There is broad agreement among government and non-government organisations that it is timely to review the operation of species protection legislation in Great Britain, as a parallel exercise to the consultation on the protection and management of Sites of Special Scientific Interest. This project was commissioned by JNCC and Wildlife & Countryside Link as a contribution to this review. The defined aims were to investigate the effectiveness and appropriateness of current legal provisions to protect plant and animal species (excluding birds); to compare the contribution made to species conservation from legislative measures with other measures, and to consider options to improve effectiveness of species protection legislation.

 

We consulted a total of 88 organisations and individuals during November and December 1998, using a structured questionnaire, one-to-one interviews and focus group events. We collated information for broad taxonomic groups of terrestrial and marine species. We investigated selected species and groups of species in some detail and drew comparisons with species legislation in other countries. We also gathered information on enforcement proceedings brought under species protection legislation in Great Britain.

 

We have presented our findings as follows; collated views on the main threats to species and the effectiveness of legal provisions and other measures to address these issues, and options for the improvement of species legislation provisions and other measures (Sections 3 and 4, detailed in Appendix 4); responses to the questionnaire (detailed in Appendix 3 on the accompanying computer diskette); case studies and information from some other countries (detailed in Appendix 6) and data on enforcement proceedings (detailed in Appendix 7).

 

The key messages from the findings were that the legislation has been successful in preventing deliberate killing or collection of some species which are clearly at risk from these actions, but most species currently on Schedules 5 and 8 of the Act are not threatened in this way, but rather by habitat destruction, degradation and fragmentation, and the wider threats of pollution and climate change. All species on the Schedules benefit from a 'deterrent effect' which discourages some potentially damaging activities. There have also been incidental benefits especially the notification of sites supporting scheduled species as SSSIs. The creation of the Schedules has changed attitudes towards collection of invertebrates, reducing the numbers of some species taken by collectors, but discouraging legitimate research, recording and monitoring of some protected invertebrates and perhaps encouraging illegal collection.

 

There are loopholes, gaps and inconsistencies in the legislation; the links between species and habitat protection are insufficient, while the "incidental result" defence clause and the lack of powers to enter land supporting protected species are serious loopholes in the Act.

 

For many of the listed marine species the wording of legislation is difficult to apply in practice. The process of selecting species for Schedules 5 and 8 is slow and has been applied inconsistently among and between species groups, resulting in an illogical list of protected species. There are taxonomic and geographical inconsistencies and confusion caused by the presence of vertebrates and invertebrates on the same schedule. Species for which the UK has global responsibility are not necessarily represented or are covered by inappropriate legislative provisions.

 

The Act has not been adequately enforced due to intrinsic problems of definition, complexity and lack of suitable powers and resources to aid enforcement and a lack of case law to aid interpretation. There are specific problems with enforcing the Act at sea. There is no central recording of offences and alleged offences making the monitoring of effectiveness and the development of case law difficult.

 

Protected species suffer unintentional disturbance and damage by the public due mainly to the inadequacy of available information and, for some animals, through prejudice. The Biodiversity Action Plan process has already achieved a great deal, particularly in raising awareness of less well-known species, and has the potential to make a significant contribution to species conservation, but requires a legal foundation, clarification of the species selection process and relationships with other initiatives. Landscape features providing habitats for threatened species remain unprotected and vulnerable to destruction. Incentives and advice, although available, are not specifically targeted at sites supporting protected or other priority species.

 

We have identified a range of issues for consideration in the quest to improve the effectiveness of species protection legislation. Notable among these are: