Building Bridges for Conservation: Dr Jonny Hanson’s Vision for Rewilding and Coexistence

It's great to be on the show. Thank you for having me. So I am an environmental social scientist at Queen's University Belfast, and I I study the relationship between people and nature and in particular how that's mediated through the processes of conservation and the process of of agriculture. So that's the day job. It keeps me pays the bills, keeps me going.

One One of many day jobs, and I think we're probably gonna dig into that a little bit more through our chat today. There's loads of things we can and probably will talk about. I mean, you've done so many things. You're a jack of all trades. I think you described yourself as that, and it certainly comes across when I've looked at your career history.

Something that's very much timely right now is you've been doing a lot of work and research into the reintroduction of large carnivores in Britain and Ireland. Mhmm. You've got a book out. We'll talk a little bit about that in a minute, but let's just start from the perspective of what large carnivals should we have within kind of the British isle sort of casting the net out wide? Like, what what's what's missing right now that should be out there right now?

Because I don't think we have any right now. I think I'm right in saying. No. I guess in historical times, so within the times that we've had people living on these islands, we've had brown bears, we've had gray wolves, and we've had Eurasian lynx. And the discussions at but the potential return of these species, particularly lynx, less so wolves because they're a bit more complicated.

And as far as I'm aware, no one is actively considering reintroducing bears. But as a as an umbrella term for large carnivores, the the debate is gathering ahead of steam, and it it's moving even over this the last 10 years that I've been observing it, even before I've become involved in it in the last few years. It's moving from a fringe issue to a mainstream issue. And so it's something that whatever part of the conservation sector that you work in or are aspiring to work in, that we should think carefully about about what that involves and weigh up the the pros and the cons, the cost and the benefits, and and who who wins and who loses. There's a lot of things to think about, Nick.

Yeah. There's a lot of balance to be struck. Why do you think the debate is kind of picking up a pace? I mean, it feels to me like linked to rewilding, restoration. It's all part of that kind of bigger process, which has become really popularized and almost mainstream within conservation.

Now it's an exciting area of growth. What's what's sped up the debate particularly around the kind of large kind of what do you think's kind of ignited that? Yeah. I think you're right. I think it is linked to rewilding, and and I'm a big fan of rewilding science.

I think it it's good to see conservation in nature on the front foot being proactive as opposed to as it was for much of the the latter half of the 20th century. On the back foot, it was about sticking fingers and dams, whereas your wilding bricks with that and is much more proactive. And at its best, it's not about some link back to an imagined past, but it's creating the ecosystems of the future and reevaluating our place within that. And in terms of creating those ecosystems, although we, as a form of apex predator ourselves, can replicate the role of predators to an extent. So for example, we can we can try to hunt and cull deer in order to reduce their numbers and stop overgrow overgrazing and and over rising, but we can't quite function the way that apex predators do because they don't only suppress the numbers of deer, particularly deer in these islands, but they also change the behavior of deer, something that's called the landscape of fear.

And being in an island that has lost a lot of biodiversity, the notion that these species could have profound and powerful effects on our countryside and on and on our ecosystems and provide lots and lots of benefits is is a tantalizing one. And I think that is the strongest part of the case for having them back with the caveat that it's not going to be a simplistic wolves change rivers model, which was often what is touted with what happened in in Yellowstone. And even in Yellowstone, it was a lot more complex. There were beavers reintroduced at the time that were involved in changing rivers. It wasn't just wolves.

So as long as we have that caveat in the discussion, the ecological benefits of these species is a big part of that discussion about rewilding and and of the need to restore nature, not just stop losing it. But the second part of that that I would add and my interest as an environmental social scientist is that these species, particularly lynx and wolves, are not just biological beings, but they're psychological symbols. And so more than anything else, I would argue that species like this. And in other parts of the world too, not just our islands, that they symbolize wild as an idea. They symbolize wild as a place, and they symbolize through rewilding.

