Ongoing, but slowing, habitat loss in a rural landscape over 85 years
Studies evaluating biodiversity loss and altered ecosystem services have tended to examine changes over the last few decades, despite the fact that land use change and its negative impacts have been occurring over a much longer period. Examining past land use change, particularly over the long-term and multiple time periods, is essential for understanding how rates and drivers of change have varied historically.
To quantify and assess patterns of change in semi-natural habitats across a rural landscape at five time points between 1930 and 2015.
We determined the habitat cover at over 3700 sites across the county of Dorset, southern England in 1930, 1950, 1980, 1990 and 2015, using historical vegetation surveys, re-surveys, historical maps and other contemporary spatial data.
Considerable declines in semi-natural habitats occurred across the Dorset landscape between 1930 and 2015. This trend was non-linear for the majority of semi-natural habitats, with the greatest losses occurring between 1950 and 1980. This period coincides with the largest gains to arable and improved grassland, reflecting agricultural expansion after the Second World War. Although the loss of semi-natural habitats declined after this period, largely because there were very few sites left to convert, there were still a number of habitats lost within the last 25 years.
The findings illustrate a long history of habitat loss in the UK, and are important for planning landscape management and ameliorative actions, such as restoration. Our analysis also highlights the role of statutory protection in retaining semi-natural habitats, suggesting the need for continued protection of important habitats.
KeywordsAfforestation Agricultural intensification Habitat loss Land cover Semi-natural habitat Urbanisation
Land use change is one of the main ongoing drivers of terrestrial biodiversity loss and the alteration of ecosystem functions and services (Bateman et al. 2013; Tittensor et al. 2014). Many studies evaluating biodiversity loss and altered ecosystem services have tended to examine changes over the last few decades (van Swaay et al. 2013; Renard et al. 2015; Hallmann et al. 2017; Song et al. 2018; Van der Sluis et al. 2019), despite the fact that land use change and its negative impacts have been occurring over a much longer period in Europe (Hooftman and Bullock 2012), Asia (Dearing et al. 2012) and America (Drummond et al. 2017). Examining past land use change is essential for understanding the full extent of loss and altered functions, predicting future changes, and planning potential response actions, such as ecological restoration.
Semi-natural habitats have high conservation importance in many parts of the world. Semi-natural habitats are those which were created by traditional human activities and are maintained by management, such as grazing, coppicing, cutting or burning (Poschlod and Wallis de Vries 2002). In western Europe these habitats include unimproved grasslands, heathland and broadleaved woodland. Such sites often support a high diversity of species, some of which are of conservation concern (Webb et al. 2010). Semi-natural habitats are also important for the delivery of ecosystem services including pollination, timber production, carbon storage and aesthetic value (Quine et al. 2011; Cordingley et al. 2015; Bengtsson et al. 2019). However, there has been a significant decline in many semi-natural habitats across Europe in the last century. For example, lowland heathland in Europe previously extended over several million hectares, with only an estimated 350,000 hectares now remaining (Diemont et al. 1996). Similarly, in England and Wales, an estimated 97% of semi-natural grassland was lost between 1932 and 1984 (Fuller 1987). The decline in semi-natural habitats over the past few decades is often treated as linear; but this has not been directly quantified in the UK. Furthermore, trends are presumed to be common across all semi-natural habitat types (Hooftman and Bullock 2012), though very few studies have examined the potential differences across landscapes.
In considering change in semi-natural habitats over time, whilst a linear decrease might be assumed, changes could accelerate or decelerate over time, or show more idiosyncratic patterns (Bürgi et al. 2004). Knowledge of how trends have changed in the recent past is at the core of biodiversity reporting, both nationally (DEFRA 2018) and internationally (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2014), but little is known about patterns over long timescales. Such information would show whether loss is slowing or increasing and even if there have been gains at any point. Trends across different habitat types could be assessed and drivers identified at different time points. Furthermore, understanding patterns of change and how drivers of decline vary in importance can be used to predict future changes, reduce ongoing habitat loss and identify where restoration could be targeted. A number of studies have assessed loss for particular habitat types over long time periods. For example, the status of the heathlands in the county of Dorset, England has been assessed since the 19th century (Moore 1962; Rose et al. 2000). Others have examined multiple habitats or land-use change using two snapshots in time (Coleman 1979; Ridding et al. 2015). But there are few studies which have assessed change in all habitats across large regional landscapes at multiple time points. An exception to this is the Countryside Survey which has assessed the extent and condition of broad habitats in the UK using 1 km survey squares at discrete intervals since 1978 (Barr et al. 1993; Carey et al. 2008).
