MEMORANDUM BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
TRANSPORT AND THE REGIONS AND ON BEHALF OF THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE,
FISHERIES AND FOOD AND THE FORESTRY COMMISSION (BIO 21)
1. The UK Government welcomes the opportunity
to submit evidence to the sub-committee's inquiry into this important
area of environmental policy. The conservation of biodiversity
is an essential element of sustainable development and will be
a principal indicator of success in achieving it.
2. The implementation of biodiversity policy
is a devolved matter. Thus, issues relating specifically to implementation
in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland[41]
are for the respective devolved administrations. This evidence
gives a general overview in respect of the UK Biodiversity Action
Plan (UK BAP) and where appropriate refers to biodiversity policy
in England in more detail. The sub-committee has indicated that
it is specifically interested in the implementation of UK biodiversity
policy through species and habitat action plans, policy integration
and the European Habitats and Birds Directives. This memorandum
does not therefore cover implementation of other CBD obligations
under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) such as those
on access to genetic resources and benefit sharing. It tries not
to repeat the evidence submitted to the House of Lords European
Communities Committee inquiry into EU Biodiversity Policy.
BACKGROUND: THE
CONVENTION ON
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
AND SUBSEQUENT
DEVELOPMENTS
3. The Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD), signed in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, and since ratified by
176 countries and the European Community, led to publication of
Biodiversity: the UK Action Plan in January 1994 and establishment
of a Biodiversity Steering Group to advise the Government on implementation
of the Action Plan. A key provision of the CBD, Article 6, requires
parties to develop national strategies for the conservation and
sustainable use of biodiversity and to integrate biodiversity
considerations into all activities.
4. In December 1995, the Steering Group
published Biodiversity: the UK Steering Group Report containing
detailed, costed action plans for 116 priority species and 14
priority habitats (Tranche 1) with recommendations for the preparation
of further action plans within three years (Tranche 2). In 1996,
a UK Biodiversity Group (UKBG) was established, bringing together
the main public and private sector players. It is chaired by DETR.
There are separate country groups for England, Wales, Scotland
and Northern Ireland and a number of UK-level sub-groups. By October
1999, the complete series of 391 targeted and costed species action
plans (SAPs) and 45 habitat action plans (HAPs) had been published.
Each of these plans is being taken forward by individual steering
groups of relevant public, private and voluntary sector players.
The steering groups are chaired by "lead partners",
some from the public sector (including Government Departments
and the nature conservation agencies), and some fromby voluntary
sector organisations.
A. THE EFFECTIVENESS
OF UK BIODIVERSITY
POLICIES
5. The UK Action Plan gave a new strategic
direction to biodiversity policy—one which was inclusive
of statutory, voluntary and private sectors, as distinct from
the previous narrow emphasis on nature conservation which had
been seen largely as the preserve of the statutory conservation
organisations and the conservation NGOs. This approach has been
widely perceived as one of the main successes of biodiversity
policy and is firmly supported by the Government.
6. The UKBG intends to publish, later this
year or early in 2001, a report of the first five years of implementation
of the UK Biodiversity Action Plan since the Steering Group report.
It will take stock of the effectiveness of current directions
both in terms of the conservation of species and habitats on the
ground and through integration into other policy areas. It will
also recommend to the UK Government and the devolved administrations
the priorities for the next five years. The Report will be based
on progress reports from the Lead Partners of the Species and
Habitat Action Plans (which have been completed but not yet fully
analysed); an independent appraisal by consultants of the biodiversity
process; a research project to assess the actual costs of action
plan implementation compared with the predicted costs and a review
of cross-cutting research needs.
7. The Joint Nature Conservation Committee
(JNCC) and the country nature conservation agencies hold the data
from the 361 progress reports submitted and are undertaking the
analysis. The process is complex and is not expected to be completed
before the end of August.
