Biodiversity monitoring
Failure to adequately represent all species, particularly invertebrates, in biodiversity 'Red Lists' and indicators.
335 items
3 sources
Source spread
Where this theme appears
Biodiversity monitoring has been flagged across 3 independent accountability sources:
250 committee recs
11 NAO recs
74 LGO/SPSO decisions
When the same issue appears across inquiries, coroner reports, and regulators independently, it indicates a recurring issue across the public record.
Browse by source
Source-grouped records are useful for tracing where a concern came from. Large sections show the 50 strongest matches for that source; counts still show the full theme total.
Committee Recommendations (250) — showing 50 strongest matches
#54 —
Recommendation: To realise the benefits of nature-based solutions to climate change, we recommend that: a) The UK adopt a clear definition of NbS and consider using the IUCN definition alongside the IUCN Global Standard for NbS. b) The Government prioritise protection …
Not Addressed
#53 —
Recommendation: We welcome the Government’s Trees Action Plan, and the intention to focus on planting broadleaf native species. The Government must not try to meet its tree planting target solely through commercial timber plantations using non- native species. A balance of …
Not Addressed
#52 —
Recommendation: Protection and restoration of peatlands have an important role to play in NbS. The Government’s announced ban on rotational burning of peat in protected areas is welcome, as part of the transformational change necessary to meet biodiversity and net zero …
Not Addressed
#51 —
Recommendation: Protecting existing ecosystems, be that ancient woodland, peatlands, or kelp forests provides the most cost-effective and significant contribution to NbS in the UK. Given the majority of the UK’s ecosystems lie outside of protected areas, more needs to be done …
Not Addressed
#50 —
Recommendation: We welcome the Government’s focus for COP26 on nature-based solutions (NbS) and the increased investment provided by the Nature for Climate fund. Nature- based solutions could substantially contribute to meeting the UK’s net zero goals 122 Biodiversity in the UK: …
Not Addressed
#21 —
Recommendation: We support the recommendations of the Natural Capital Committee that the development of soil indicators should be fast-tracked; that a shadow target for soil health should be established urgently; and that a legally-binding target for soil health ought to be …
Gov response: The government recognises the importance of healthy soils for the delivery of a wide range of ecosystem services, including food production, carbon storage, water regulation and supporting biodiversity. We are committed to protecting and improving …
Not Addressed
#20 —
Recommendation: Healthy soils are essential to biodiversity; and yet the data and indicators to measure soil health do not exist to the degree required to ensure effective monitoring. Without credible arrangements for monitoring and measuring soil health, the Biodiversity in the …
Gov response: (21a) The Government is committed to making sure that no one is left behind by the connectivity revolution and to delivering nationwide gigabit connectivity as soon as possible. Today, over 40% of premises can access …
Under Consideration
#6 —
Recommendation: We recommend that the Government introduce, preferably via the Environment Bill currently before Parliament, a mechanism for statutory interim targets to ensure that its proposed species abundance target is met to halt the decline of nature by 2030. We further …
Gov response: In formulating this recommendation, the EAC considered other indicators and metrics on biodiversity and wider natural capital beyond the information provided in the Environmental Accounts. We have therefore taken a consistent interpretation in our response. …
Under Consideration
#24 —
Recommendation: The publication of the first draft of the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework provides a promising starting point, but elements of the draft lack ambition. • The 2030 mission should be clearer and stronger, and should align with the Leaders’ Pledge …
Gov response: We are seeking a commitment to halt and reverse biodiversity loss by 2030 in the post-2020 global biodiversity framework at CBD COP15. Such a commitment is highly ambitious and will require the implementation of transformative …
Not Addressed
#22 —
Recommendation: The UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP15 summit presents an opportunity to create a transformative Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework that will ‘bend the curve’ of biodiversity loss. The UK has a crucial role to play in promoting a transformative, …
Gov response: The UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP15 summit presents an opportunity to create a transformative Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework that will ‘bend the curve’ of biodiversity loss. The UK has a crucial role to …
Not Addressed
#69 —
Recommendation: The value of biodiversity in rivers in England does not appear to have been priced adequately into the economic decisions made by companies and by regulatory agencies. If it is to meet the Environment Act’s legally binding target to halt …
Gov response: Government supports the use of natural capital in decision making, as set out in the 25 Year Environment Plan. We accept that Ofwat should take natural capital into account in economic decision making. Natural capital …
Not Addressed
#4 —
Recommendation: The current range of pollutants being monitored is too narrow. The Environment Agency must begin work to extend the number of substances it is regularly monitoring in rivers. Existing datasets do not provide a comprehensive picture of risks to human …
Gov response: The Government agrees that engaging stakeholders on antimicrobial resistance in the environment will be a valuable step following the Pathogen Surveillance in Agriculture, Food and the Environment programme. We are already engaging with water companies …
Accepted
#10 — Amend draft NNNPS to include current Clause 5.29 equivalent for biodiversity protection.