In the UK, as elsewhere in western Europe, the decline in semi-natural habitats in recent decades has been attributed to three major types of land use change; agricultural intensification, urban development and afforestation (Watson and Albon 2011). These three major land use changes increased rapidly after the Second World War, at the start of the period known as the “Great Acceleration”, when the impact of human activity on the state and functioning of the Earth System increased significantly (Steffen et al. 2007, 2015). Agricultural intensification accelerated in the 1940s due to the Agriculture Act of 1947 (Best and Coppock 1962). This continued following the UK’s accession to the European Union (EU) in 1973, causing semi-natural grasslands and heathlands to be converted to arable or fertilised for grass production. Over the same period, semi-natural habitats were also being lost to conifer plantations, due to the importance of economic forestry resulting from a Treasury policy review in 1957 (Aldhous 1997). This continued until the 1980s, when policy changes promoted planting of deciduous trees (Nail 2008). Urbanisation has also increased over the last 60 years. In the UK urban growth during the 1950s was greatest in the most urbanised regions (Parry et al. 1992). However in the latter half of the twentieth century urban sprawl increased as richer people moved away from urban centres, which led to a greater loss of countryside (Zhang 2016). Although the three major land use changes which have led to the loss of semi-natural habitats in the UK are known, few have examined the trends over time using long-term land cover data.
As elsewhere in the world, a number of policies and laws have been developed in the UK in an attempt to reduce further losses of semi-natural habitats. These range from European-wide legislations to local planning policies which aim to prevent damaging activities. European protected sites include Special Protection Areas for birds and Special Areas of Conservation. Sites that are nationally important in the UK for their flora, fauna, or geological or physiographical features are protected by law as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs, or Areas of Special Scientific Interest, ASSIs, in Northern Ireland) (JNCC 2015). All sites protected by European and national legislation must be considered in the UK planning process. The National Planning Policy Framework sets out government’s planning policies for England which requires that local authorities must ensure that any developments have minimal impact on biodiversity. Although the importance of protected areas for biological conservation is acknowledged, there is little empirical evidence of their effectiveness (Gaston et al. 2008; Greve et al. 2011). Given the importance placed on protected areas, it is important to understand if they are effective in preventing or slowing habitat loss.
Has the loss of semi-natural habitats been linear over time?
What are the main drivers of loss for each semi-natural habitat, and do these change over time?
Do protected sites have lower rates of change than other areas of semi-natural habitat?
Habitat extent in the 1930s
Broad habitat classifications for 1930, 1950 and 1980, matched with categories from the Land Cover Map 2015, alongside the final combined habitat classification for the whole time series
Broad habitat (1930, 1950, 1980)
Land cover map habitat (1990, 2015)
Combined time-series habitat classification
Rivers and streams
Standing open water and canals
Bracken (excluding 1950)
Arable and horticulture
Arable and horticulture
Arable and horticulture
N/A (not found in Dorset)
Fen, marsh and swamp
Fen, marsh and swamp
Fen, marsh and swamp
Dwarf Shrub Heath
Boundary and linear feature
N/A (removed these sites)
Built-up areas and gardens
Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland
Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland
Habitat extent in the 1950s
For sites which had remained the same habitat in 1980 (determined by Horsfall) as in the 1930s, we assumed the same habitat in the 1950s (3892 sites). For the remainder, we utilised the OS Great Britain 1:25,000, 1937–1961 (Ordnance Survey 1961) map series to determine the habitat cover during the 1950s. This OS series comprised 10 kilometre squares across Great Britain, and most of the individual 10 kilometre square maps including Dorset were completed around the 1950s. Since the OS maps displayed particular symbols for certain habitats (see Fig. 2) we could distinguish the main habitat for most sites (coniferous and broadleaved woodland, water, urban, heath, marsh and grassland), which we classified according to the broad habitat types (Table 1). For some sites that were semi-natural grassland in the 1930s, no markings were present on the 1950s OS map to indicate the habitat type. We used a GIS layer of calcareous grassland habitat in 1946 created by DERC using a variety of sources including Royal Air Force (RAF) Aerial Photographs c. 1946–51, OS maps and The Conservation of Chalk Downland in Dorset, 1973 (see Edwards, 2006), to indicate which sites were still calcareous grassland. The remaining unclassified sites which were semi-natural grassland in 1930 (n = 550), were thus likely to be either arable, improved grassland or another type of semi-natural grassland. To distinguish these, we utilised RAF Aerial Photographs c. 1946–51 (Dorset County Council 2018). Arable fields were open with furrows, interpreted as a sign of ploughing, whilst pastures were open without furrows, often with grazing animals present. Darker colours and “rough patches” were used to distinguish between unimproved and improved grassland. This technique was very time-consuming, so was only employed where other methods failed to identify the habitat. Aerial photographs were unavailable for 91 sites, and so these were removed from further analysis. Where the 1930s habitat had clearly been lost, but the OS map did not give any indications as to the current habitat, we assigned the habitat present in the 1980s.