They symbolize it as a process of taking it from somewhere that was in the distant past or somewhere that's far away in Africa or Asia, Nepal, or Serengeti, and they bring it into Northern England and Southern Scotland and the west of Ireland. And that symbolism goes in both directions. It can be a powerful for proponents that they are symbols of that that rewriting the story of the countryside and and and that vision for nature. But they can equally be symbols of out of out of touch liberal urban elites interfering in the countryside and imposing costs on farmers. These are the sort of things and and symbols that we can project onto these animals.

So it's also really important in this debate when we think about the growing interest in this that we remember that we're not just dealing with ecological facts, but we're also dealing with social perceptions and that symbolic aspect. We need to consider both at the same time. Mhmm. Yeah. You mentioned there's something I've not heard before, which is a landscape of fear.

Yeah. And how deer I immediately start to think, what does that mean for, like, a deer population? When they when they don't have big predators hunting them, they must be behaving quite differently. So I guess my question is, how would wildlife populations within the British Isles be different if large carnivores, like wolves, like lynx, even like bears actually, were just a native you know, became a part of our native fauna again. Like, what would be different?

Pros and cons, but, like, you know, what what we're missing right now that would suddenly change if they were here, if there was just a naturalized part that we'd accepted? Yeah. I I guess bears, although they are capable of of certainly hunting, they are more omnivorous than carnivorous. And I'm not sure there's been much even many research that I'm aware that has looked at the potential role. But certainly with wolves, which are pack hunters capable of taking large deer right up to, you know, adult red deer stags, which would be our largest deer species.

And then lynx, which are specialist forest dwellers and usually predating on roe deer. But in the context of Britain and Ireland, we also have then a series of invasive species, some of which are similar in size with muntjac and Chinese water deer. And then getting larger than that, we have fallow and sika as well. And they spend a lot of time eating trees and young trees. And I and I think foresters in particular, probably have some concerns about the damage that they do to forestry operations, and they just eat everything in sight often.

And so the role of predators in that is twofold. 1, they will actively hunt and eat deer. They will have that profound role in the ecosystem of changing the deer population by selecting. And and whereas we as humans, typically, we want adult males with fancy headgear that looks good over the mantelpiece and sounds good over a pint in the pub. Whereas apex predators are are hunting the weak and the sick and the ill and the young.

And so they can create, I I I believe, and understand healthier populations as well because they are the kind of pruning to to go back to the tree metaphor. But as you said, there's also then the landscape of fear is part of a broader package of what is called nonconsumptive effects. So when they eat deer, they're consuming them. Those are the direct effects. Deer numbers are reduced, but they also have indirect effects because they are in a landscape.

And this was well described in Yellowstone. Deer will start to avoid certain landscapes, maybe dense cover, maybe open areas where they're more, easy easily caught. But then can also have knock on effects in terms of if they're fearful, they may be more they're less likely to gain weight or reproduce. And then we see that in livestock as well, which is something we'll get on to later. So that whole package of ecological impacts, even though they're often relatively small numbers of apex predators in a landscape, has a profound and outsized effect.

The other tech technical term is is trophic cascades that just cascades down through the web of life having this incredible impact and benefit to all the web of life beneath them. Yeah. Yeah. It's really interesting to kinda just to connect to what that world what we're missing right now, what it could look like. Yeah.

And that's what this is all about, I guess. What would be the you talked about balance and sort of, you know, working with different communities. You talk you just touched on the impacts on what on on, obviously, on livestock, you know, and obviously farming, and there's all sorts of pros and cons. What would be the process of reintroduction? Let's say the links.

I guess that's the the the lowest hanging fruit here in terms of, potential impacts. Like, yeah, what would the process look like for reintroducing? Yeah. Who would you need to engage? Yeah.

How would what steps would you take? Let's keep keep it sort of general. Yeah. Sure. And I think it's worth saying there has been one failed attempt to reintroduce links about 8 years ago that, an effort was declined a license for the north of England, and then there are current projects that are at various stages in also in the north of England and then in Scotland.

Right. And the results early: 2024

So for lynx, that's that's forest cover. Secondly, within a landscape, is there the prey base? So are there enough roe deer sized deer in those landscapes to sustain? And, also, it's about thinking then about that population over a longer period of time. So as it expands, making sure that it's genetically healthy.

