Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

This clause introduces a provision for biosphere reserves selected by the UK and designated under UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere programme, to be given pilot status with regard to planning and ministerial guidance. I am grateful to the noble Baroness for raising the profile and awareness of the subject of biosphere reserves, UNESCO sites which aim to reconcile the conservation of biodiversity with its sustainable use. At present the three English sites—Braunton Burrows; Moor House, Upper Teesdale and the North Norfolk Coast, and the other five UK sites for that matter—do not fully meet the UNESCO criteria in that they are primarily designated for just a core zone and none has included complete buffer zones or transition zones indicated as necessary under the 1995 revised UNESCO criteria. This reflects the UK’s approach to the selection and protection of wildlife sites whether they be at a local level, for instance national nature reserves, at national level, SSSIs or internationally—Natura 2000 and Ramsar sites. For each of these, our approach has been to identify the main populations that require protection and draw a tight line around those to ensure that all parties know the area merits protection. Whereas many other EU member states and countries around the world have included within their statutory designations buffer zones and/or transition zones, as highlighted by the UNESCO designations, the UK’s regulatory regime is such that this is not a necessary requirement to achieve the sustainable conservation protection of the sites. The UK’s application of the EC Habitats Directive’s network of sites, Natura 2000, highlights this approach. While Natura 2000 sites encompass the important habitats or species of concern, controls on activities that may impact on these are not limited by where they occur but by where the affect may be felt. In other words, the UK’s approach is that the potential buffer zone to its protected area network is the wider countryside in general. Although, as speakers have recognised, a further review of the UK’s network of biosphere reserves is due, I do not at this stage see any wildlife benefit from extending zonations. As the core area of the UK’s current crop of biosphere reserves is already statutorily protected, additional designation by UNESCO appears unlikely to result in additional direct wildlife gain. That said, I recognise that indirect benefit may derive from this international accolade, as it may encourage other stakeholders to give greater consideration to their actions and their consequences. The regional approach of biosphere reserves also reflects landscape-scale approaches to conservation found in conservation policies at global to local levels, and can contribute to the delivery of biodiversity action plan objectives. On the basis that the current statutory designations on which the UK’s biosphere reserves have been selected are already included within existing planning and ancillary ministerial guidance—this is unlikely to change—I do not believe that the proposed amendment will achieve any wildlife gain. On the contrary, it may actually increase duplication and red-tape which could detract from the consideration of the important wildlife sites on which the reserves are based. Nevertheless, the noble Baroness and my noble friend Lord Judd have raised some important points which I will ensure that Natural England will explore. On the basis that the aims of the biosphere reserves are already adequately addressed by the protection afforded to the statutory designations at their core, I hope the noble Baroness will feel able to withdraw her amendment. If, on reflection, having read the debate, I have anything to add, I shall, of course, write to noble Lords.