Recommendation: The draft revised NNNPS should be amended to include an equivalent to Clause 5.29 of the current NNNPS. If the Government declines, it must explain why, and how this is compatible with Government policy on promoting biodiversity.
Gov response: The Department for Transport considers that paragraph 1.9 of the revised NNNPS provides sufficient clarity regarding the status of the NNNPS in other consenting regimes. Paragraph 1.9 states that: “Road and rail developments in England …
Not Accepted
#7 — Stakeholders expressed significant concerns about biomass production impacts, Drax support, and accreditation effectiveness.
Recommendation: We also received a high number of written submissions from stakeholders.8 Particular concerns drawn to our attention included: a. the impact of biomass production on biodiversity, forest stocks and the environment more generally. b. the terms of the agreement for …
Not Addressed
#33 — Ensure robust regulation and integrity for UK nature markets, preventing offshoring degradation and financial risks.
Recommendation: Nature and biodiversity are highly location specific and a market which trades in biodiversity credits must account for this. The UK Government should ensure that the UK market has integrity and strong regulation that minimises the risk of the UK …
Gov response: We agree that biodiversity is inherently location-specific and that any markets for biodiversity credits should reflect this. This is why developer obligations under the BNG scheme in England are calculated on the basis of a …
Accepted
#32 — Define government expectations and set measurable targets for nature recovery through nature markets.
Recommendation: The Government should clearly define its expectation for the level of nature recovery in England which is likely to be achieved through the operation of nature markets, and should set out the criteria against which progress will be evaluated. In …
Gov response: The Woodland Carbon Code has supported the development of over 38,000 hectares of validated projects in the UK, projected to sequester 13 million tonnes of carbon. Similarly, the Peatland Code has supported over 13,000 hectares …
Accepted
#30 — Set out unequivocal support for BNG policy, driving it through Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects.
Recommendation: The Government must set out unequivocally its support for BNG policy and ensure that it continues to deliver genuine habitat net gains and supports a thriving market in natural capital credits. The Government should make use of Nationally Significant Infrastructure …
Gov response: Response to recommendation 16 & 20: The government continues to support BNG policy. We have recently launched two BNG consultations. The first is on applying BNG to NSIPs. The development of high-quality nature-positive infrastructure will …
Accepted
#29 — Establish comprehensive, publicly accessible register of BNG assets, investors, and credit owners by February 2026.
Recommendation: We recommend that not later than 12 February 2026—the start of the next biodiversity net gain reporting year—the Government establish a comprehensive and publicly accessible register of: • the location of onsite and offsite assets being developed under statutory provision …
Gov response: A publicly available register for off-site BNG exists and gives details of every registered gain site, the responsible body, and the size, location, and detail of the habitat being created. Some onsite data is publicly …
Not Accepted
#28 — Low public accessibility and visibility of BNG financial flows and site registers.
Recommendation: The ability for nature credits to traced through clear and transparent means is key to ensuring market integrity. Although a register of BNG sites available for offsite investment has now been established, the public interface is still not fully accessible …
Gov response: A publicly available register for off-site BNG exists and gives details of every registered gain site, the responsible body, and the size, location, and detail of the habitat being created. Some onsite data is publicly …
Not Addressed
#27 — Establish clear, robust baseline assessment methodology for measuring nature gains within 12 months.
Recommendation: The Government must continue to work with both public and private sector organisations, including the British Standards Institute and the International Sustainability Standards Board, so as to establish a clear and robust 59 baseline assessment methodology against which all gains …
Gov response: We are continuing to sponsor the British Standards Institution’s Nature Investment Standards Programme, which involves a large number of public and private sector organisations. The programme will produce a suite of Nature Investment Standards. The …
Not Addressed
#26 — Baseline data for natural capital improvement lacks sufficient granularity at farm level.