And some of the most recent work that's been done in the the north of England and and into Scotland all the way up to the Highlands is looking at that over a 100 years. So looking at habitat prey and genetics over a 100 years. And that's really the gold standard for considering a a population, and that's really exciting and important work. But in many ways, that that's the low hanging fruit. That's the low hanging fruit.

That that's the easy bit because the complicated bit is not so much the nature bit of large carnivore reintroductions. It's the human nature bit. Less the ecology and more the human ecology. Best practice there in my view, given that I work at this interface between large carnivore conservation and livestock farming, would be always to start, and I would recommend this not just in these islands, but all over the world, is to start with the most affected, which is typically because of real or perceived risk, livestock and landowners, particularly of sheep, which are quite vulnerable to large carnivores of of all sorts, bears, wolves, and lynx, and not just to bolt on a consultation with farmers at the end to try and get a license a reintroduction license from Natural England, which is what what happened, in my opinion, 8 years ago and other people's opinion too. But to really get to grips with the concerns and the perspectives of those livestock owners from the very outset and to build many of the approaches and solutions around their concerns.

Mhmm. And in my view, we also should in the same way that we're thinking about the ecology of a reintroduced populate reintroduced population links over a 100 years, we need to take a similar long term perspective with the social and the economic and the cultural and the political, the human dimensions as well. Mhmm. Because it's one thing to fund a pilot for 5 years and to fund compensation costs for lost sheep in those 5 years or to fund a suite of what I call the the coexistence toolkit. These measures that we can use to to protect livestock from large carnivores.

But we also need to be thinking, as that lynx population expands over a 100 years, how are we gonna pay for this over over that 100 year period? How are we gonna be paying for this in in a century? If there are 656 lynx in the north of England and Scotland, how are we gonna pay for that? And who's gonna pay for it? And this also comes down to a a big part of reintroductions in the social element is paying even more attention to those who are living closest to it, not just livestock owners.

So it's relatively easy for people living in a a leafy suburb of Belfast or Dublin or London or Cardiff or Edinburgh to think, isn't this a fantastic idea? And it is a fantastic idea. I love the idea and principle. But in practice, we should think carefully and give particular attention to those whose livelihoods are gonna be affected and whose daily routines are gonna be changed because they have to fence in a different way, or they have to employ livestock guardian animals or they're going to see some of their livestock killed. And also about that symbolic aspect that to some people like that, those changes are not just about changes to daily routines.

They can be seen, and I hinted at it earlier, they can be seen as an assault on a way of life. Mhmm. And that's something that I picked up on my travels across Western Europe and North America. I rarely find people who said I really don't like wolves. I really don't like links.

They said, I don't want to see my way of life changed, and I resent people from the outside who have never kept shape or run a farm trying to tell me how to change the way I farm or the way I live or this piece of land that I've had for 6 generations. So starting with those concerns, to me, that that is absolutely fundamental. Yeah. Starting with those concerns, working with local people from the beginning, and also having this much longer term view, this 100 year type vision as well about how these are gonna how these changes might be implemented and managed here. So you've you've got a book coming out.

It's called Living With Linked, Sharing Landscapes with Big Cats, Walls, and Bears. And you did a bit of an epic rewilding road trip across Western Europe and North America. Like, what was the what was the motivation for the book? Like, why did you decide to write a book in the first place? Yeah.

It's it's a good question. You know, I've always wanted to write a book. I've just, a create very creative person. I was, not many people know this, but between the ages of 5 15, I was classically trained in in piano and clarinet and musical theory. So I have this creative element which finds some expression in the social science that I do, but it's statistical analysis and scientific rigor.

And what I wanted to do was take all of the scientific knowledge and social scientific knowledge that we're talking about and the historical knowledge that we've hinted at in terms of the history of our relationship with these species in Britain and Ireland, and bring that together with just a really good story. A story that makes people laugh, makes people cry, makes people swear, makes people just wonder and think about this and be excited. I wanted to write to turn it into something that people at the end of one chapter was like, oh my word. I can't believe that happened. How is Johnny Hanson gonna survive to the end of the next chapter, never mind the end of the book in 1 piece?