8. The consultants, Entec UK Ltd, have submitted
that a near-final report of an independent appraisal of the biodiversity
process commissioned by the Government for the UKBG. They were
contracted to provide a summary of views from those engaged in
the biodiversity process as to its successes and failures, to
draw conclusions and to make recommendations. Some of the main
messages from the appraisal are already clear. They include the
following:
— The Government's commitment to implementation
of the CBD through the BAP process has meant that biodiversity
conservation has been taken more seriously than before across
the range of sectors with a major influence on it. The process
has created strong partnership through a complex organisational
structure, though there are risks of over-weighty bureaucracies
and burdens on staff resources to service it. There is still a
need to secure wider involvement throughout Government and the
private sector.
— Completion of all the planned SAPs
and HAPs is a great success. Their clear targets provide for the
first time an agreed definition of priorities and objectives,
a focus for action and a means of measuring progress. They may
however be victims of their own success, in the sheer weight and
number of plans. Rationalisation and consolidation of actions
across the plans is now important.
— The large number of Local Biodiversity
Action Plans (LBAPs)—over 100 in England—is a success,
demonstrating the strong commitment, principally of local authorities
and NGOs, to biodiversity. There remain important challenges however,
eg to build better links between the national and local levels,
to iron out contradictions between them and to broaden the involvement
of local players.
— There have been significant policy
shifts in favour of biodiversity, particularly in agriculture
and forestry, though more needs to be done and across more sectors.
The integration of biodiversity into Local Agenda 21 and the planning
system (especially through revision of Planning Policy Guidance
Note 9: nature conservation) are particularly important. There
is some unease that concentration on HAPs and SAPs may be diverting
attention away from wider policy issues.
— Raising public awareness of the conservation
of biodiversity as part of sustainable development remains a significant
gap.
— Data collection requires much greater
co-ordination and improved monitoring of many key species and
habitats is needed. The National Biodiversity Network (NBN)—a
comprehensive system to link national and local records—is
an important initiative which needs further resources.
9. Entec's final report will be supplied
to the sub-committee when it is available. To a great extent the
issues highlighted are already being addressed in the continuing
work of the UK and England biodiversity groups and in Government
policy. The forthcoming UKBG report is expected to make specific
recommendations on how to address the main issues.
B. PROGRESS
ON SPECIES
AND HABITAT
ACTION PLANS
10. Although the detailed analysis of the
reports from Lead Partners is not yet complete, the tables attached
to this memorandum give some summary data on the progress of the
action plans. For example, 200 of the 361 reports submitted show
that action has been undertaken and that the plan is starting
to meet its targets. In particular, as might be expected, the
earlier plans, i.e. those published as part of Tranche 1 have
had time to make considerable progress, whereas relatively little
has yet been achieved on many of the more recent plans.
11. Progress revealed by the reports are
for example that water vole surveys since 1995 reveal a continued
loss of populations but have also found previously unrecorded
sites so that the overall rate of decline may not be as severe
as first thought. Evidence also suggests that white-clawed crayfish
populations are still in decline and that juniper has continued
to decline both in number of stands and individual plants. Corn
buntings populations are continuing to show declines though progress
has been made in understanding the reasons for this and in including
management prescriptions sympathetic to corn bunting in agri environment
schemes. The targets for the Skylark and the Reed Bunting are
unlikely to be achieved unless agri-environment schemes including
sympathetic management prescriptions are implemented on a much
wider scale.
12. Otters are continuing the significant
trend towards recovery from the surviving strongholds in the south-west
and parts of northern England. Information on numbers is limited
but local surveys since 1994 have shown that the clear geographical
expansion is continuing. The stone-curlew population decline from
the 1930s to the 1980s has been halted and the population has
increased in each of the last six years. There has been a 40 per
cent increase in breeding pairs over the last five years. However,
the population is still small and vulnerable. For sustainable
population recovery it is desirable to increase the number of
pairs nesting on semi-natural habitats. Substantial progress has
been made towards the targets for upland oakwood since 1996, notably
by the Forestry Commission through direct action in the woodlands
it manages and by targeting its grants. However information on
status and trend is still inadequate and improving this is a current
priority for the steering group leading this plan.
