Standing up for nature through the planning process
Photo by Andy Hay (rspb-images.com)
One of the most important things we, that is the RSPB do, is to stand up for nature when roads, ports, energy developments, forestry, housing or quarries threaten important areas for wildlife in the countryside.
We have done this for an awful long time, from proposals to build an airport on the Maplin Sands in the Outer Thames estuary in the 1960s, the afforestation of important moorland in North Wales in the 1980s to superquarries on Harris in the 1990s. Each year across the UK, and now increasingly overseas as well, RSPB staff assess the impact of developments on key species and important sites.
Persuading developers to take our concerns seriously took a big step forward with the adoption by the EU of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive in 1985, and its subsequent updates. The RSPB was heavily involved in arguing for this Directive, which requires all major developments to evaluate their impact on the environment, and seek to mitigate this, or find less damaging alternatives. This provided a welcome level playing field between developers, and different EU countries stopping a ‘race to the bottom’ at the expense of the environment. Of course, some developers do a better job than others in implementing these requirements, and we are not slow in pointing this out during the consultation phases and our staff are recognised experts in this field.
The principle of assessing developments for their environmental impact is especially important where they might affect protected areas – and this is reflected in the EU Nature Directives. Where development might affect a Special Protection Area or a Special Area of Conservation, the environmental impact assessment is expanded and is called a Habitats Regulation Appraisal.
The RSPB supports the planning system, and the importance – to nature – of these EU Directives as part of that system. I am pleased to say many industry leaders agree with us. In our experience, developers welcome the certainty of knowing where important areas for wildlife are, how to protect them, and conversely where there are areas with less constraint and where sympathetic development can be welcomed.
So how does the RSPB decide to get involved and what is our strategy?
First, we actively try and influence Government and Local Authority spatial plans, so these clearly identify the most important areas for birds and wildlife. We promote policies to local and national authorities that will clearly signal that Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), EU Natura sites and widespread but scarce species in the wider countryside deserve and require special protection. Hopefully such plans will guide responsible developers away from conflict situations – so development and conservation is the outcome. But on occasions developers decide to ignore the plans, or the advice we offer and so a difficult period of confrontation may lie ahead. The planning system can be ‘adversarial’ once an application is submitted. Planning authorities require an ‘objection’ to ensure our views (or those of Scottish Natural Heritage or other agencies) are fully considered. We sometimes offer a conditional objection, listing issues which if resolved would allow us to withdraw later. But at the end of the day if the development is in the wrong place, or at the wrong scale and its impact is unacceptable, we will sustain an objection – and be prepared to pursue this to a Public Inquiry, if necessary. This can be an expensive, complex and time consuming process for all concerned. In order to help staff decide when we will object, our Trustees have set out a clear policy to guide us. This helps ensure we ‘fight’ the most important cases, and our reputation with Governments, local authorities and developers is built on taking a consistent, evidence-based approach to what is at stake and the impact of what is proposed. In other words, we do not cry wolf!
In essence if a development threatens a nationally important assemblage of birds, or a designated SSSI or EU Natura site, or sizeable area of a scarce and vulnerable habitat such as lowland heathland, or native pinewood, we will seek to defend it from damage or inappropriate development. We also, where resources allow, lend support or staff expertise to important cases involving other wildlife assets for example if Plantlife, Scottish Wildlife Trust or Buglife seek our help.
The RSPB expends some serious resource engaging with the planning and consenting process – we have trained staff across the UK who work with planners and developers. They are supported by experts in planning and law based in Edinburgh and our UK HQ in Sandy. Is it worth it? Well I think the answer is a resounding yes! We win c.80% of the cases we fight, and sometimes some new and innovative partnerships are forged as a result, that not only stops future problems, but invests in nature as well. Some of the people we fight, see that forging closer relationships with us, will help prevent future disagreement, and lead to better developments, which are more acceptable. A ‘win win’.
At any one time we will have 3-400 ‘live’ cases on the books. You can read about some of them here. We can genuinely claim to access more planning cases than any other NGO. I know sometimes people are upset we don’t support their local objections – and of course some politicians and developers are upset we object to a development promising local jobs. My postbag though has many more concerned people at our lack of support for their local campaign. As I have explained we can only be effective by concentrating on the major cases – but clearly people fighting to save their local environment and wildlife, when often it is a David and Goliath contest, shows the deep concern citizens have for ‘their’ local place. I am not sure politicians – both local and national, or of any political persuasion quite get this. They all too often assume wildlife can adapt, or find somewhere new to go. Sadly that is usually not the case. Equally they undervalue what a countryside rich in wildlife offers, both in terms of public enjoyment, the health agenda, and in ‘services’ such as clean water, capturing and storing carbon, clean air, and by underpinning industries like farming and tourism.
For general information on how you or your community groups can get engaged with ‘planning’ please follow this link.