Habitat extent in the 1980s
Sites were revisited by Anne Horsfall in the 1980s (see Horsfall, 1981). Using Good’s plant list for each site, Horsfall determined whether the habitat reported in the 1930s remained or had changed. She recorded the general habitat alongside additional notes, which we used to classify each site into a broad habitat type (Table 1). We made some assumptions during the classification process in order to assign woodland sites to coniferous or broadleaved woodland. For most sites where plantations were present in the 1980s, Horsfall had made additional notes allowing us to determine whether the plantation was broadleaved, coniferous or mixed. For a small number of sites (< 10) Horsfall provided no information, and we assumed a coniferous plantation since the majority of British tree planting in the mid twentieth century was coniferous (Mason 2007). We also assigned improved grassland for all of the sites which Horsfall described as pastures. For the majority of sites, this was confirmed by notes provided by Horsfall (Fig. 2).
Habitat extent in 1990 and 2015
To determine the habitat at each site in 1990, we used an updated dataset of the UK Land Cover Map 1990 (LCM1990) (Rowland et al. 2017b). The original LCM1990 (Fuller et al. 1993), is not directly comparable with Land Cover Map 2015 (LCM2015) (Rowland et al. 2017a) because it uses different land cover classes and has a different spatial structure. To make it comparable with LCM2015, our updated 1990 Land Cover dataset (Rowland et al. 2017b), was created using the same methodology as that used to create the LCM2015. Using ArcGIS on the revised LCM1990, we assigned the habitat for each site as that with the largest percentage cover in the site. Since the updated LCM1990 does not yet have full coverage across Dorset, 441 sites could not be assessed and were removed from the study (Fig. 2). We used the same methodology with LCM2015 to identify the main habitat type for each site in 2015.
Combining habitat time series data
Habitat data for the 1930s, 1950s, 1980s, 1990 and 2015 were standardised using Table 1. The habitat classifications from the 1930s, 1950s, 1980s and the LCMs were largely similar, as they were all based on Jackson (2000) broad habitat categories. We generated transition matrices between each time period, with partially converted sites being classified as lost. This highlighted any apparent habitat changes that were unlikely to occur in reality, for example acid grassland converting to calcareous grassland. Where unlikely conversions were identified in 1990 (where both 1980 and 2015 remained consistent), we checked aerial photography for the closest time period available, 2002 (Dorset County Council 2018). This resolved issues for a number of urban sites, which were identified as improved grassland in the LCMs due to large gardens with extensive lawns. This left a total of 3784 sites for analysis, where the broad habitat was known in each time period. Since the methodology we used for classifying habitats in the latter periods (1990 and 2015 used the Land Cover Maps), was quite different from the previous time points, we performed validation using additional datasets to assess the accuracy and consistency of the time series across all periods, which we describe in Appendix 1. This provided us with a high level of confidence in our classifications.
To examine whether the losses of semi-natural habitats (acid grassland, broadleaved woodland, calcareous grassland, fen, marsh and swamp, heathland and neutral grassland) were linear over time, we constructed general linear models (GLMs) and generalized additive models (GAMs), with year as the dependent variable. GAMs are often used to detect non-linearity in time series data (Granadeiro et al. 2004; Watson et al. 2018). Where the AIC difference between the GLM and GAM was less than 2, we took this as providing evidence for little difference between the models (Burnham and Anderson 2002), and so the GAM model was rejected and we concluded the pattern was linear. Where this was not the case, we included year as a smoother term in the GAM model using the “mgcv” package (Wood 2017) in R v3.0.2 (R Core Team 2017).