C. THE PRIORITIES
FOR IMPLEMENTING
THE SPECIES
AND HABITAT
ACTION PLANS
AND THE
OBSTACLES TO
THEIR EFFECTIVE
IMPLEMENTATION (INCLUDING
THE DESIRABILITY
OF PLACING
THE PLANS
ON A
STATUTORY BASIS)
13. The Plans only cover only certain UK
species and habitats, and therefore themselves represent a selection
of priorities for targeted action from a long list of Species
of Conservation Concern. The process of selection was difficult
but has achieved a valuable consensus. Although overall priorities
must be kept under review in the longer term, further prioritisation
within the existing set of Plans would probably not be helpful
at this stage. Some organisations, however, particularly the smaller
NGOs and non-biodiversity sectors find the plethora of plans confusing,
daunting and potentially very resource-intensive. The Government
believes that there is scope for rationalisation or grouping of
plans within umbrella groups so that common actions can be identified.
The UKBG, in consultation with Lead Partners, is considering the
best means of achieving this. It may also be necessary to look
at ways of resolving contradictory targets between plans.
14. The steering groups for each action
plan are able to adjust and re-prioritise actions within the plans
in the light of progress with their work programmes. They may
also recommend that the targets should be adjusted, either because
they are already being achieved, or because they have proved to
be unrealistic or unnecessary.
15. Lack of adequate resources is often
mentioned as a main obstacle to implementation. In recognition
of the resource needs, the Government has increased English Nature's
Grant in Aid by £11m in the last two years, some £3.3
million of which was to be directed specifically towards the implementation
of the Biodiversity Action Plan, including assistance to voluntary
sector partners. In addition, the increases in agri-environment
schemes to a planned total of £1 billion over seven years
will make a substantial contribution to the achievement of plan
targets. The full analysis of the Lead Partner reports will identify
whether there are other specific resource needs which cannot be
met from these major funding streams.
16. The Government does not believe that
it is necessary or desirable to put the Plans on a statutory basis.
It is committed to ensuring that all Ministers take action to
integrate biodiversity considerations into their policies and
programmes as a key element of action for sustainable development.
The Government doubts whether a general statutory duty to give
effect to the provisions of the BAP would deliver more than is
currently being achieved. A statutory duty on the public sector
could have the perverse effect of breaking down the current highly
successful delivery partnerships of statutory, business and voluntary
sectors, to be replaced by legal confrontation. In addition the
action plans, which contain aspirational targets agreed by consensus
could not be imposed retrospectively without building in a review
provision which could lead to unwelcome reconsideration of targets
by the statutory bodies and consequent diversion of effort in
the meanwhile away from implementing the Plans
D. THE CO
-ORDINATION OF
BIODIVERSITY PLANNING
AND ACTION BETWEEN
NATIONAL AND
LOCAL LEVELS
17. It is the Government's firm wish that
there should be Local Biodiversity Action Plans covering all parts
of England and recognises that more needs to be done to improve
co-ordination between national and local levels. A lot of work
has already been done on this, and further work is in train.
18. The UK Biodiversity Group's "Local
Issues Advisory Group" was asked to develop guidance on the
production of Local Biodiversity Action Plans. Together with the
Local Agenda 21 Steering Group they jointly published 5 guidance
notes in 1997. These notes were distributed to all local authorities
above parish level throughout the UK. The guidance notes were
complemented in April 1999 by case studies providing practical
examples of local biodiversity initiatives. A sixth guidance note
"Education—Awareness to Action" was published
by the England Biodiversity Group in March 2000.
19. The original Local Issues Advisory group
has now been wound down. But an England Local Issues Group was
established in April 1999 and held the first workshop for local
biodiversity action plan co-ordinators in January 2000. The workshop
provided an opportunity for contact between national and local
co-ordinators and for a discussion of how to improve the links
between the national and local levels. The England Local Issues
Group is using the results of the workshop to formulate its future
work programme for practical action. Annual workshops are also
held for for the lead partners. The most recent, in early April
2000, also considered national/local links with a view to producing
revised guidance at the national level for lead partners. This
is also an issue on which the forthcoming UKBG Report is expected
to put forward proposals.
