ENVIRONMENTAL LAW

The UK's Current Legislative and Policy Arrangements for Tackling the Conservation of Nature

The UK's Current Legislative and Policy Arrangements for Tackling the Conservation of Nature

Introduction

The paper critically evaluates the British current Legislation and the policy arrangement which is tackling all the matter related to the conservation of nature. According to Birnie & Boyle (2002) Nature conservation law is the field of law relating to the protection and conservation of wild animals, plants, and natural habitats. Four main legal tools are used (p. 65).

Discussion

Ball & Bell (2004) said that the first is conserving vital habitats by designating and safeguarding key sites, habitat loss having the greatest impact on nature conservation (p. 32). The law here either seeks to facilitate favourable management if the land own by a nature conservation agency or sympathetic landowner, or strike a balance between the nature conservation interests and those of private landowners. Boyle & Anderson (2006) critically said that the fundamental laws are Part II of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 which significantly amend by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 for Scotland. It is broadly similar controls are in the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004), and laws implementing EC Directives on Wild Birds (79/409) and Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (92/43) (the Habitats Directive) (p.65).

Chertow & Esty (2007) discusses that before amendment passed, the 1981 Act took a voluntaristic approach. On designated sites of special scientific interest, the law prevented damaging development for a short period during which the Nature Conservancy (p. 21). Its successors could try to negotiate a management agreement with the landowner, a regime described as 'toothless' (Southern Water Authority v Nature Conservancy Council (1992) per Lord Mustill). Management agreements included payments to compensate landowners for profits lost by not developing their land in ways harmful to wildlife, and did not necessarily provide money to encourage sympathetic land management. Now, a more regulatory and proactive approach taken; permission for damaging operations can be refused indefinitely, and hazardous activities can only be carried out with the consent, or if carried out under a management agreement or management scheme (the latter being a constitutional power to control damage by neglect). Payments only made for effective conservation works. However, planning permission but 'trumps' these controls, so much depends on what conditions planning authorities impose on developers. Current policy guidance is ambiguous as to whether nature conservation interests must be mitigated and compensated for (e.g. by providing different habitat), or can be traded against economic development (Daniel &Marian 2007, p. 12).

EC laws on habitat conservation aimed at designating a coherent EC-wide network of sites, known as 'Natura 2000', and non-ecological factors (such as economic development) cannot be taken into account when selecting sites (Freestone 2004, p. 193). For less endangered habitat types, and habitats of less endangered species, there must be proactive management, and deterioration and damage must be avoided. Plans or projects likely to have a significant effect on the site must be assessed, and damaging activities can ...