For each time period, we identified those sites in which the habitat type changed and used Chi squared tests to examine whether new habitat types fitted a null hypothesis of a random distribution of different types. Separate Chi squared tests were performed according to the original habitat type; neutral grassland, calcareous grassland, fen, marsh and swamp, heathland and acid grassland. When assessing what habitats changed into, those with a low coverage were combined into an “other” category (coastal, water, fen, marsh, swamp, acid grassland, calcareous grassland, heathland, mosaic and inland rock) for this analysis. Where the assumptions required for a Chi squared test were not met, we used Fisher’s exact test for small sample sizes.
Protected sites were determined using the digital boundary data for SSSIs in ArcGIS (Natural England 2014). SSSIs were first established in the 1950s, but were later re-notified under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, with sites still being added until present, but to a much lesser extent (see Ridding et al., 2015). SSSIs were chosen to represent protected areas in the UK since this system provides the underpinning statutory protection for all sites, including those which are of European importance. Sites were classified as protected if at least 90% of their area fell within the SSSI boundary, which accounted for small differences in the borders of both datasets. We then calculated the turnover at each site, with turnover defined as the number of time periods in which the habitat changed (Swetnam 2007). To examine whether protected sites were more likely to have no turnover, we used a Chi squared test to determine if the number of sites with no habitat turnover fitted a null hypothesis of equal distribution between protected and unprotected sites. Individual tests were performed according to the original 1930s habitat of the site: acid grassland, calcareous grassland, fen, marsh and swamp, heathland and neutral grassland.
Trends in semi-natural habitats
GLM and GAM results including AIC, R2 and smoother term values (edf = estimated degrees of freedom) (for latter only) used to examine whether trends in semi-natural habitat (acid grassland, broadleaved woodland, calcareous grassland, fen, marsh and swamp, heathland, neutral grassland) and land cover (arable, coniferous woodland, improved grassland, urban) were non-linear between 1930 and 2015 in Dorset
Fen, marsh, swamp
Timing of habitat conversion
Intensive land cover types within the landscape including coniferous woodland, improved grassland, arable and urban areas increased rapidly, at the expense of semi-natural habitat sites, largely between 1930 and 1980 (Fig. 3). The greatest increase in the number of improved grassland and arable sites occurred between 1950 and 1980, which corresponds to the period with the highest percentage loss of semi-natural habitat sites (− 20%). For urban and coniferous woodland, the greatest gains were between 1930 and 1950. After 1980 the number of sites converted to the intensive land covers decreased (Fig. 3). This was particularly clear for arable, coniferous woodland and urban, which showed non-linear trends (Table 2) and evidence of levelling off in the later time period, with some arable sites even being lost between 1990 and 2015. Improved grassland, on the other hand, increased linearly throughout the survey period.
Drivers of change for semi-natural habitats
Chi squared test results for examining whether current land cover across lost habitat sites were randomly distributed for acid grassland, calcareous grassland, fen, marsh and swamp, heathland and neutral grassland across the four time periods; 1950, 1980, 1990 and 2015 in Dorset
Fen, marsh, swamp
Land cover change in protected sites
We have identified changes in habitat types by assessing more than 3700 sites in the Dorset landscape between 1930 and 2015 over five consecutive time intervals. The creation of this novel dataset for Dorset’s semi-natural habitats has provided a rare opportunity to examine the loss of habitats, the patterns of change and the fate of sites across multiple time periods in a region which is broadly representative of many lowland landscapes in western Europe that have a predominantly agricultural land use.
Trends in semi-natural habitats
We found considerable losses over 85 years for the majority of semi-natural habitats across the Dorset landscape, including neutral grassland, calcareous grassland, fen, marsh and swamp, acid grassland and heathland. This is consistent with other studies in Dorset (Rose et al. 2000; Hooftman and Bullock 2012), the UK (Fuller 1987; Ridding et al. 2015) and across Europe (van Dijk 1991; Piessens and Hermy 2006). The NCC (1984) revealed a loss of 70% of chalk grassland in Dorset between 1934 and 1972, which is the same as the loss we report between 1930 and 2015. For the majority of habitats in Dorset, the decline was non-linear between 1930 and 2015. The greatest losses occurred during 1950 and 1980, after which the decline in semi-natural habitats decreased. While this might be seen as a positive for conservation, it is mostly due to the fact that there was very little habitat left in this landscape by this period. For instance, only 12 of the original 401 neutral grassland sites remained in 2015. However, other factors including the timing of drivers (discussed below) and the designation of SSSIs and other similar protection schemes, will have increasingly prevented damaging activities on many semi-natural habitats (JNCC 2015).
