Having traversed half of Europe visiting biodiversity projects and pondering what we saw and heard during these visits in the countless hours of cycling in between, we have come to some conclusions on the biodiversity of the Danube and beyond. Before our memories and tan lines fade we wanted to set out our four top thoughts:

1. NGOs are on the frontline of conservation

One of the most rewarding aspects of the trip was meeting passionate advocates working on the coal face of conservation. Seeing the work going on in and around national parks reminded us that many of the rare species and wild places we appreciated would not exist but for the passion and dedication of people like Jasmin Sadikovic in Croatia. Thank you to all who gave us an insight into the biodiversity of the Danube.

2. National parks are important but not enough

Perhaps it was the way we organised the trip but many of the projects we visited were in national parks and over time an impression built up in our minds that much of the effort that was going in to protecting natural environments along the Danube was occurring in these national parks and was often largely funded by tourism. Something about this realisation made us uneasy. Separating natural and human environments risks creating a mentality that human beings are apart from nature, not part of it. We concluded that projects that integrate the two, particularly in cities, should be given more attention. We would like to see sturgeon swimming beneath Belgrade bridges and white tailed eagles hunting in the Bratislava suburbs.

3. Ecosystems are easier to talk about than biodiversity

When we set out on this trip we wanted to find real stories that would bring to life the benefits that biodiversity provides. However more often than not the stories we found related to a particular species, or an ecosystem function. It was more or less impossible to find good stories that demonstrated the importance of the number and variety of species. That’s not to say it is not important – it is. The problem is that the connection between the ecosystem function that provides the human benefit and the number and variety of species in an area can be extremely complex and doesn't make for easy telling. It’s better to talk about particular species/ecosystems to connect with people but we still need to use biodiversity as a measure of the ecosystems health.

4. Focusing on utilitarian benefits of ecosystems may be useful, but struggles to stir passions

Our central question throughout the trip was ‘what has biodiversity ever done for us?’ We asked everyone we met for an answer to it. Responses varied: we heard interesting stories about everything from how locals were benefiting from tourism revenue generated by newly protected areas, to how ladybirds help make a good Sauvignon Blanc. They were interesting answers, but not passionate ones. The passionate answers were those that told us how being in an untamed natural environment made people feel and how it affected them when they were younger. The importance of these emotional responses should not be underestimated. Understanding that it is the biodiversity that we immerse ourselves in, that squirms across the palm of our hand, which fosters a personal connection to the natural world is crucial. Good science and the resulting reports and stats that are published each year are fundamental to the decision making processes of governments and businesses but to engage people emotionally you need experiences that connect them with nature.