Recommendation: It is vital to develop a substantial baseline to measure natural capital improvement metrics against. This is already taking place in some respects (e.g. Natural Capital Ecosystem Assessment (NCEA) data for woodlands) but the current programmes arguably do not provide …
Gov response: We are continuing to sponsor the British Standards Institution’s Nature Investment Standards Programme, which involves a large number of public and private sector organisations. The programme will produce a suite of Nature Investment Standards. The …
Not Addressed
#25 — Provide report on current and projected private investment in nature recovery within 12 months.
Recommendation: The Government should urgently address the gaps in its data and understanding around the level of investment into nature recovery projects. We recommend that within 12 months of the date of publication of this report the Government provide a report …
Gov response: Defra is required under the Environment Act 2021 to publish an EIP and to report annually on its progress. This requirement ensures that the government remains accountable for its environmental goals and targets. Defra is …
Not Addressed
#24 — Government lacks primary data on private investment for nature recovery targets.
Recommendation: For the Government to determine whether it has delivered on its target to deliver £1 billion of private investment into nature recovery annually by 2030, it must have primary data on relevant financial flows to provide a thorough understanding of …
Gov response: Defra is required under the Environment Act 2021 to publish an EIP and to report annually on its progress. This requirement ensures that the government remains accountable for its environmental goals and targets. Defra is …
Not Addressed
#23 — Commit to reviewing the effectiveness of on-site BNG delivery by February 2027.
Recommendation: The Government should also ensure that on-site gains have sufficient transparency and scrutiny of delivery—through sufficient funding of local authorities to deliver checks, and provision to local authorities of the capacity to undertake enforcement action—with a commitment to reforming the …
Gov response: We agree with the principle of a review of the effectiveness of on-site delivery after a number of years to allow delivery to reach a steady state. The government has recently announced a further £10m …
Partially Accepted
#22 — Consult on measures to increase BNG compliance or mandate corporate disclosure of nature-damaging activities.
Recommendation: We recommend that the Government consult on measures to increase compliance as a market driver, potentially through expanding BNG requirements or mandating corporate disclosure of nature-damaging activities. (Recommendation, Paragraph 123)
Gov response: Government is committed to improving outcomes for nature and we have launched consultations on the introduction of mandatory BNG for NSIPs alongside a consultation on ways to make BNG a more streamlined experience for smaller …
Partially Accepted
#18 — Evaluate BNG policy effectiveness, review investment estimates, and publish annual updates
Recommendation: The Government should continue to demonstrate leadership on natural capital markets by evaluating and reviewing the BNG policy and whether its design, metrics, and implementation remain effective in increasing investment into natural capital projects and delivering measurable improvements in nature …
Gov response: Mandatory BNG is still in its early stages, having been introduced for most major developments from 12th February 2024, and for minor development (small sites) from 2nd April 2024. Evidence of its contributions to nature …
Accepted
#17 — Successful nature markets require balance between scale, local accountability, and BNG benefits
Recommendation: For successful nature markets to be delivered there needs to be an effective balance between efficiencies of scale and local accountability which brings about local buy-in and transparency, ensuring that offsets are being delivered to a high standard. A method …
Gov response: Response to recommendation 16 & 20: The government continues to support BNG policy. We have recently launched two BNG consultations. The first is on applying BNG to NSIPs. The development of high-quality nature-positive infrastructure will …
Accepted
#16 — Clarify ‘effective means’ of protection, monitoring, and recourse for 30by30 land
Recommendation: We recommend that in its response to this report the Government clarify— • what it considers to be ‘effective means’ of protection against loss or damage to important biodiversity values for the purposes of designating land in England as ‘protected’ …
Gov response: Our 30by30 update at COP16 confirmed our vision for 30by30 on land in England, and the criteria for land that can contribute to this target. We are developing more detailed guidance on how the criteria …
Not Addressed
#16 — Reinstate DEFRA funding for sustained long-term data collection and monitoring at Lyme Bay.
Recommendation: We recommend that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) reinstates funding to ensure the long-term data collection and monitoring at Lyme Bay is sustained to enable scientific analysis of the benefits of whole-site approaches for marine protection. …
Gov response: The Government agrees that the research at Lyme Bay is highly valuable, and Defra is in discussion with Natural England (NE) to continue the long-term monitoring of Lyme Bay. Lyme Bay is an important site …
Not Addressed
#15 — Cessation of funding for Lyme Bay undermines crucial long-term marine data collection.