The non-linear trend of habitat loss revealed in this study has important implications for the reporting of biodiversity change over time, since many long-term studies often focus on the last forty years at best. For instance, Hallmann et al. (2017) reported a 76% decline in flying insect biomass German protected areas between 1989 and 2016, whilst Powney et al. (2019) showed that one-third of insect pollinator species experienced declines between 1980 and 2013 in Great Britain. Both studies evaluated species’ trends after 1980, by which time the majority of semi-natural habitats were already lost in our study. Indeed, data on biodiversity loss to inform reporting to the Convention on Biological Diversity goes back to the 1970s at most in the UK (DEFRA 2018), a country with one of the longest histories of monitoring in the World (Pocock et al. 2015). There are few exceptions to this, for example Hambler et al. (2011) examined extinction debts in Britain going back to the 19th century. This still raises the question as to what species loss occurred during the earlier period of massive habitat loss before such recording started. Indeed, the “shifting baseline syndrome” addresses the problem that a lack of understanding of historic losses may cause an acceptance of the current low biodiversity state as being normal (Soga and Gaston 2018). Furthermore, ongoing species’ declines may be a delayed response to this past habitat loss, i.e. the paying of extinction debts (Sang et al. 2010). Hooftman et al. (2016) found that plant extinctions in intact habitat in Dorset were driven by declining connectivity as a result of landscape-scale habitat loss. This also suggests that even if habitat loss completed ceased, which is not yet evident in Dorset, losses in biodiversity may continue.
Timing of habitat conversion
Between 1930 and 2015 a number of land cover types, representing intensive land uses, increased considerably across the Dorset landscape, including arable, improved grassland, coniferous woodland and urban areas. Arable and improved grassland increased the greatest from 1950 to 1980, which suggests that habitat conversion to these land covers did not necessarily occur immediately after the Second World War and continued after the UK’s accession to the EU in 1973 (Fuller 1987). The number of sites converted to arable fell after the 1980s, around the time where crop yields tripled in the UK (Pretty et al. 2000), through mechanisation and chemical application, meaning less area was required to maintain yields. Agri-environment schemes were also introduced, while a number of economic and political factors led to a reduction in the number of farms, including falls in prices for agricultural products and farm income, as well as diseases affecting cattle such as Mad Cow Disease (BSE) and Foot and Mouth (Zayed 2016).
In the period 1990–2015 the number of arable sites decreased for the first time during the study period. The European Environment Agency (EEA) found that urbanisation was predominantly occurring on arable land between 1990–2000 (European Environment Agency 2010) and 2006–2012 (European Environment Agency 2017), but in Dorset we found no evidence of this. Instead the main change to arable sites 1990–2015 was conversion to improved grassland. This most likely reflects the agricultural system in the UK, whereby grass and clover leys are often added to arable rotations, to manage weed problems such as black grass or to increase soil fertility (AHDB 2018).
The majority of urbanisation in Dorset occurred during 1930–1950 in our study, which includes the period immediately after the Second World War. During this time no planning permission was required for land development, until the Town and Country Planning Act was established in 1947. Following this period there was a reduction in the number of sites converted to urban, despite the fact that this land cover is predicted to increase across Europe in the future (European Environment Agency 2017). This may be because Dorset is a predominantly rural county (Hooftman and Bullock 2012), where urban pressures are largely confined to the main towns of Bournemouth and Poole (Webb and Haskins 1980). None of our sites occurred in these areas, since they were not examined in the original Good survey (Good 1937).
The biggest increase in coniferous woodland in Dorset was also in the period 1930–1950. For coniferous woodland this was largely driven by the formation of the Forestry Commission in 1919 and the objective of having a strategic supply of timber which led to extensive planting until 1980 when the emphasis shifted towards sustainable forestry (Mason 2007). This mirrors the findings in this study in which a non-linear trend in afforestation is evident, with a slowing in the later periods. Afforestation was also found to be one of the most important processes for landscape change across Europe (Bürgi et al. 2017).
Although the loss of semi-natural habitats to agricultural intensification, urban development and afforestation was highest following the Second World War until the 1980s, there were considerable losses in the landscape after this period. This suggests that the three drivers of change are still a threat to biodiversity in the present day. This has important implications for conservation and landscape management in the future. Indeed, the pattern of urbanisation is currently changing in Dorset and elsewhere in England as house building is expanding into more rural areas (Campaign to Protect Rural England 2018). Agriculture could continue its gradual expansion under policies aimed at increasing food production (Reif and Vermouzek 2019) or under new post-Brexit agricultural policies. Conversely policies for a more sustainable future might facilitate expansion and restoration of semi-natural habitats, as promised under the UK Government’s 25 Year Environment Plan (Isaac et al. 2018) and more widely for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.