20. One of the principal mechanisms for
co-ordination between the national and local plans is the data
base of Local Biodiversity Action Plans which is available on
the UK Biodiversity web site hosted by the JNCC, www.jncc@gov.uk/ukbg.
Improvements to increase the scope and coverage of the data base
are to be carried out during the summer.
E. THE ADEQUACY
OF ARRANGEMENTS
FOR MONITORING
AND REPORTING
CHANGES IN
SPECIES AND
HABITATS
21. The 1994 UK Biodiversity Action Plan
included an undertaking that the Government and its agencies would
examine and develop the integration of monitoring studies and
seek to establish baselines for key components of biodiversity.
The 1995 UK Biodiversity Steering Group Report reviewed the existing
monitoring schemes and found that assessment programmes were already
in place for 64 per cent of the "long list" of species
of conservation concern. Given the extensive data already being
collected, and the potentially high costs of new monitoring activities,
the Steering Group identified two major elements for a cost-effective
biodiversity monitoring system: (i) a shared biodiversity database
to improve access to information and co-ordination of data collection;
and, (ii) a particular focus on the monitoring of national and
local biodiversity targets.
22. Since 1996, both elements have progressed
substantially.
— A National Biodiversity Network (NBN)
consortium has been established, bringing together the statutory
conservation agencies, research institutes and voluntary bodies,
under the leadership of the JNCC. The network aims to link local
biological record centres with national data custodians and the
statutory conservation agencies. In January this year, the Government
announced funding of £250k in 2000-01 to support the development
of the NBN.
— Lead Partners for species and habitat
Action Plans have been given the task of ensuring that adequate
information is available for assessing progress towards the achievement
of targets, including implementation of new survey and monitoring
activities if these are required. It is intended that Lead Partner
reports will be completed at three-yearly intervals.
23. Action Plan monitoring is complementary
to the assessment of the condition of protected sites of national
and international importance by the statutory conservation agencies.
Other recent initiatives to improve monitoring include:
— Countryside Survey 2000, which by
the end of the year will show estimates of the extent, distribution
and condition of "broad" habitat types in the UK and
the changes over the last 20 years.
— A pilot project to monitor UK bat
populations and a scoping study for monitoring other mammals to
be taken forward by JNCC.
— A new atlas of flowering plants for
Britain and Ireland will collate all known records of flowering
plants and track distribution changes over 40 years.
— Co-ordination of the Environmental
Change Network of UK terrestrial and freshwater sites for long
term monitoring of environmental characteristics, including biodiversity.
— The re-design of agri-environment
scheme monitoring which will include assessment of the biodiversity
benefits of the schemes.
24. DETR published UK Quality of Life indicators
in 1999. These contain six measures of biodiversity change, including
a headline indicator of changes in populations of wild birds.
MAFF has also recently published a set of indicators on sustainable
agriculture. Such top-level indicators can help summarise complex
biodiversity information in relation to policy objectives. The
Government expects the UKBG to recommend a set of indicators,
linked to future objectives, in their report.
25. Changes in biodiversity are generally
slow and biodiversity monitoring is a long-term activity requiring
sustained effort and co-ordination over many years. Good progress
has been made in addressing the priorities identified by the original
UK Steering Group. But the Government recognises that further
rationalisation and greater co-ordination between national and
local monitoring activities will be needed. The Government therefore
supports the plans to develop a biodiversity sampling framework
which have been proposed by the Biodiversity Information Service
of the JNCC. Biodiversity monitoring also poses scientific and
technical challenges which are not fully resolved. There are,
for instance, significant gaps in understanding of ecosystem processes,
and relationships between species and habitats. DETR is sponsoring
a series of workshops aimed at identifying and prioritising biodiversity
research needs and a workshop to address monitoring methodologies
and indicators is planned later in the year.
F. CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION
OF EU BIODIVERSITY
MEASURES, PARTICULARLY
THE HABITATS
AND BIRDS
DIRECTIVES
26. The Habitats and Birds Directives are
the cornerstone of EU biodiversity policy within the EU Biodiversity
Strategy. Paragraphs 2.9 and 2.10 of the Department's evidence
to the House of Lords European Communities Committee inquiry into
EU Biodiversity Policy describes the background and progress on
the EU Strategy and we are pleased to note that, following disappointing
initial progress, the Commission has issued draft action plans
for consultation with Member States on the integration of biodiversity
into the agriculture and fisheries sectors.
G. FULL IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE
EU HABITATS AND
BIRDS DIRECTIVE
OBLIGATIONS IN
THE UK, AND
THE ADEQUACY
OF THE
NATURA 2000 NETWORK
27. As of April 2000 the UK has classified
211 Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for birds (80 of which are
in England). On 28 March Michael Meacher announced the full list
of 254 SPAs the UK intended to classify. The programme of completing
classification of those sites will be substantially be completed
by the end of 2000.
28. By June 1999 the UK had sent a list
of 340 sites to the European Commission as candidate Special Areas
of Conservation (SACs) covering other species and habitats. Towards
the end of 1999, the UK list was reviewed together with those
of seven other Member States in the Atlantic Biogeographical region.
At "moderation" meetings (Kilkee, 6-8 September 1999,
and Paris, 16 November 1999) it was clear that each Member State
had tackled the identification process differently. All Member
States were asked to look again at their lists to ensure adequate
representation of those habitats and species listed at Annexes
I and II the Habitats Directive. It was recognised that the UK
list represented the best sites available for each habitat or
species in this country. However, for a number of habitats and
species the site lists were judged not to provide inadequate geographical
or ecological coverage or to include too low a proportion of the
total national resource. In addition it was made clear that wherever
a site had been identified as a candidate SAC, all other habitats
and species listed in the Directive which were present on the
site should be made known.
29. As a result of the clarification provided
by those meetings, the UK has initiated a thorough review of its
site lists. The JNCC has been asked to work with the country nature
conservation agencies to forward further recommendations to Government.
Those recommendations are expected shortly. DETR and the devolved
administrations will consult on new sites or site information
during the summer, with the aim of providing revised site lists
for consideration at further moderation meetings at the end of
the year.
30. The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c)
(Amendment) (England) Regulations 2000 (SI. 2000/192) give full
protection to candidate Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) ahead
of their adoption by the Commission. As a consequence, new and
existing consents likely to have a significant effect on the conservation
interests of a candidate SAC must be assessed as soon as reasonably
practical. This provision is necessary and justified to avoid
any potentially damaging project affecting a site before it is
formally adopted.
31. Member States are required to produce
a report on the site-based implementation of the Habitats Directive
by the year 2000. That report is currently in the process of being
prepared for submission during the summer.
H. MEASURES TO
PROTECT BIODIVERSITY
OUTSIDE OF
PROTECTED SITES
32. Paragraphs 2.1 to 2.7 of the Government's
evidence to the House of Lords give a broad account of the means
by which biodiversity policy and the site protection measures
of the European Directives interact. Although the protection of
SSSIs (as improved through the enactment of the provisions of
the Countryside and Rights of Way Bill currently before Parliament)
will continue to play a vital part in the delivery of the targets
for biodiversity, the national species and habitat action plans
apply wherever the species or habitat are found. Similarly Local
Biodiversity Action Plans are not limited to protected sites and
create the potential for all sections of the community to understand
the biodiversity value of their areas, take account of the actual
and potential impact of their activities on it and grasp opportunities
for enhancement.
33. The Government also aims to encourage
all sections of society to integrate biodiversity considerations
into their policies and programmes as part of sustainable development.
This includes the encouragement of business and commerce to ensure
that biodiversity is fully integrated into their environmental
management systems. Although significant steps have been taken
to raise business awareness through publication of guidance and
case studies, seminars and the biodiversity Champions initiative,
more action is necessary to raise business awareness of the importance
of sustainable use of natural resources. To this end, DETR is
granting £36,000 over three years to Earthwatch to provide
an in-house business and biodiversity resource centre to raise
awareness of what businesses can achieve and make links to biodiversity
partners such as the NGOs and English Nature.
34. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981,
as amended, and the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c)
Regulations 1994, provide measures to protect certain plant and
animal species and their breeding and resting sites wherever they
are found. The Countryside and Rights of Way Bill contains proposals
to strengthen the protection given to protected species by increasing
the enforcement powers of the police and courts.
35. A Local Sites Review Group, established
by DETR in 1999 following the consultation on the proposals for
strengthening the SSSI legislation, considered the contribution
non statutory local sites can make in protecting biodiversity
in England and Wales alongside other issues. The Group's report
and recommendations are currently being considered.
I. SPECIFIC MEASURES
TAKEN BY
GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS
TO HELP
ACHIEVE BIODIVERSITY
TARGETS
36. The preceding paragraphs describe many
of the measures taken by DETR and other Departments to help achieve
biodiversity targets. The paragraphs below concentrate chiefly
on measures by DETR and MAFF and the Forestry Commission as the
main Government Departments involved, but there are many other
examples across government of measures helping to promote biodiversity.
The Countryside and Rights of Way Bill currently before Parliament
will, in the measures it proposes for greater protection of SSSIs,
make a highly significant contribution to achievement of biodiversity
objectives. Following passage of the Bill, DETR will issue a consultation
draft of Planning Policy Guidance 9 which deals with nature conservation.
This will take account of the Bill's provisions and incorporate
advice on how local planning authorities should take biodiversity
into account in their development plans and decisions on individual
planning applications.
37. There have already been a number of
cases where other policies have been adjusted to achieve beneficial
results for biodiversity. Examples from DETR include the approach
to the AMP3 round of water pricing which gave significant emphasis
to dealing with water abstraction and sewage effluent impacts
on SSSIs; the publication by the Highways Agency of its own Biodiversity
Action Plan; and revision of the Planning Policy Guidance document
on Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) to give advice on ways in
which biodiversity should be integrated into RPGs. The draft RPGs
currently under discussion show how seriously this advice has
been taken. In addition, the Department has established a sub-group
of the Advisory Committee on Releases into the Environment to
advise Government on the wider biodiversity issues surrounding
the use of genetically-modified crops.
38. The Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries
and Food (MAFF) is the lead partner for 3 priority habitats: Ancient
and Species-rich Hedgerows; Cereal Field Margins; and Upland Hay
Meadows. MAFF is the contact point for 9 species of farmland birds,
12 species of arable plants and 2 species of fish. In addition,
MAFF is the lead partner and contact point for the single-grouped
plan for Commercial Fish, and contact point for the single-grouped
plan for Deep-water Fish.
39. Within Government, MAFF makes an important
contribution to biodiversity targets by taking the lead on further
reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) away from support
for production and towards support for rural development and environmentally-friendly
farming practices. Although only 4 per cent of the CAP budget
currently goes towards rural development measures, the Government
has taken the opportunity to advance environmentally beneficial
farming practices within the constraints of the CAP, particularly
through agri-environment schemes. The Government plans to increase
significantly the role of these schemes through the application
of the seven year England Rural Development Plan (ERDP) which
was submitted to the European Commission in February 2000. £1
billion of the total £1.6 billion allocated to the RDR over
the next seven years is expected to go on expansion of the Environmentally
Sensitive Area, Countryside Stewardship and Organic Farming schemes.
Agri-environment schemes are administered by MAFF and their technical
advisers the Farming and Rural Conservation Agency (FRCA). FRCA
has staff specifically tasked to secure effective contributions
to the UK Biodiversity Action Plan through scheme agreements with
landowners, and to represent the Ministry on national and local
biodiversity fora.