And what I do, I suppose, that that the tagline that I have on my website and and social media accounts is that I I bring the world to life, and I wanted to bring this topic to life by writing a really exciting, popular science adventure travelogue. That's all I did. I look forward to reading it. Sounds great. What did you learn then through through the book?

Like, what would people discover, or what surprised you? Because you've spoken to over 50 people, 7 countries. There's lots of stories in there, lots of conversations. You've brought that to life. Like, what, yeah, what what surprise elements or what did you learn through those conversations that people will read about?

Yeah. Well, the, you know, the book's 85,000 words, which sounds like a lot. Well, it it could have been twice that. There's I really had to be selective. And I I guess I learned so many things, but I can distill it down to to 3 main messages.

One is that when these animals return, particularly after long absences, It is really challenging. And we shouldn't sugar, could it? It is challenging. It's challenging for all the reasons we've discussed in the last 20 minutes. So the first thing is my advice is never lose these species.

Never never lose them. Do everything we can to keep them in a landscape and not lose them because once you lose them, it's really hard to bring them back. And the longer the time period goes between them last being here and coming back, the harder it becomes because we lose the memory. And we get used to putting sheep on a hillside and and visiting them once a day and bringing them in after 6 months for the winter down to the down from the Dales to the lowlands. All of those changes.

We we don't like change as a species. We like our daily routine, and we like our way of life. And we think things will always be as they always are, and they never are, but we think they will be. So I think acknowledging that. I came to write this book as a professional large carnivore conservationist.

My PhD was in how to snow leopard share landscapes with people and their livestock and their other activities like tourism. But I hadn't anticipated the challenges of bringing large carnivores, particularly wolves more so than lynx back. And I was a bit taken aback, especially in Europe, in Switzerland and the Netherlands, by the degree of social conflict that the return of these animals can generate, especially when it is poorly managed. Whenever we don't factor in all of those human dimensions and when we don't start with farmers' concerns at the center when they're tacked on at the end or to save money, people are only given 50% compensation. So that's one of the big big lessons.

The other is that in these islands, I been thinking about this topic for 10 years and actively researching it now for the last 2 in a bit. Even though I think it is harder than I first anticipated, I think it is more likely. And I think it is gathering pace as we've already said a couple of times. And strategically, again, we should we should take a step back and think about this in terms of decades and not just years. Because in all the places that I visited, the debate about the return of these species played out over decades and not just years.

And, strategically, if we think about the strategic factors that are shaping the future of the British and Irish countryside, particularly reforestation in upland areas, Less people involved in livestock, including upland sheep farming. Mhmm. Expanding environmental consciousness, particularly in urban and younger voters and consumers. Meeting climate change goals through that afforestation, expanding deer populations. We are creating, I think, in the future, whenever that might be the more and more suitable conditions for these animals' return.

We're creating the environmental, ecological conditions. We're creating the social conditions. We're creating the economic conditions. And I think at some point, all of these are going to align to facilitate this to happen most likely with links. And if it happens with links, it's probably more likely that wolves will happen.

And into that mix, I would throw also technical technological factors that while these are not a substitute relational process. Reintroducing carnivores is a relational process. It's a relational process between people and a relational process between us and other animals and the rest of nature. So technological solutions can't substitute for that, but my goodness, they can certainly help us with that in terms of digital fences with sensors on lynx collars and sensors and sheet collars that set set off sirens when links come near a field. You know, those sorts of tools, I think, will become more readily available and can be actively designed.

And so that's the second thing, that it's one is that it's it's more challenging than anticipated. 2, it's more likely than I anticipated. And the third thing, and and this goes way beyond just this argument, these species, and even beyond conservation, is sharing landscapes with large carnivores is also about sharing landscapes with each other. It's about sharing landscapes of people who think differently, look differently, vote differently, who have different visions for the land, different views in the past, the present, the future, different values, different approaches to value, and and to what extent money and finance and economics should shape the future of nature. And we need to find ways to share landscapes with each other.