Recommendation: Long-term data collection is critical to scientific analysis of the effectiveness of marine protection measures such as whole-site protections and their impact on ecosystem recovery. We are concerned that funding for Lyme Bay has stopped, and this will lead to …
Gov response: The Government agrees that the research at Lyme Bay is highly valuable, and Defra is in discussion with Natural England (NE) to continue the long-term monitoring of Lyme Bay. Lyme Bay is an important site …
Accepted
#51 — Promote establishing a coordinated monitoring programme across the Antarctic Treaty System for adaptive management.
Recommendation: Long-term, systematic monitoring of visitor activities is vital to assess the cumulative impact of tourism. The UK should promote the establishment of a coordinated monitoring programme across the Antarctic Treaty System. Data gathered should underpin adaptive management strategies, including the …
Gov response: . The Government accepts this recommendation.
Accepted
#25 — Decline in UK terrestrial biodiversity research capacity weakens Antarctic monitoring and expertise.
Recommendation: We are concerned that the decline in UK based terrestrial biodiversity research capacity is significantly weakening the UK’s ability to monitor, understand, and respond to ecological changes in Antarctica. This loss of expertise risks undermining both the UK’s scientific leadership …
Gov response: . The Government accepts this recommendation.
Accepted
#24 — Accelerating environmental changes are severely impacting Antarctica's biodiversity, requiring urgent science-led responses.
Recommendation: The accelerating environmental changes in Antarctica, driven by climate change, sea ice loss, and increasing human activity, are having serious and compounding impacts on the continent’s biodiversity. These changes demand urgent, science led responses. (Conclusion, Paragraph 141)
Gov response: The Government partially accepts this recommendation. 32. Historically, the study of terrestrial ecosystems was a major focus of all Antarctic research programmes since it was a readily accessible environment for science expeditions. With the advent …
Accepted
#10 — Embed nature-based solutions as core to flood risk management, reforming funding and setting targets.
Recommendation: The Government should embed nature-based solutions as a core component of national flood and coastal erosion risk management by 2027. Defra, working with the Environment Agency, HM Treasury, and other key partners, should: • Reform flood funding appraisal and partnership …
Gov response: The government recognises the need for continued, significant investment to boost flood resilience, with flood risks only likely to increase due to climate change. This is why this government has increased investment to record levels. …
Under Consideration
#34 — Assess local authority capacity for monitoring BNG commitments and ensure adequate resourcing.
Recommendation: The Government should conduct an assessment of the capacity and performance of monitoring of BNG commitments by local authorities. Local authorities must understand their responsibilities to ensure that BNG promised is delivered and buy in expertise and resource if it …
Gov response: 105. We continue to work closely with Skills England, local planning authorities, planning schools, professional bodies and sector stakeholders to strengthen the planning workforce, improve recruitment, retention, skills and promote innovation. 106. As set out …
Accepted
#32 — Prevent blanket exemptions for small sites and defer substantial BNG policy changes for three years.
Recommendation: While the Government has completed its consultation on new exemptions to BNG, additional exemptions must not undermine the effectiveness of the policy, ecosystem integrity, or the establishment of the BNG credit market. Entire exemptions from BNG for small sites would …
Gov response: 95. As set out in our response to recommendation 29, On 16 December 2025 Government published a consultation on a new NPPF which included a proposed requirement for development proposals to take advantage of opportunities …
Under Consideration
#31 — Early introduction of new BNG exemptions risks unintended consequences and undermines policy assessment.
Recommendation: Introducing new exemptions to BNG when the policy remains in the early stages of implementation may have unintended consequences, particularly if applied too broadly. We believe more time is needed to assess the effectiveness of BNG before substantive changes are …
Gov response: 91. The Government is already exploring innovative financial mechanisms to accelerate adoption of lower embodied carbon products. For example, we are co-sponsoring an Advance Market Commitment (AMC) to pilot for low carbon concrete, delivered by …
Under Consideration
#28 — Clarify responsibilities for oversight, enforcement, and standardised monitoring of off-site Biodiversity Net Gain projects.
Recommendation: More clarity is needed on how off-site Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) projects will be maintained, monitored, and enforced over the full 30-year period. We ask the Government, in response to this report, to lay out clearly who is responsible for …
Gov response: 82. For the reasons outlined in our response to recommendation 24, we do not agree with mandating whole life carbon assessments at this time, however, we have committed to update Planning Practice Guidance to assist …
Not Accepted
#27 — Biodiversity Net Gain's long-term success undermined by inadequate regulation, monitoring, and accountability mechanisms.