40. Within the ERDP the Government also
plans to increase spending on schemes to improve existing woodlands
and planting new ones, with the aim of improving the landscape,
habitats, and wildlife of amenity farmland. A new Hill Farm Allowance
Scheme is also part of the package and will help preserve the
farmed upland environment through the switch from headage payments
to area payments. Measures put forward under the Plan will be
financed by a combination of the EU's allocation of funds for
Rural Development, proceeds from modulating farmers' payments
under CAP direct production subsidies, and new Government match-funding
of the receipts from modulation and existing budgets.
41. The Government also applies environmental
conditions to two CAP schemes. Cross-compliance measures have
been applied to livestock subsidies since 1993. These measures
allow aid to be withheld or reduced for overgrazing or environmentally
damaging feeding practices. Under the Arable Area Payments Scheme
(AAPS), since 1993 land that is set aside has to be managed in
accordance with strict rules to provide environmental safeguards
and benefits.
42. Further work is being done in response
to the numerous suggestions of additional environmental conditions
which might be attached to agricultural support payments, following
the consultation last year on the European Commission's Agenda
2000 reform. Complementing this is recently published work undertaken
for DETR by the Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP).
IEEP was commissioned to review, update and extend its previous
study (1995) on environmental cross-compliance within the CAP.
IEEP was also asked to report on current policy intentions and
developments in EU Member States and identify practical options
for cross-compliance in England. Ideas for possible cross-compliance
measures must be considered very carefully with regard to whether
they would be easily understood, their ease of enforcement, the
environmental benefits and the cost to farmers. A further round
of consultation on detailed proposals would be needed before introducing
them.
43. Although much is being done, the Government
recognises the importance of proper evaluation of schemes. All
schemes are kept under review to ensure that they deliver their
objectives but MAFF will also be carrying out a major review of
agri-environment schemes in time for it to feed into the mid-term
evaluation of the England Rural Development Plan in 2003.
44. The Government's fisheries policy is
an essential element in the maintenance and enhancement of biodiversity
in the marine environment. It is largely constrained by the Common
Fisheries Policy (CFP) but conservation of fish stocks and promotion
of sustainable fishing is a key purpose of the CFP. And the objectives
of the framework CFP Regulation include the need to protect and
conserve the marine ecosystem. The Government plays its part in
ensuring that the CFP delivers on this aim. Recent noteworthy
successes in this area are a decision by the Fisheries Council
to bring to an end the tuna drift net fishery after 31 December
2001 and the decision reached last December to close an area stretching
from mid-Northumberland to the Moray Firth coast to protect the
food supply for nesting seabirds by banning the sandeel fishery
between April and August.
45. There are many other policy instruments
administered by MAFF which contribute to biodiversity targets—some
less obvious than others. These include environmental protection
measures such as the regulation of farm waste, heather burning,
controls in Nitrate Vulnerable Zones and pesticide approvals,
storage and use. MAFF also takes the lead within Government on
flood and coastal defence schemes. It is a specific policy aim
to ensure that defences are constructed and managed in ways which
protect and, if possible, enhance biodiversity. MAFF administers
licensing controls on deposits at sea and measures to conserve
and protect freshwater fisheries. MAFF also funds programmes to
provide farmers with free conservation advice, focusing especially
on priority BAP species and habitats.
46. The Government's research and development
(R&D) programmes provide an important contribution to biodiversity
targets, not least by helping Government and others to identify
and assess policy measures. Some £3 to £4 million is
spent annually by MAFF and DTR in support of such measures. DETR
also chairs the UK Biodiversity Research Working Group to identify
longer-term research needs through a series of workshops on cross-cutting
themes involving both public and voluntary sectors.
47. In accordance with the CBD and also
international agreements on forestry made at Rio in 1992 and at
Helsinki in 1993, biodiversity conservation is one of the key
aims of the UK's policies for sustainable forestry. In addressing
these commitments the Forestry Commission (FC) has been able to
build upon progress made since the mid-1980s in managing forests
for nature conservation and developing environmental guidelines.
In 1998 the FC published the UK Forestry Standard which summarised
all the guidelines and mechanisms available to deliver sustainable
forestry. It also set out indicators which will be used to measure
success using national monitoring sample surveys. These indicators
will be further refined and integrated with the emerging sets
of indicators for biodiversity, sustainable forestry and sustainable
development as a whole.