And we're as I travel 29,000 kilometers across Western Europe and North America, talking to people who were at all points in the political spectrum, all walks of life, I what I kept discovering is that people really love the places that they live. And this debate gets heated because people really care about the future of the places that they come from. And I think in this highly polarized political social and political context that we find ourselves now, that we should remember that When someone disagrees with us and makes for introductions or or will for introductions or anything else for that matter in conservation or otherwise, that we all really care about where we're from and where it's going and our part in that. And that that that's a really important piece of common ground to to hold on to. Yeah.

Beautiful. Yeah. I love that. You mentioned this is your first book. It's 85,000 words.

Could have been twice as many. I feel like there's probably more books in you as well. I'm sort of sensing that. Well, how did you find the writing process? Like, what was that like?

Not many of us written books. Was it easy? Did you have a certain time of the day? Like, just talk us through the actual, you know, rigor or joy of writing. Yeah.

I I got into a bit of a rhythm when I started writing, but I should precise that by saying that I had, a research assistant who did a lot of the the docuework in terms of I would so I had when you submit a book proposal to a publisher, you have to come up with a a plan and you have a marketing plan, but also how many chapters and a one page summary for each chapter, and then you have to have a sample chapter. So starting with that, and then I created a detailed plan for every chapter. And as I went through, I'd send the detailed plan to my research assistant, and Jack would do then would would thoroughly research it and come back to me with a dossier of papers and summaries and abstracts, attached to all the different points in the chapters as I went through. Because, yes, it's it's primarily a story, but there's also a lot of of science. And then I think that, actually, both of those go together, the facts and the feelings, the evidence and the emotion, the science, and the stories.

to: 6000

to: 6000

I find that if I went more than 3 days a week, it became a law of diminishing returns. So I could get a chapter a chapter and a bit written per week. I get 1 and 2 thirds written if I worked 5 days. But once I went over 3 mornings a week, just some of the creative spark ebbed away. Mhmm.

And so that was one of the big learning points for me in writing this book is you gotta piss yourself, and you gotta you gotta just allow yourself the energy to be creative in the process as well and just find that rhythm. Others will work differently, and and and that's fine. Everyone has their own routine and rhythm, but that worked for me really well. Yeah. Yeah.

Right. Do it again. Do it again. I love it again. Structure that you've got.

Yeah. And I like the rhythm, and you've obviously learnt when your energy drops and how to optimize and balance everything. And it sounds like everyone needs was it a Jack, the researcher? Sounds fantastic. Yes.

Everybody does. Yeah. Let's talk about your career. You've done so many things, and time is relatively short, but I want to try and dig in as much as I can. Let's start with your current role if we can.

So you're a research fellow at Queen's University Belfast with a social policy hub called ARC, yeah, amongst other things. What what's your current job like? Like, how do you describe it to your family and friends who have no idea what it is you do day to day? Yeah. So well, to also put it in the context of of what we've said and particularly that last point well, the first point I said was that those kind of introductions are really tricky.

The second was that they're becoming more likely. And the third was that they're about coexisting with each other. So we need natural science data in that, particularly for that ecological baseline. We need social science data to understand us as people. And often that's quantitative data.

ive us that breadth of what a: 1000

the Good Friday Agreement of: 1990

Catholics think about Protestants, how people think about new minority ethnic groups coming into the country or how people think about the police, all of those sort of things. And my point is this, that when it comes to solving environmental conflicts, we, in conservation, we need to take those methodologies from peacebuilding in Northern Ireland and across the world, and we need to apply them to solving environmental conflicts. And so I work in ARC, surrounded by sociologists and social policy wonks and educationalists and all of these different academics who who have never studied conservation. And I try I'm learning about how we I can take those peace building approaches and bring them to conservation. But what I also do is bring an environmental angle to their work.