Recommendation: It is too early to assess the overall success of Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG), as the policy is still establishing itself. Its long-term success is dependent upon the establishment of clear and effective regulation. The absence of standardised monitoring and …
Gov response: 81. The Government is not currently considering adopting the RICS methodology as the UK industry standard for whole-life carbon assessments. However, we acknowledge this recommendation and will keep it under review.
Under Consideration
#26 — Publish annual reports detailing mitigation hierarchy application and environmental effectiveness on EDP sites.
Recommendation: We recommend that this evidence should include the systematic monitoring and review of the environmental outcomes on all sites where an EDP has been approved and introduced. NE should publish annual reports detailing the extent to which the MH has …
Gov response: 78. Introducing incentives based on green energy installations could add significant complexity to the operation of the current property tax system, as well as having an impact on the Exchequer. SDLT is an important source …
Under Consideration
#25 — Publish site-specific evidence of environmental improvements when mitigation hierarchy has not been applied.
Recommendation: Whilst accepting the Minister and NE’s assurance that the MH has remained in place, and would only be set aside where doing so would demonstrably benefit nature, we urge the Government and NE to publish site-specific evidence of the environmental …
Gov response: 76. The Government is committed to the 2050 net zero carbon emissions target and recognises that embodied carbon can account for a significant portion of a building’s whole life carbon emissions. We know that addressing …
Under Consideration
#24 — Strict application of mitigation hierarchy for housing developments remains essential without scientific justification.
Recommendation: The relaxation of the mitigation hierarchy (MH) in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill has been a significant point of contention. The MH aims to ensure that harm to nature is first avoided, with destruction and compensation used only as a …
Gov response: 73. In our response to the 2024 consultation on reforms to the NPPF which sought views on the introduction of carbon accounting through the planning system, we recognised the concerns raised by respondents including low …
Under Consideration
#11 — Incorporate biodiversity into Duty to Co-operate, aligning with Local Nature Recovery Strategies
Recommendation: We recommend that the Government should explicitly incorporate matters relating to biodiversity into the Duty to Co-operate, enabling local planning authorities to work together to meet national house building and biodiversity targets at a regional level. The Duty to Co-operate …
Gov response: 35. The success of the NRF will come down to the delivery of the win-win for nature and development. As such, we would expect Natural England to be judged based on the successful delivery of …
Under Consideration
#10 — Ensure local authorities have up-to-date plans to collectively satisfy national environmental targets
Recommendation: Local authorities must ensure they have up to date local plans and environmental and climate planning policies. When combined, all local plans and policies should satisfy national environmental targets, allowing for flexibility as to how they meet these targets between …
Gov response: 33. The Government and Natural England recognise the importance of avoiding any perception of conflict of interest, and will continue to ensure that Natural England’s advisory and regulatory functions are objective and delivered with high …
Under Consideration
#2 —
Recommendation: The potential consequences of biodiversity loss for human populations have for too long been overlooked. It is vital that nature recovery is also prioritised in our economic recovery efforts alongside action on climate change. If measures to promote economic recovery …
Gov response: The Government set out in its recent Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy that tackling climate change and biodiversity loss will be the UK’s international priority through 2021 and beyond. This will …
Under Consideration
#49 —
Recommendation: To address these concerns we recommend that: a) Defra updates its Nature Recovery Network Policy Paper by the end of the year, explaining how LNRS will be co-ordinated into a national Nature Recovery Network and how local authorities should link …
Not Addressed
#48 —
Recommendation: We welcome the Government’s ambition to create a national Nature Recovery Network but believe far more detail is needed to translate this ambition into transformative action. The Nature Recovery Network (NRN) is contained in the 25 Year Environment Plan, but …
Not Addressed
#45 —
Recommendation: To allow the biodiversity net gain policy to fulfil its transformative potential within the UK’s built environment we recommend that: • The Government should explain how and when it will move to embedding environmental net gain in the planning system, …
Gov response: The Environment Bill will ensure that new developments enhance biodiversity and deliver measurable ‘Biodiversity Net Gain’ (BNG). This means developers will be required to ensure habitats for wildlife are left in a measurably better state …
Not Addressed
#44 —
Recommendation: The Government’s Planning White Paper could have implications on the delivery of the biodiversity net gain policy. We believe planning reforms should not weaken or undermine biodiversity protection.
