Some Local Authority Waste collection provisions are unsatisfactory – particularly in seaside towns with fox and seagull nuisance.
QL10
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
QL11
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
Compared with the scale of other issues, these are low priorities, although in terms of engaging people in responsible behaviour w= hich can then extend to less visible environmental concerns, the priority is hig= h.
QL12
– no comments on the following sections
Will
the actions described above enable us to deliver our key outcomes for manag=
ing
flood risk?
Proposed
outcomes:
· =
where appropriate, measures will be in place =
to
manage the risk of flooding from rivers and the sea
· =
everyone will understand the flood risk they =
are
subject to and how to live with that risk
QL13
If
not, what else needs to be done by government, individuals and other
organisations?
QL14
Do
people at risk of flooding have sufficient information about the risk that =
they
face and what they need to do about it?
QL15
What
would be appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
QL16
How
high a priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
QL17
Will
the actions described above enable us to deliver our key outcome in relatio=
n to
air pollution?
Proposed
outcome:
· =
everyone in
QL18
If
not, what else needs to be done by government, individuals and other
organisations?
QL19
What
would be appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
QL20
How
high a priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
QL21
Will
the actions described above enable us to deliver our key outcome in relatio=
n to
noise pollution?
Proposed
outcome:
· =
there will be an increase in the proportion of
tranquil areas and noise pollution will be reduced
QL22
If
not, what else needs to be done by government, individuals and other
organisations?
QL23
What
would be appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
QL24
How
high a priority is this activity (low, medium, high)?
QL25
Will the
actions described above enable us to deliver our key outcome in relation to
chemicals?
Proposed
outcome:
·=
; =
there will be greater understanding of the health risks
posed by chemicals and these risks will be minimised as far as possible
The key to this is again education and publicity. Consumers will then exercise their= right to choose – information on the nature of chemicals used in clothing a= nd furniture and building materials should be widely available. Consumers should also be informed = of the chemicals used to treat their food – both in production and processing. (It is ironic that those eschewing agro-chemical use such as organic farmers are those who bear the burden of regular inspection and certification costs.)
QL26
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, individuals and other organisations?
Greater openness on the chemical treatments of soft furnishing and the likely length of time that off-gassing will occur. Greater education on food and acce= ss to information on food production and processing.
QL27
What wo=
uld be
appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
Absolute decrease in VOCs, and use of pesticides. Reduction in emissions.
QL28
How do =
we
balance the need for innovation in product development with the need to pro=
tect
the public and the environment against the potentially adverse consequences=
of
chemicals?
The simplest way is through liability legislation. Polluter pays, and manufacturers h= ave corporate responsibility for damaging health impacts.
QL29
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
This is probably high, as these chemicals may be contributing to chronic ill health.
QL30
– no comments on this section
Will
the actions described above enable us to deliver our key outcomes in relati=
on
to radioactivity?
Proposed
outcomes:
· =
appropriate measures will be in place to prot=
ect
those at risk from radon. Oth=
er
radioactive discharges in
QL31
If
not, what else needs to be done by government, individuals and other
organisations?
QL32
What
would be appropriate indicators of success and how could we measure them?
QL33
How
high a priority is this activity (low, medium, high)?
MtC1
Will the
actions described throughout this section enable us to deliver our key outc=
omes
for education and information, policy integration and better delivery by
relevant organisations?
Proposed
outcomes:
·=
; =
individuals take responsibility for their environmental
impact and understand what they can do make improvements by recycling, energy saving, reducing=
car
emissions
·=
; =
environmental considerations are integrated in all policy development and that=
high
quality and consistent environmental data is available to inform the decisi=
on
making processes
·=
; =
the roles and responsibilities of organisations are
understood leading to better integration for the delivery of environmental
protection and enhancement
·=
; =
Good quality information is available at the point where
people make decisions and changes in behaviours that have a negative impact on the environme=
nt is
apparent
These are laudable aspirations although difficult to m= easure to gauge success.
Again it is disappointing that the investment in suppo= rting organic farmers because of their environmental contribution, and their contribution and the integrated nature of it, is not recognised. With the emphasis on local consumption and production, and an increased interest in = the potential of public procurement to support local economic activity, organic farming has a key role to play. Local organic producer groups, whether based around technical or marketing issues, can form an important catalyst for new initiatives and an opportunity to engage in building local partnership capacity. The sense of partnership can be strengthened by the need for organic producers to find solutions to common problems that are specific to the sector. In the area of public procurement = (of fibres and timber as well as food) organic producers are helping to meet pu= blic policy goals and therefore can provide a strong input into private-public partnerships.
There is a major connection to be made between food, f=
uel
and fibre production, and consumption, and how to ensure this connection is
best delivered will require concerted action and overview. If targets are set for
‘local’ public procurement, there needs to be an idea of the
capacity to produce, to satisfy the demand, and steps taken to enhance the
supply.
MtC2
If not,=
what
else needs to be done by government, individuals and other organisations?
The weakness appears to be a focus on external integra= tion, which is fine and necessary, but this has to start with internal integratio= n; this is addressed regarding ASPBs, but not intra-departmental integration, which may be the biggest challenge.
MtC3
Given o=
ur
proposals on plan rationalisation, what would be the best mechanism to embed
environmental issues in the local authorities planning and delivery?
Local authorities should be required to publish (web-b=
ased
would be fine) planning applications for all cases where green-field sites =
are
to be developed, and to notify local wildlife trusts, records centres, EA, =
CCW
and community councils and consider their input before making decisions.
MtC4
How sho=
uld
the State of the Environment Report be structured in future, what should it
report on and how frequently should it be updated?
5 year intervals seem appropriate, but showing trends =
in all
cases; some issues will need annual figures to be meaningful.
MtC5
How hig=
h a
priority is this activity (low, medium or high)?
High
References
Ardeshir, D. (2003). Monitoring of the Organic Farming Scheme for Wales: Baseline Report 2002. Wales, ADAS.
Bellamy, P. H. L., P.J.,Bradley, R.I.Lark, R.M.,Kirk, = G.J.D. (2005). "Carbon losses from all soils across England and Wales 1978-2003." Nature 437= : 245-248.
Boxall, A. B. A., L. A. Fogg, et al. (2003). "Prioritisation of veterinary medicines in the UK environment." <= u>Toxicology Letters 142: 207-218.
Johnstone, I. G., R. I. Thorpe, et al. (2004). The sta= te of birds in Wales 2003. Cardiff, RSPB Cymru: 19 (bilingual).
McLean, B. and D. Frost (2003). Controlling Ectoparasi= tes on Welsh Organic Sheep Farms. Aberystwyth, Organic Centre Wales.
Philip Robertson, G., E. A. Paul, et al. (2000). "Greenhouse Gases in Intensive Agriculture: Contributions of Individual Gases to the Radiative Forcing of the Atmosphere." Science 289: 1922-1925.