48. Under the UKBAP, the Forestry Commission
is lead partner for five of the six published Habitat Action Plans
for native woodland habitats and leads the joint native woodland
steering groups at UK and country levels. It also has a formal
role as contact point or lead partner for 12 Species Action Plans,
including two birds, four plants and also six invertebrates, four
of which are exclusive to the New Forest.
49. An England Forestry Strategy was launched
by Ministers in 1998. It includes biodiversity targets for native
woodlands and related SAPs and HAPs amongst its key themes. An
English Native Woodlands Partnership has been established with
the aim of co-ordinating and implementing links between the Strategy
and the Biodiversity Action Plan.
50. The FC runs a Woodland Grant Scheme
(WGS) to encourage sustainable management of privately owned woodlands.
Specific grants are targeted at UK BAP priority habitats and species.
For example, Challenge funding schemes have been successful in
creating new native woodlands in National Parks, and in restoring
former coppice woodlands for butterflies in ancient woodlands
in southern England. Grants throughout England are now being targeted
to reverse the fragmentation of existing native woodlands, conserve
priority species and help with the preparation of management plans
for semi-natural wood.
51. The Forestry Commission manages 1.06
million hectares of land in GB (261,000k ha in England). Biodiversity
is a key consideration throughout the estate and is a major objective
for semi-natural woodlands and open ground areas which make up
over a third of the total area. Annual gross operational spending
on biodiversity projects currently averages £2.5million,
(£1.3 million in England) concentrated on important SSSI
and candidate SAC sites like the New Forest and on priority habitats
and species elsewhere. These figures include EU LIFE funds which
have been attracted to match FC expenditure in the New Forest.
52. FC also funds and carries out research
on woodland biodiversity conservation totalling £1.35 million
annually, mostly carried out by Forest Research, an Agency of
the Forestry Commission. Overall the FC spends £15 million
annually GB-wide on biodiversity related operations, which is
over one quarter of total FC Grant-in-aid.
53. The key achievements over recent years
have been:
— The revitalising of many ancient
semi-natural woodlands which are our most precious remaining biodiversity
asset. This has been done by replacing exotic species with native
trees, controlling grazing animals and restoring management of
glades, rides and coppice woods where these are important for
rare species.
— A great increase in broadleaved species
and native woodlands in the planting of new woodlands and replanting
existing ones, such that more than three-quarters of Woodland
Grant Scheme (WGS) planting in England is now composed of native
species;
— Diversification of the 20th century
plantation forests dominated by introduced conifer species so
that they develop a greater range of ages and species of tree,
increased open ground and wetland /riparian habitats and more
native woodland areas within them;
— Significant progress has already
been made in respect of targets for the earlier HAPs published
in 1996, including upland oakwoods.
J. THE PRIORITY
AREAS FOR
AND WHAT
IMPROVEMENTS ARE
NEEDED TO
ENSURE BIODIVERSITY
CONCERNS ARE
INTEGRATED INTO
OTHER GOVERNMENT
POLICIES
54. The Government has set up a group of
"Green Ministers" coming from each Government Department.
The Green Ministers' annual report will this year report on how
Government Departments are integrating biodiversity considerations
into their policies and programmes. The Committee of Green Ministers
has recently published a "biodiversity checklist" for
Government Departments, to indicate what actions they can take
to promote biodiversity in their policies and programmes and in
the management of their estates.The checklist provides a framework
for measuring progress which will be published in the annual report
of Green Ministers. A principal aim is to integrate biodiversity
considerations into those areas of policy where opportunities
may so far have been overlooked.
55. The UKBG's report is expected to advise
on the priority areas for integrated action. It is anticipated
that they will recommend that effort should continue to be addressed
to agriculture, fisheries, forestry and water policy.
DETR
April 2000
41 Northern Ireland is treated as a devolved administration
for these purposes on the basis that the suspension of devolution
in Northern Ireland is temporary. Back
| 