Because if you go back in Northern Irish history, if you go back in British history or Irish history, those conflicts that we've had and anywhere else in the world, it's always about land. You go back far enough. It's about who gets to do what with the land, when, and where. It's about who controls it. Even these debates, should we have links back or not?

It it's about who gets to do what with the land. So if you don't have an environmental angle when it comes to understanding the past, the present, the future, then the social policy, the peace building that you're doing will not be fully complete. So at the same time in Arcos, I'm learning about peace building and bringing it to conservation. I'm bringing conservation to people who don't generally engage with conservation. And there's a lesson there for me in thinking you were saying how do I explain it to my family, but I'm always thinking how do I make the these 1st year social workers?

How do I make them think about biodiversity conservation? What what is their what is what gets them out of bed, and what makes them think that they need to engage with the natural world? And it's it's not always about the intrinsic value of nature, which for me is an integral part of the way that we value the natural world that has a right to exist independent of our interaction with it. But I think we in conservation need to accept that that's not everybody's starting point. Some people's starting point is, I want good food for my kids.

I want a nice house, that is warm in winter. I want x, y, or zed. And so I think conservation needs to also, at the same time as setting up the inalienable right of nature to exist, also needs to find ways for it to slot into people's everyday lives because it provides a green space for them to walk their dog or walk their children, or it provides beauty in an urban environment or an escape to the countryside. And so it's it's forcing me being in this social policy unit to think creatively about how I bring conservation biodiversity and the environment to different audiences, both of my fellow academics and researchers and also to some of the students that I I teach. And I I guess that's the hallmark of my career is that I just like to do things differently, and I like I like a challenge.

I don't follow the herd, and there's something to be gained from that sometimes. It's how innovation happens. Yeah. Yeah. And you are innovative for sure.

I love what you're saying about, like what I'm hearing is I'm listening to you through the interviews. We want a a real understanding of community and of people and of culture and of history, and also just a a a real art of communications, like how to convey messages and speak to people. And that feels like it's woven into so many threads of of, yeah, of how you approach things. You touched on there about innovation as well. I want to talk about about that particularly with you and look back at your career steps so far.

We've got sort of 10, 15 minutes or so, so I want to make sure we cover the key bits we have. So let me speak back your history too. But Yes. In my interest in. So you studied medieval history and archaeology at Queen's University Belfast.

Medieval history and archaeology. Interesting. Then you did business management and sustainability at Queen's University Management School. You then worked in nature education and fundraising. And then as you've already said, you did a PhD in snow leopard conservation at University of Cambridge.

You then set up some community farms as well, didn't you as well? So where to go? What what do you think what have been the kind of what's the key thread that that that brings all that together? Is are there kind of skills or connections across that? Because it feels like there's lots of parts, and you're very multidisciplinary.

Maybe that's the key thread is that you don't just do one thing, you do lots. I don't know. When you look back at your career, what's what's been important to you? Yeah. I the multidisciplinary is important.

But even going back even, you know, to childhood, this I've already referenced it with all the music that I did. But, I grew up between 2 islands. I grew up between the Republic of Ireland and North of Ireland, moving back and forth between cultures. I didn't really feel like I was either British or Irish. I came to feel that I was both.

But then also in preschool and high school, I lived in Malawi in Southern Africa. So I grew up between multiple cultures, and that was not always easy as a teenager when your point of reference is constantly shifting. But as it relates to my career, I the the golden thread that runs through it is as I grew up between worlds, what I do now is I build bridges between worlds. I build bridges between natural science and social science, between the conservation humanities and the conservation sciences, between conservation and agriculture, between large carnivore reintroductions and livestock conservation, between social policy wonks and social workers and the environmental space and environmental NGOs. And in a world that so often is about building walls, then I think we need people to build bridges.

And we need it in conservation too to widen widen what conservation is. Like, conservation to me, it's it's a social process. It's something that is done by people to, with, and for nature based on vision and and values and value. It's not, as I talk about in the book, a series not just at least a series of science experiments held together with string. It is a big tent social process.