Differences among semi-natural habitats in drivers of change
There were significant differences in the drivers of loss among the different semi-natural habitats during different time periods. More calcareous grassland sites were lost to arable land after the 1940s compared with neutral grassland, acid grassland and fen, marsh and swamp. Ridding et al. (2015) found that although greater numbers of mesotrophic sites were lost throughout England between 1960 and 2013 compared with calcareous grassland, the proportion of sites which were converted to arable was greater for calcareous grassland compared with mesotrophic grassland, wet grassland and lowland heath and dry acid grassland, which is consistent with our study. Considerably fewer acid grassland and fen, marsh and swamp habitats were converted to arable compared with calcareous and neutral grassland, which is most likely due to; a) more constrained soils that are less fertile for arable agriculture; and b) the lack of advances in drainage technology until the 1980s (Green 1990).
Conversion to improved grassland was a key driver of change for most semi-natural habitats throughout the study period, particularly for acid, calcareous and neutral grassland after 1950. Some of these changes may have been due to fertiliser application or reseeding, however some changes may be attributable to more subtle processes such as nitrogen deposition or grazing management, rather than land-use change per se (Maskell et al. 2010; Diekmann et al. 2014). A re-survey of Good’s calcareous grassland sites in 2009 revealed a shift from species typical of species-rich calcareous grasslands towards those more typical of mesotrophic grassland, with eutrophication and management changes suggested as potential causes (Newton et al. 2012).
During all time points, excluding 1950–1980, afforestation was the greatest driver of heathland loss. The large conversion to coniferous woodland in the 1950s corresponds to the period where conifer planting was promoted, as previously mentioned. Heathland losses to coniferous woodland in 1990 and 2015 were likely to be a result of inappropriate management. Diaz et al. (2013) conducted a re-survey of the original Good heathland sites in 2010 and also found that vegetation shifted towards a woodland community, whilst Rose et al. (2000) reported increases in scrub and woodland on heathland in between 1987 and 1996. This supports the findings of heathland also being lost to broadleaved woodland in this study, which is largely attributed to the reduction in rough grazing and controlled burning (Moore 1962). Urbanisation was also a driver of heathland loss in Dorset, which largely occurred in 1980 and 1990. This corresponds with Webb (1990) who reported a loss of 150 ha of heathland for roads, houses and factories between 1978 and 1987 and Rose et al. (2000) who reported a further loss of 100 ha 1987–1996.
Although Good surveyed the Dorset landscape evenly, with roughly 5–6 stands per square mile (Good 1937), it is possible that biases were introduced into the time series when particular sites were removed from the study (see Fig. 2). For instance, over 400 sites were eliminated from the north-west due to incomplete land cover map coverage in 1990, whilst sites which were less than 0.5 ha were also removed (Fig. 2). While it is not clear if eliminating these sites introduced any bias, one might expect the habitat losses to be underestimated in this study, given that smaller sites (< 0.5 ha), which are more vulnerable to loss, were not considered. For four of the six semi-natural habitat types we found significant differences between the size of sites which remained and were lost between 1930 and 2015, but these patterns varied. For broadleaved woodland and calcareous grassland, lost sites were significantly larger than those which remained, but the opposite pattern was found for heathland and for fen, marsh and swamp (see Appendix 2 for further details).
Land cover change in protected sites
Sites which are protected through designation as a SSSI were more likely to remain unchanged compared to those which are not protected. Ridding et al. (2015) also found that 91% of protected English semi-natural grasslands persisted between 1960 and 2013, compared with only 27% in non-protected sites. While there has been controversy about the effectiveness of protected areas, they have proven valuable around the world at conserving habitat (Geldmann et al. 2013). The retention of neutral grassland in this study was not affected by protection status, which may be because the management of such grasslands has caused vegetation change. For instance, only 42% of neutral grasslands which are designated as SSSIs are considered to be in favourable condition, with under-grazing and abandonment being the main cause of decline (Williams 2006). Our study suggests that statutory protection is beneficial in preventing habitat loss through damaging activity, however appropriate management of protected sites is essential.
