Can No Mow May cause more harm than good?

FORGIVE ME, BUT I'M REALLY SURPRISED that your wildlife magazine continues to encourage people to partake in Plantlife's No Mow May campaign each year due to the harm it can cause.

Every garden will have wildlife that lives amongst the plants and in the nooks and crannies of various structures. When people leave their lawns uncut, it is not just the flying pollinators that will be attracted to the new habitat when various flowers appear, but many of the garden's resident creatures will move into the long grass, too.

It is these creatures that are then destroyed when the mowing resumes once May has passed. You only have to look at the life-cycle of grasshoppers to realise why No Mow May can be such a destructive scheme for wildlife.

If new habitats are to be created in gardens, then they need to be long term and not just for a month or two. In fact, there are many really good things that people could do in their garden to help our declining biodiversity rather than unwittingly risk harming it.

Now that I have retired from my job as head of entomology at the John Innes Centre in Norwich, I spend a lot of time talking to gardening clubs where I can explain the importance of balanced ecosystems. It would be great if you highlighted the pitfalls of creating temporary habitats (eg No Mow May) and what people could be doing instead. Ian Bedford, entomologist and show speaker, via email

PLANTLIFE REPLIES:

The campaign isn't and never has been about creating temporary habitats, but rather encouraging a change in mindset and behaviours as part of a new approach to lawns and green spaces.

Plantlife promotes a mixed mowing regime, with multiple different grass lengths, which has the greatest benefit to wildlife. Short lawns are best for bird's-foot trefoil, for instance, and mini meadow areas mown two to three times a year outside of peak summer months are often home to taller flowers such as musk mallow or oxeye daisies.