Conservationists urge the UK government to ban harmful pesticides as butterfly numbers hit a record low in the 2024 UK butterfly emergency

The UK has declared a national “butterfly emergency” after the 2024 Big Butterfly Count recorded the lowest-ever numbers of these key pollinators. Butterfly Conservation, the group behind the annual survey, revealed that participants counted an average of just seven butterflies per 15-minute observation period—the worst figures in the survey’s 14-year history. This alarming data underscores the urgency of the UK butterfly emergency 2024 and highlights the need for immediate conservation efforts.

This year saw significant declines in once-common species like the small tortoiseshell, common blue, and green-veined white, with eight out of the 10 most-seen species reporting long-term population drops. The survey, which enlists thousands of citizen scientists, found that in some areas of the UK, participants recorded no butterflies at all, marking a sharp deterioration from previous years.

The collapse in numbers has prompted Butterfly Conservation to call on the UK government to take urgent action, starting with a complete ban on neonicotinoid pesticides. Despite a partial ban on neonicotinoids in 2018, exemptions for their use on sugar beet have been granted annually since 2021. These chemicals, designed to kill pests, are believed to play a significant role in the butterfly population decline as they affect insects’ food sources and their ability to reproduce.

Richard Fox, Butterfly Conservation’s head of science, expressed his concerns, noting that “a third of the species recorded in the Big Butterfly Count had their worst year on record.” He emphasized that butterflies are vital indicators of environmental health, with their rapid decline signalling broader issues within the UK’s natural ecosystems. “Nature is sending us a warning,” Fox added, “and we must act now if we want to reverse these worrying trends.”

Weather patterns also contributed to the steep decline, with a wet and cold first half of summer reducing breeding success for many species. However, experts argue that weather alone doesn’t explain the long-term decline, which has been evident for over a decade. The Big Butterfly Count’s 2024 results showed an alarming 22% drop from the previous year’s figures, making it clear that urgent intervention is needed to address the UK butterfly emergency in 2024.

Butterfly Conservation is urging the public to sign an open letter to Environment Secretary Steve Reed, demanding that the government ban neonicotinoids outright. In total, more than 85,000 volunteers participated in the survey, recording over 935,000 butterflies and day-flying moths. Yet, this total represented a significant drop from last year, when more than 1.5 million insects were logged.

A spokesperson from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) stated that the government remains committed to protecting pollinators and will continue to review the use of harmful pesticides. But for many conservationists, these assurances are not enough. They argue that only a full ban on neonicotinoids and more stringent policies to safeguard biodiversity can reverse the sharp decline in butterfly populations, especially in light of the ongoing UK butterfly emergency in 2024.

Analysis

Political: The butterfly crisis is putting pressure on the UK government, particularly as it navigates environmental policies post-Brexit. While neonicotinoids were banned across the EU in 2018, the UK has repeatedly allowed exceptions for sugar beet farmers, which is now under increasing scrutiny. The Conservative government has faced criticism for not prioritizing environmental issues amid more pressing economic concerns. However, with the 2024 butterfly count triggering calls for a nature emergency declaration, the environment could become a hot political topic, particularly ahead of the next general election. Labour, under Keir Starmer, has pledged to ban neonicotinoids entirely, providing a clear political contrast with the ruling party’s approach. The butterfly crisis could serve as a litmus test for the government’s commitment to environmental sustainability, especially as public awareness grows around biodiversity loss.

Social: Socially, the dramatic fall in butterfly numbers has raised alarm over the broader impacts of biodiversity loss on everyday life. Butterflies are often seen as symbols of nature’s beauty and fragility, and their disappearance resonates with the public in a way that more abstract environmental concerns may not. Many citizen scientists participate in the Big Butterfly Count as a form of community engagement, and the event has served as an entry point for environmental activism for thousands of people. The butterfly emergency may galvanize public support for broader conservation efforts, but it also points to growing societal tensions over the use of pesticides and the prioritization of agricultural interests over environmental health. As the UK public becomes more aware of the connections between biodiversity and food security, the demand for greener policies is likely to increase.

Gender: The butterfly emergency also has implications for gender roles in environmental advocacy. Women have historically been at the forefront of grassroots environmental movements, and the Big Butterfly Count is no exception. Female-led organizations have played a significant role in raising awareness about the decline in pollinator populations. The growing environmental crisis offers an opportunity to highlight women’s contributions to conservation efforts and could lead to more women stepping into leadership roles in both policy-making and activism. Additionally, the focus on biodiversity preservation aligns with broader feminist critiques of unsustainable economic models that prioritize short-term profits over long-term ecological health.

Economic: Economically, the butterfly crisis underscores the growing tension between agricultural practices and environmental sustainability. The UK’s sugar beet industry, which has been granted exemptions to use neonicotinoids, illustrates the difficult balancing act between supporting agriculture and protecting biodiversity. While farmers argue that neonicotinoids are necessary to protect crops from pests, the long-term costs of biodiversity loss, including the decline of pollinators essential for other crops, could outweigh these short-term benefits. The economic case for banning harmful pesticides becomes even clearer when considering the potential losses in tourism and recreation. Nature-based tourism, including butterfly watching, contributes to local economies, particularly in rural areas, and its decline could have broader economic repercussions.

The butterfly emergency thus serves as a microcosm of the broader economic debate surrounding environmental policy. If the UK government continues to prioritize short-term agricultural gains over long-term environmental health, the country risks facing even more severe ecological and economic consequences in the years to come.