Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
Beavers, otters and dormice are in danger the wildlife That could be put at risk by new planning proposals, green groups have warned.
Senior ministers have pointed the finger at species such as bats, spiders and snails for preventing new housing and major infrastructure development, and proposed changes to planning rules they claim will work for growth and nature.
As part of the proposed plans, developers Levies may have to be paid for their impacts on nature.
A report by the Wildlife and Countryside Link (WCL) coalition of 90 nature organizations warns of a “black hole” as evidence that proposals to make developers pay fees rather than follow existing rules to protect wildlife would work for many species.
Under the government’s Planning and Infrastructure Bill, new environmental development schemes will allow schemes that could harm legally protected sites or wildlife to pay a “nature restoration levy” to enable the habitat or species to be restored overall on a “strategic” scale.
The government has highlighted a “district level licensing” approach for great crested newts, which speeds up construction plans by replacing old measures of capturing, counting and relocating the amphibians with a faster system that charges developers a fee for building new high-quality habitat.
But the WCL report says great crested newts are currently the only species where the strategic approach has proven effective.
Conservationists have warned that, without rigorous evidence and effective field trials, moving away from the current approach of site-level protection measures to prevent and reduce harm to protected species could pose a “serious threat” to already declining wildlife and wild animal welfare.
This potentially threatens a whole host of British species, including hazel dormice, otters, barn owls, gray seals, Atlantic salmon, badgers, hedgehogs, rare fungi and plants and even the recently reintroduced beaver, they argue.
For some species, such as those that are restricted to a few locations, are territorial or cannot easily move, it is unlikely that this approach will work, while for many species, including widespread but declining species, there is “shaky” or “insufficient” evidence on whether it could be successful, he said.
The report highlights potential threats to protected species such as:
- The hazel dormice, which has seen its numbers decline by 70 percent since 2000, has a fragmented population and requires well-connected hedgerows, woodland and scrub to survive;
- beaverwhich require extensive unpolluted river systems, and are highly regional and difficult to relocate;
- Barn owls, which depend on open countryside and barns for breeding and have suffered habitat loss and lack of suitable nesting sites due to the conversion of old buildings;
- lizard orchids, flowers that grow only in certain areas and are difficult to relocate because of their complex relationships with fungi and other soil organisms;
- Beavers, which have recently been reintroduced with government support for wide-scale release, may be vulnerable to compensation measures that could undermine their populations and long-term recovery.
The report notes that wildlife may require specific conditions that take decades or centuries to form, warning that “homes, areas and habitat structures cannot be easily moved to a spreadsheet and later restored”.
Conservationists called for a precautionary approach and said the new process should not be applied to the species without rigorous scientific evidence.
This should be avoided altogether for a defined list of irreplaceable habitats; Rules should prioritize avoiding harm before minimizing harm; The report urges that more robust, site-specific data be collected on what wildlife is there before environmental development plans are implemented.
Richard Benwell, chief executive of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “When it comes to protected species, there is a huge black hole in the evidence.
“If applied to the wrong wildlife, the new approach could accelerate a decline from chronic to catastrophic.
“The Government has rightly promised to follow the best scientific evidence, but detailed processes are needed to ensure that the new system cannot be misused for profit or political convenience.
“We are demanding a transparent scientific process, strict precautionary approach and real-world data to ensure that wildlife is not buried under the concrete carpet in the name of development.”
Becky Pullinger, head of land use planning at The Wildlife Trusts, said: “The Planning and Infrastructure Bill threatens huge changes to the rules that protect wildlife and poses a significant risk.
“Scientific evidence must underpin any planning process and if its strength is undermined there will be serious consequences for nature and the wild places that communities are proud of; species such as hazel dormice, otter and barn owl could all be affected.
“New development and nature restoration can go hand in hand and so we urge the Government to work closely with colleagues to ensure that nature protection is at the forefront of new legislation.”
A government spokesperson said: “We completely reject these claims. The design of the Nature Restoration Fund has been carefully considered and will deliver more for nature, not less. Through our Planning and Infrastructure Bill we will create a win-win for the economy and nature, so we can build the infrastructure and 1.5 million homes the country so desperately needs.”