536 CONFERENCE OF, DELEGATES. 
A discussion followed, in which the following took part: Dr. Arundell 
Esdaile, Dr. C. J. J. Fox, Mr. Hilary Jenkinson, Dr. L. J. Spencer, Mr. 
James Strachan, and Major J. Edington Aitken, the last proposing as an 
amendment the deletion from the resolution of the words specifying the 
grade of paper recommended. Upon being put to the meeting the amend- 
ment was lost and the resolution carried. 
Tuesday, September 29. 
Discussion on The Effects of Urban Expansion upon the Flora and Fauna 
of the Countryside. (Sir E. Joun Russetz, F.R.S.; Prof. E. J. 
SatisBpury ; Mr. T. SHEPPARD.) 
Sir E. Joun Russet, F.R.S. 
It is a commonplace that the spread of the urban population has a devastating 
effect on the native fauna and flora. There are two chief ways in which this is done : 
direct and indirect. The direct methods are the uprooting of all wild plants thought 
to be scarce, the complete collection of all visible flowers, thereby reducing the possi- 
bility of seeding; the taking of birds’ eggs and nests; the destruction of young 
animals by the cats and dogs that accompany the human invaders. 
The indirect effects are the destruction of quiet breeding and nesting places, in 
the ‘ tidying-up ’ that follows the division of a peaceful countryside into ‘ desirable 
building plots,’ the cutting down of trees and hedges in the widening and straightening 
of lanes, and the conversion of moist places into dry ones by drainage operations, 
and the pumping that has lowered the water table in England considerably during 
the past fifty years. 
Examples of all these are given. 
Some of these effects are inevitable, and we can hardly hope to preserve our native 
flora and fauna intact where the human population is increasing. A good deal of the 
destruction is, however, unnecessary, and arises from the fact that the new population 
coming into the country districts is entirely urban in its outlook and education and 
lacks the knowledge of country things, of the modes and manners of country life, 
and of the places likely to afford good nesting or homing places for birds and other 
wild animals. It would be very helpful if someone with the knowledge, the time and 
the tact would produce a handbook written for the new country dwellers, setting forth 
the things that can be done and those that should not be done; in this way much 
unintentional damage could be avoided. 
Even more useful would be concerted efforts to save the small woodlands and 
coppices which dot the countryside. These afford sanctuary for all but the shyest 
of animals, and even these soon learn the places where they are left unmolested. 
This should not be an expensive matter, especially in view of the increased value of 
the neighbouring sites as the result of the better preservation of the amenities of the 
district. 
On the edge of the newly developing building areas there is an intensive preserva- 
tion of game for sporting purposes: this involves much destruction of wild life by 
gamekeepers. As against this there is a reduction of gamekeeping in some of the 
remote rural districts. 
Prof. E. J. SALISBURY. 
These effects are due to both direct and indirect factors. One of the most important 
of the latter is man’s influence on the natural balance between species. Even rare 
species show marked persistence where conditions are stable. Protection neces- 
sarily involves artificial control owing to natural succession. The best palliative 
would seem to be the scheduling of large areas to be maintained in their present 
condition by careful control. 
