18
Rejected
Implement government-funded compensation and rapid response for land managers impacted by reintroductions.
Recommendation
We have seen first-hand in Bavaria that crop damage compensation and mitigating works, such as substantial structural changes to the drainage system, were major calls on the public purse, requiring bold decisions and significant funding. The annual budget for compensating farmers for damage to crops such as maize and sugar beet amounted to €450,000 alone. We also saw the benefits of rapid response consultants. We believe that this approach, in combination with a government funded compensation scheme, is the best way to mitigate concerns and provide reassurance to land managers potentially impacted by high-risk reintroduction Species Reintroduction 23 projects. Where populations are already established, the case for establishing a management process should be urgently considered, with priority given to species with protected status.
Government Response Summary
The government rejected the idea of a new government-funded compensation scheme for land managers, stating its focus is on existing environmental land management schemes and expecting reintroduction applicants to provide funding for managing impacts.
Paragraph Reference
53
Government Response
Rejected
Government Response
Rejected
HM Government
Rejected
We would expect any release proposal in England to demonstrate how it will ensure appropriate management through the provision of staff or funding, and engagement. We also see management groups and local stakeholder involvement as a key part of successful reintroductions. That is why we have encouraged the establishment of management groups where a species, such as beaver, has a significant interaction with land managers. These management groups provide the strategic and coordinated support required for communities to live alongside the species, maximising the benefits they can bring, and enabling targeted mitigation work where conflicts occur. With regard to funding, the government’s focus remains on incentivising delivery of wider environmental benefits through our environment land management schemes. Actions that deliver wider biodiversity benefits, such as buffer zones along watercourses and provision of space for nature, can play a role in helping to manage the impacts of reintroduced species. Again, where it is clear that a proposal to reintroduce a species will impact upon land managers we would expect an applicant to provide sufficient funding to manage these impacts appropriately.
Source
Inquiry
Species Reintroduction
Report
Fifth Report - Species Reintroduction
11 Jul 2023
HC 849
Timeline
Recommendation age
2.9 yrs
Report published
11 Jul 2023