Philip Stott at Envirospin Watch gets rather carried away by his desire to put down a report from the environmental charity Plantlife International. He seizes on the fact that the BBC report is illustrated with a picture of a poppy, to denounce the whole report as nonsense because poppies are common.
This is of course good knockabout stuff, but sails perilously close to the poor reporting of science he spends so much time decrying. The report is of course not about poppies but as the BBC report clearly says about the plant group which includes poppies.
(Incidently the BBC report is now illustrated with a picture of a Corncockle and the caption 'Few corncockles are now seen in the wild')
I think Prof Stott has let his desire for a good story get in the way of his scientific judgement - something that may be understandable in a journalist, but should not happen with someone who is basing their case on their own scientific credentials.
Of course, there are some less-adaptive field plants that do need protection, but let's not talk general PC poppycock.
For more information about the decline of the English meadow see this report
One of the worst-affected counties is Worcestershire, where 75% of unimproved meadowland was lost or damaged between 1975 and 2000.In Derbyshire, 51% of meadows were damaged between 1983 and 2000. In the 10 years from 1989, Shropshire lost 49% of its meadows.
Species dependent on the grasslands, the report says, include marsh fritillary and chalkhill blue butterflies, and wild flowers like the meadow clary and the Deptford pink.
I think I know where the poppycock blooms and it isn't on the Plantlife website - or even in this case at the BBC.