And that tent in the UK has often been, limited. It it limited by class, limited by race. And I think conservation will be stronger when we make that tent bigger and we invite people in. And people who bring different ways of thinking about and valuing nature and and relating to it. And so when I set up and ran that community farm, which was again about building that bridge between conserving land and also farming land, producing food, and and maintaining food and landscapes for a while.

One of the things that we did was expand the remit of who is involved in that place, that piece of land, to not just be of the middle class and people who are doing fairly well and could afford the food. We did a low we we needed and valued people like that. They were a big part of the project. But 2 days a week, we also had referrals from the NHS of adults with learning difficulties. And we also set up the first pilot of its kind in Northern Ireland, which was a project to work with refugees and asylum seekers.

Mhmm. And involve them in, yes, the agricultural side, but also the conservation side and and the 2 together. And that, again, is is building bridges, inviting people into the conservation tent who perhaps have been excluded before. I think conservation will be stronger, better, and more diverse biologically when it is stronger and better, more diverse culturally and socially as well. Yeah.

Yeah. Fantastic. Yeah. I absolutely see that that golden thread. You described it brilliantly.

Yeah. You may feel you've answered this, but I'm gonna ask it again anyway. Just think yeah. We as conservationists, wildlife conservationists, we are we're winning some battles, but we're largely losing the war globally. You know, we are seeing, you know, worrying declines in species and ecosystems and habitats across the planet.

What do you think we as a conservation sector need to do more of or be better at to have more impact? Like, what what can we do to really dial it up and actually really to see nature coming back at scale and at a speed that we require? Yeah. I I was I suspected you might ask me this question, so I was thinking about this. 2 things stand out.

I'll say the one first and then the the second one, which has a slightly controversial example that, we'll see what what your listeners think of it. The the first one, I think, is the importance of governance, and particularly when I think about snow leopard conservation in Nepal or particularly with large carnivore introductions to Britain and Ireland, that governance is the foundation on which a lot of these things sit in that it's a forum and a mechanism to bring people together at multiple scales, whether it's the local at the village level right up to the global level. And I think we see are seeing a worrying fraying of global governance, which doesn't bode well for biodiversity or climate or for many other things at the moment. And I it troubles me, and I I don't I don't have a fix to that other than to say, I think governance is really important. Because when it's conservation becomes a bigger tent with more people or we're wanting to reintroduce a species to a landscape.

Having ways to turn to make sure that con conservation is based on conversation is absolutely essential. The other thing and this is why I went to business school, and it's why I'm a passionate entrepreneur. I'm pro innovator and pro entrepreneur more than being pro or anti marketer, pro or anti government. I I believe in in supporting innovative people. And after setting up the community farm, I ran an accelerator that helped others to to do the same.

But I say this a lot in the book. It it keep coming back to the ecology and economy both have the same Greek root word, which is oikos, which means home. And the fundamental goal for me of this century that will solve the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis and the pollution crisis and many others is to make sure that the oikos of ecology and the oikos of economy work in synchronicity instead of segregation. So that instead of this linear economy where we take, make, and discard, we discard species, we discard ecosystems, we discard people, we discard the climate. Then instead of that linear model, we have a circular model where we take, make, and regenerate.

And this is where we get into the role of of money and economics and finance in conservation. I think we don't have the luxury of not using that with the caveat that we as a species have a fondness for finance finance that can lead us into very dark places. So we have to have that caveat and and caution in mind. But I was thinking about this example. I'd be interested to hear what your your listeners think about this, and, hopefully, I won't get into trouble with the bat police.

But with the HS 2 project, which I'm not gonna get into the the wrongs and the rights and the ins and the outs, But I was just reading that I think there was a 100,000,000 spent on a a bat tunnel somewhere on the HS 2 line. And, again, hopefully, the bat place won't come knocking on my door when I say this. But I was thinking that imagine that 100,000,000 instead of that building tunnel had been spent on investing in nature restoration projects across the UK. That this is where I'm getting into biodiversity net gain. I think there would have been a net gain for bats overall as as multiple bat species and for bat populations.

