Last week saw the 265th anniversary of the birth of Scotland’s national poet, Robert Burns. Oor Rabbie is known, remembered and celebrated worldwide as an outstanding and prolific composer of verse, a writer and collector of folk songs, a good drinker, a bad farmer, and a bit of a ladies’ man (I reserve the right to mild understatement here). This is all common knowledge, but in addition, many folk may have missed the fact that he was also a pretty decent naturalist to boot.

One source reckoned that his works referenced upwards of 40 different species of birds, for instance. Another estimated that he had written 118 separate poems on the theme of nature, though many more besides contain passing references to wildlife. He clearly knew and recognised many of the species that inhabited the countryside where he lived and worked: Aiks and Birks (Oak and Birch trees), Fummarts and Maukins (Polecats and Hares), Gleads and Paitricks (Red Kites and Grey Partridges) all rated a mention at one point or another. As well as many, many more besides. When it came to natural history knowledge, Burns was a good all-rounder.

Impressively, this was in the late 18th Century, an age before you could point your smart phone at something and get it to identify what you’re looking at, or look it up on Google (other search engines are of course available), or even check out a field guide. I’d venture to say Burns probably didn’t have a decent pair of binoculars either. His field skills would have been honed the old-fashioned way – careful and thoughtful observation, combined with knowledge passed down the generations by word of mouth. This was much the same way I learned the basics when I was growing up, more than 200 years down the line (and there ends any similarity with the great man himself).

Of course, the Scotland that Burns knew would have looked very different to the Scotland that we know today. Huge changes have taken place in the interim with regard to agriculture and general land use, development, transport and population (there are four times as many people in Scotland today than when Burns was alive, for example). Although the population back then was far smaller, more people would have made their living directly from the land, as did Burns during his rather unsuccessful career in agriculture. Consequently people would have had much closer links with their surroundings, and the other creatures inhabiting those surroundings, than most of us do today.

There would undoubtedly have been a lot more wildlife, and wild land, in Scotland during Robert Burns’ lifetime than that which we have in 2024. But for a’ that, Burns was still acutely aware of the pressures applied to nature by humanity. In his well-known and much-loved ‘To a Mouse’, penned in the year 1785, he writes:
I’m truly sorry Man’s dominion
Has broken Nature’s social union,
An’ justifies that ill opinion
Which makes thee startle
At me, thy poor, earth-born companion
An’ fellow-mortal!
For my money, this verse proves that Rabbie was way ahead of his time. ‘Man’s dominion has broken Nature’s social union’ – wow. And this was in 1785! I often wonder what he would have made of 21st Century Scotland, specifically the state of nature and our relationship with it. I suspect he may have ended up seeking solace in gude ales and bonnie lassies.

My point here is that our difficult relationship with nature is nothing new. The difference between the 1780s and the 2020s is that we are more powerful than ever, in terms of exerting control and influence over the natural world. Technology, medicine, agriculture and sheer weight of numbers combine to give us, in Burns’ words, dominion over nature. But we’re also more knowledgeable than ever about the problems facing the planet, problems of our own making. It’s now up to us how we use this knowledge and power.

On the Reserve lately I have heard many grumbles about the wildlife getting the rough end of the stick; these are nothing new either. People out on the mudflats at low tide, preventing the wading-birds from feeding in sub-zero conditions. Dogs running amok, chasing the Roe Deer and flushing roosting birds off the lochs and estuary. Seals getting disturbed by over-curious beach-goers. Wildlife getting buzzed by drones. The list goes on. The recurring theme is a lack of consideration for the other species that share our environment. Surely a National Nature Reserve deserves a bit more respect than that?

However, all of these things are within our power as individuals to change. Our behaviours when outdoors, particularly in sensitive and important areas for wildlife, can have far-reaching consequences. We may not think that our own actions matter that much; after all, I’m just one person in seven billion, so what difference does it make? Well, that’s just it – often the problem is the cumulative effect. You might not think it’s a big problem if your dog flushes all the ducks off the creek, but when everyone else’s dog does the same, throughout the day – every day – the combined effect can be disastrous. But if everyone considered this sort of thing, and acted accordingly, the problem could be solved. You, as the individual, have the power to change things.

Nature conservation has always been an uphill struggle, but some brilliant minds have taken up the challenge down the years, many of whom were way ahead of the curve: Peter Scott, Aldo Leopold, Bert Axell, et al. Robert Burns perhaps deserves honourable mention as a proto-conservationist too, one who showed compassion towards his ‘fellow mortals’ of whatever species – even the aforementioned mouse, which then, as now, would have been considered ‘vermin’ by many people.

Maybe we should all channel our inner Rabbie in this respect, and together we might make the world a better place for nature and humanity alike. I’ll drink to that.




































































































































