This study has confirmed a considerable decline in semi-natural habitats across the Dorset landscape between 1930 and 2015. This trend was non-linear for the majority of semi-natural habitats, with the greatest losses occurring between 1950 and 1980, and slowing after this time. This period coincides with the largest gains to arable and improved grassland, suggesting that these drivers did not necessarily lead to the loss of habitats immediately after the Second World War, as often presumed, but instead conversion to intensive land covers continued to increase until 1980. Although the loss of semi-natural habitats declined after this period, largely because there were very few sites left to convert, habitats were still being lost over the last 25 years. This suggests an urgent need both to protect remaining semi-natural habitats fully, which this study has shown to be effective, but also to restore these habitats to start to reverse the huge losses.
The National Library of Scotland provided access to the Ordnance Survey maps. The Dorset Environmental Records Centre (DERC), particularly Carolyn Steele, assisted with the Good and Horsfall data, and Bryan Edwards and the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) team allowed access to the 1950s chalk grassland GIS layer. This work is funded by the Mechanisms and Consequences of Tipping Points in Lowland Agricultural Landscapes (TPAL; NE/P007716/1) project (www.tpalvaluing-nature.co.uk). The Valuing Nature Programme (www.valuing-nature.net.) is funded by the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), the Economic and Social Research Council, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, the Arts and Humanities Research Council and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The recast LCM1990 was supported by the NERC award number NE/R016429/1 as part of the UK-SCAPE programme delivering National Capability.
- AHDB (2018) Livestock and the arable rotation. WarwickshireGoogle Scholar
- Barr CJ, Bunce RGH, Clarke RT, Fuller RM, Furse MT, Gillespie MK, Groom GB, Hallam CJ, Hornung M, Howard DC, Ness MJ (1993) Countryside Survey 1990: Main Report. Dep Environ 2Google Scholar
- Bateman IJ, Harwood AR, Mace GM, Watson RT, Abson DJ, Andrews B, Binner A, Crowe A, Day BH, Dugdale S, Fezzi C, Foden J, Hadley D, Haines-Young R, Hulme M, Kontoleon A, Lovett AA, Munday P, Pascual U, Paterson J, Perino G, Sen A, Siriwardena G, van Soest D, Termansen M (2013) Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: land use in the United Kingdom. Science 341:45–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Best R, Coppock J (1962) The changing use of land in Britain. McMillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Burnham KP, Anderson DR (2002) Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Campaign to Protect Rural England (2018) The State of the Green Belt. LondonGoogle Scholar
- Carey PD, Wallis S, Chamberlain PM, Cooper A, Emmett BA, Maskell LC, McCann T, Murphy J, Norton LR, Reynolds B, Scott WA, Simpson IC, Smart SM, Ullyett JM (2008) Countryside survey: UK results from 2007. NERC/Centre for Ecol Hydrol, 105 ppGoogle Scholar
- Coleman A (1979) Has planning fulfilled its aims? In: Land use perspectives. The Land Decade Educational Council, London, pp 20–33Google Scholar
- Dearing JA, Yang X, Dong X, Zhang E, Chen X, Langdon PG, Zhang K, Zhang W, Dawson TP (2012) Extending the timescale and range of ecosystem services through paleoenvironmental analyses, exemplified in the lower Yangtze basin. Proc Natl Acad Sci. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118263109 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- DEFRA (2018) UK Biodiversity Indicators 2018. LondonGoogle Scholar
- Diemont WH, Degn HJ, Webb N (1996) A pan-European view on heathland conservation. In: Proceedings of the National Heathland Conference 1996, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
- Dorset County Council (2018) Dorset Explorer. https://explorer.geowessex.com/. Accessed 4 Apr 2018
- Edwards B (2006) Changes in the area of downland and rough pasture on the Dorset chalk 1946–2006Google Scholar
- European Environment Agency (2010) The European Environment State and Outlook 2010Google Scholar
- European Environment Agency (2017) Landscapes in transition. LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
- Fuller RM, Groom GB, Jones AR, Thomson AG (1993) Land Cover Map 1990 (25 m raster, GB)Google Scholar
- Hallmann CA, Sorg M, Jongejans E, Siepel H, Hofland N, Schwan H, Stenmans W, Müller A, Sumser H, Hörren T, Goulson D, De Kroon H (2017) More than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0185809 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hill MO (1996) TABLEFIT, Version 10, for identification of vegetation types. Wallingford, Centre for Ecology and HydrologyGoogle Scholar
