Normally arcane pieces of environmental legislation are for the super-specialists and lawyers – but last week’s Autumn Statement by George Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, has propelled the role of this (and other) Directives into centre stage. The Habitats Directive and it’s European forerunner – the Birds Directive have formed the backbone of protecting Europe’s nature for over 30 years, and that includes all the fabulous wildlife we have here.
And they have been very effective ... the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement fingered the way we implement these nature Directives in the UK as a constraint on the ability of our economy to overcome the current bleak outlook. We disagree. There is an array of authoritative evidence that provides a convincing argument that a healthy and thriving environment is one of the foundations of a sound economy. Put crudely, if you have to sacrifice your environment, and the quality of life it delivers for us, for short-term gain – your economic model is far from sound.
This is part of a series of posts that provides some background to our reaction to the Chancellor’s autumn statement – here I’m going to look at the Habitats Directive. This is taken from a document we produced a couple of years ago, here’s a link to the pdf for the full report.
The Habitats Directive is designed to conserve a targeted list of animal and plant species and habitats of European Community importance. It doesn’t cover birds as they are covered by the Birds Directive that came into force earlier in 1979.
It establishes the Natura 2000 site network for the protection of those species where protected areas are necessary to conserve them (protected areas just don’t work for dispersed species – so identifying and protecting ‘sites’ is not a solution in all circumstances).
The Natura 2000 network is not well known in the UK – at least not by that term. The special places in contains are very familiar to us ... Dungeness, (and if you look at the page I linked to you can find the Natura 2000 logo), the Wash, Morecame Bay, the moorlands of the Pennines, Salisbury Plain – a list of our finest and most treasured landscapes. The network includes the wildlifey sites designated under the Habitats Directive and birdy Special Protection Areas designated under the Birds Directive. But, put simply, these are our crown jewels of wildlife. Recognised to be of international importance (we know they are important for us already) – and they bring with them a duty to care for now and for future generations.
But some species just don’t fit into a site-based approach. And the Habitats Directive provides a system of protection that regulates the exploitation of a longer list of animal and plant species.
The protection for Natura 2000 sites is given through a series of tests that are applied in sequence to a land-use plan or project that is likely to affect, significantly, a Natura 2000 site.
The aim is to avoid damage to Natura 2000 sites wherever possible, given that these are the very best places for wildlife in Europe. On the whole the system works well, but in rare cases where damage cannot be ruled out, the plan or project can only go ahead if:
These are tough tests, and so they should be. But they do not rule out development, they provide the framework to resolve conflict and put the quality of our natural environment at the heart of the process.
If you are concerned that the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement is seeking to rip up the rules and put our environment in harms way – then you can step up and add your voice here.
And, as always, I'm really interested to hear your views, do comment.
Follow me on twitter.