success of species translocations is poorly understood. The translocation process can often delay a contract for at least a year with huge consequences to budgets and delivery. On a typical development scheme if there was an option to put the estimated equivalent money into habitat creation rather than species translocation this would benefit a wider number of species and probably even the newts.


Similarly, removal of alien species (notably Japanese knotweed) whereby plants on the immediate development site have to be removed to a licensed tip is often ineffective and very expensive. Is there any evidence to suggest that this approach is effective? Commonly the infamous knotweed occurs along roads and railways adjacent to the development site and so swiftly re-invade. Again habitat creation and other proactive policies as an alternative may prove better value for money.


What needs to be done? Changes in existing legislation and policies Under current nature conservation legislation and polices, with the exception of the protection of statutory designated land or sites the UK (and the EU) will not meet its targets to protect and enhance the environment and biodiversity. Current legislation and policies need to be revised or replaced with legislation and policies which protect habitats and focus on wider natural resource and landscape-wide enhancements.


The Wildlife & Countryside Act (1981) is thirty years old and, similar to that of the Habitats Regulations (2010), the focus is on protecting species, and not habitats and ecosystems. Legislation and polices which protect habitats and landscapes will be more effective, more sustainable and more cost efficient in conserving biodiversity.


Habitat and large scale landscape creation This has proved possible in the private/NGO sector with the Great Fen and the Wicken Vision, and in the public sector with the National Forests and restoration of major


wetlands such as Somerset Levels and North Kent Marshes through environmental/agricultural subsidy.


Sustainability and getting the right balance Getting the balance between economic development and nature conservation is fundamentally important in achieving sustainable development. In the context of biodiversity, developers spend £millions each year in ecological surveys and mitigations. Such costs would arguably be more effectively spent if used to create habitats and enhancing the wider landscape, and this would still conserve species and assist in enhancing the environment and biodiversity to improve quality of life. But it will take a lot more than just material changes. There needs to be a fundamental change in our thinking.


Lack of big picture thinking and planning This is especially important when considering impacts on the natural environment of developments. Piecemeal development can have a significant impact on our wider natural environment. It is very difficult for an environment impact assessment (EIA) to identify and be able to assess in-combination and cumulative impacts, simply because information about other developments is not available to the developer. Yet local authorities and regulators are often aware of other developments but will not provide advice or information to the developers.


Lack of vision and lateral thinking This is partly embedded in the way our natural environment is addressed in legislation and policy. In the UK and EU we take a very reductionist approach, focusing on legislation on species, rather than ecosystems and natural resource management. This is lack of vision and lateral thinking is similarly reflected in the way we


Photo: Queen Adelaide Habitat Creation. Habitat protection and creation work provides significant biodiversity benefits, rather than focusing on one species lone: Ely Beet Pits, Cambridgeshire.


|126| ENVIRONMENT INDUSTRY MAGAZINE


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152