But also that 100,000,000 and getting the financing right for conservation is going to be really, really important. So that's just a little slightly controversial example to to get people thinking. But it also what that also gets us thinking about, and this relates back to governance and to finish really quickly with this, is that involves trade offs. Can we always say no to every project, or are there some projects that have to happen, but we can actually have more nature conservation in other areas? It's tricky topic, Nick.

There'll be many opinions on that, but, we need to get that ecology and and that economy working together. Yeah. Absolutely. And it's something we talked a lot about on this podcast too and something I believe quite passionately as well is, you know, the role of the charity sector, for instance, is incredibly important and done such great work, but we need something beyond a charity sector model if we're going to, you know, save the planet. We can't just save it on spare change in donations.

You know, we need an economic model that drives that growth that links to business and prosperity, yeah, for all Thank you, sir. People. So, yeah, I'm totally with you on that. Yeah. Absolutely.

As we sort of start to wrap up, few general questions, if I may. One is, a lot of our listeners, and we've got some people listening here, would love to ask their questions once we've finished our recording, are aspiring conservationists, their career switchers looking to switch their career from whatever they're doing to now working wildlife conservation, or they're students, job seekers looking to get their first job. What sort of careers advice would you give people who are looking to kinda start their career in wildlife conservation? Are there any things that people should bear in mind or might help them through your experience? Yeah.

Yeah. There are. And I remember it may not sound like it now, but I remember being in that place myself many years ago. So I've been through it. And 2 two things helped me.

1 was I spent all my university summers working with as many different projects and species as I could all over the place, all over Britain and Ireland, all over the world. So depending and and that'll be easier if you're a a a non attached student as opposed to perhaps if you're switching careers and you have a a family and and commitments, that's obviously gonna be different. But even in your spare time, try and get practical experience in a particularly in a an area of conservation that you're interested in. That definitely helped me also know what I didn't want to do, what what I did want to do. It it confirmed that I wanted to spend the rest of my life working with big cats.

And 20 years later well, 18 years later, here I still am doing that. The other aspect I would say is don't be afraid to not follow the herd. Don't be afraid to do it differently than everyone else is doing it. So the standard conservation approach is do zoology, conservation biology masters, and then work in conservation. But because conservation is a social process, we need zoology and biology, but we also need philosophers and economists and entrepreneurs and doctors and vets, theologians, you name it, financiers.

You name it. We need it. So, particularly, if you're coming to this as a mid career professional with a career already, think about how you can leverage the skills and career you've had so far to bring something innovative and unique to the conservation sector. Look where the gaps are and look where the problems are and say, how can my career solve the problem that conservation has? So I'm trained as as a historian, as an entrepreneur, and a social science.

And conservation has gaps in social science, enterprise, and history. So I am able to fill those gaps that are are there. If, on the other hand, you're starting out, I would strongly advise that you don't just do the same old, same old, which is nothing wrong with it. But I would say at some point along the way, make sure that you study other subjects. Even if it's part of your degree, do a minor in anthropology.

Do a minor in geography. Do a minor in music. Do whatever it might be. Upskill yourself because the world in all its richness and wonders does not just fit into these little academic silos that the Victorians gave us at the in a 150 years ago. It is so much broader than that.

And so in conservation alone and in any other space, we can't just expect one discipline to have all the answers, never mind ask all the right questions. So build bridges between subjects, and that will help you to build bridges in conservation. Brilliant. And that theme of bridges comes back again at the end. Lovely.

Johnny, it's been such a nice chat. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for sharing your time with us here today. Your book, Living with Link, Sharing Landscapes and Big Cats, Walls, and Bears is out February 11th. Yeah.

And it's, well, we'll drop links below this. Thanks for your time. If people wanna find out a bit more about your work, people wanna find the book, where should we send them? Where should they go? You can go to my website, johnnghanson dotcom, and I have a quarterly newsletter.

I won't spam you every week or every month, but every quarter, you'll get an email about what I'm up to. And I'm on most social media channels at johnnyhansen. Wonderful. Thanks again, Johnny. Thanks for joining us.

Thank you so much. Thank you. Cheers. Right. Wonderful.