- Horsfall A (1981) A pattern of change: observations on plant habitat change in North-East Dorset since 1931: Part 3, 1981. Dorset Proc 103Google Scholar
- Isaac NJB, Brotherton PNM, Bullock JM, Gregory RD, Boehning-Gaese K, Connor B, Crick HQP, Freckleton RP, Gill JA, Hails RS, Hartikainen M, Hester AJ, Milner-Gulland EJ, Oliver TH, Pearson RG, Sutherland WJ, Thomas CD, Travis JMJ, Turnbull LA, Willis K, Woodward G, Mace GM (2018) Defining and delivering resilient ecological networks: nature conservation in England. J Appl Ecol 55:2537–2543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jackson DL (2000) Guidance on the interpretation of the Biodiversity Broad Habitat Classification (terrestrial and freshwater types): definitions and the relationship with other classifications. JNCC Report 307Google Scholar
- JNCC (2015) Guidelines for selection of biological SSSIs. http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-2303. Accessed 7 Apr 2015
- Natural England (2014) Sites of Special Scientific Interest and historical monuments. https://www.gov.uk/sites-of-special-scientific-interest-and-historical-monuments. Accessed 6 Jan 2018
- NCC (1984) Nature conservation in Great Britain. Nature Conservancy Council, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
- Ordnance Survey (1961) Ordnance Survey Great Britain 1:25,000, 1937–1961. Using: National Library of Scotland. http://maps.nls.uk/index.html. Accessed October 2017
- Ordnance Survey (2017) 1:250,000 Scale Colour Raster. Crown copyright and database right 2017 OS 100017572. Accessed December 2017Google Scholar
- Parry M, Hossell J, Wright L (1992) Land use in the United Kingdom. In: Whitby M (ed) Land use change: the causes and consequences. Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, pp 7–14Google Scholar
- Powney GD, Carvell C, Edwards M, Morris RKA, Roy HE, Woodcock BA, Isaac NJB (2019) Widespread losses of pollinating insects in Britain. Nat Commun. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08974-9
- Quine C, Cahalan C, Hester A, Humphrey J, Kirby K, Moffat A, Valatin G (2011) Woodlands. UK National Ecosystem Assessment Technical Report. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, pp 241–294Google Scholar
- R Core Team (2017) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, ViennaGoogle Scholar
- Rodwell JS (1992) British plant communities: grasslands and montane communities. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Rowland CS, Morton R., Carrasco L, McShane G, O’Neil AW, Wood CM (2017a) Land Cover Map 2015 (vector, GB)Google Scholar
- Rowland CS, Morton RD, Carrasco L, O’Neil A (2017b) Applying Earth Observation to assess UK land use change: Lot 2 Medium Resolution Optical, Report to BEIS, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2014) Global Biodiversity Outlook 4. MontréalGoogle Scholar
- Tittensor DP, Walpole M, Hill SLL, Boyce DG, Britten GL, Burgess ND, Butchart SHM, Leadley PW, Regan EC, Alkemade R, Baumung R, Bellard C, Bouwman L, Bowles-Newark NJ, Chenery AM, Cheung WWL, Christensen V, Cooper HD, Crowther AR, Dixon MJR, Galli A, Gaveau V, Gregory RD, Gutierrez NL, Hirsch TL, Höft R, Januchowski-Hartley S, Karmann M, Krug CB, Leverington FJ, Loh J, Lojenga RK, Malsch K, Marques A, Morgan DHW, Mumby PJ, Newbold T, Noonan-Mooney K, Pagad SN, Parks BC, Pereira HM, Robertson T, Rondinini C, Santini L, Scharlemann JPW, Schindler S, Sumaila UR, Teh LSL, van Kolck J, Visconti P, Ye Y (2014) A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets. Science 346:241–244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- van Dijk G (1991) The status of semi-natural grasslands in Europe. In: Goriup PD, Batten LA, Norton JA (eds) The conservation of lowland dry grassland birds in Europe. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough, pp 15–36Google Scholar
- van Swaay C, van Strien A, Harpke A, Fontaine B, Stefanescu C, Roy D, Maes D, Kühn E, Õunap E, Regan E and Švitra G (2013) The European Grassland Butterfly Indicator: 1990–2011. European Environment Agency Technical ReportsGoogle Scholar
- Watson R, Albon S (2011) UK National Ecosystem Assessment: synthesis of the key findings. UNEP-WCMC, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Webb JR, Drewitt AL, Measures GH (2010) Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat management. Part 1 Report. SheffieldGoogle Scholar
- Williams J (2006) Common standards monitoring for designated sites: first six year report. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
- Zayed Y (2016) Agriculture: historical statistics. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.