Gov response: The Environment Bill will ensure that new developments enhance biodiversity and deliver measurable ‘Biodiversity Net Gain’ (BNG). This means developers will be required to ensure habitats for wildlife are left in a measurably better state …
Not Addressed
#43 —
Recommendation: Nature recovery does not happen overnight and must be maintained and built upon for generations. The proposed 30 year minimum to maintain biodiversity net gains will achieve little in terms of delivering long-lasting nature recovery.
Gov response: The Environment Bill will ensure that new developments enhance biodiversity and deliver measurable ‘Biodiversity Net Gain’ (BNG). This means developers will be required to ensure habitats for wildlife are left in a measurably better state …
Not Addressed
NAO Audit Recommendations (11)
Implementing statutory biodiversity net gain
On managing risks as statutory BNG embeds as business as usual, Defra should: establish arrangements to understand and respond to system-wide risks and opportunities;
Accepted
Planting Trees in England
e) incorporate a measure of the proportion of woodlands that are well managed into its target for increasing woodland cover by 2050; and
Partially accepted
Implementing statutory biodiversity net gain
identify the contribution that they expect statutory BNG to make to national biodiversity targets, and how they will measure the progress statutory BNG makes to these objectives.
Accepted
Environment Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2022-23
In order to address the issues described in my certificate, priority areas for 2023-24 should include: achieving a more stable, accurate and complete asset management dataset, with activity prioritised based on the Environment Agency?s own risk analysis as well as …
Accepted
Implementing statutory biodiversity net gain
monitor the extent to which the private market for biodiversity units is growing at the pace and scale it needs to in order to provide developers with the range of habitat types they require;
Accepted
Environment Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2022-23
updating property ownership records and making them accessible, where possible through registration ? plans should take note of the overall public sector aspiration for comprehensive registration by 2025 ? and addressing gaps in information on the extent of property holdings …
Accepted
Planting Trees in England
c) ensure its monitoring and evaluation framework includes robust mechanisms for measuring progress against targets for wider benefits such as biodiversity, flood management and air quality;
Accepted
Resilience to animal disease
i collate and publish regular data on volumes of SPS imports and checks for animal products in each category of risk;
Partially accepted
Regulating for investment and outcomes in the water sector
EA must understand whether actions in water company plans are being delivered and having the intended impact and delivering statutory environmental targets.
Accepted
Environment Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2022-23
continuing the Environment Agency?s rolling valuation programme with property selection including a risk-based element (e.g. addressing older balances and risks of duplication) with the aim of presenting a materially reliable picture of the overall portfolio as early as practically possible
Accepted
Investigation into government’s actions to combat waste crime in England
We have identified areas where Defra and the Agency, working with HMRC and others, could make further progress: Improve data on waste crime and strengthen understanding of the resources being used to tackle it, so that resources can be targeted …
Accepted
LGO / SPSO Decisions (74)
21-014-730 — London Borough of Hillingdon
Summary: Ms X complained about the Council’s decision to approve works to trees in a conservation area that she said were used by bats. We found the Council at fault in failing both to consult on the application or to make a written record of its decision reasons. These faults …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Upheld
Jul 2022
22-004-477 — King's Lynn & West Norfolk Council
Summary: Mr X complains the Council accepted a low maintenance planting scheme for a development in his village rather than properly considering Biodiversity Net Gain. We will not investigate the complaint because it is unlikely an investigation will usefully add to the Council’s own investigation or lead to a different …
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Aug 2022
21-011-484 — Cheshire East Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of matters relating to the presence of Japanese Knotweed on a site near Mr X’s home. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jan 2022
22-007-012 — London Borough of Brent
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decision to reject his dropped kerb application on the basis his constructed driveway did not meet biodiversity requirements, which are not mentioned within its policy. We have not found fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Transport And Highways
Not Upheld
Nov 2022
24-001-798 — North Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council
this complaint about the Council’s decision to end regular maintenance on land identified as a wildlife corridor. There is insufficient evidence of fault causing any significant personal injustice to Mr X.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jun 2024
24-007-375 — Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about damage caused by Council owned trees to her property. This is because it is reasonable for Miss X to take the matter to court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Sep 2024
24-020-407 — East Suffolk Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council felling trees at a heathland site. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, and insufficient evidence of personal injustice.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Apr 2025
25-005-201 — London Borough of Islington
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to remove a tree which caused the complaint to suffer a fall. This is because we are unlikely to add to the Council’s investigation or achieve the outcome requested.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Aug 2025
25-009-948 — Swindon Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about property damage.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Nov 2025
25-009-111 — North West Leicestershire District Council
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council not removing or doing further works to its tree which is near her property.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Nov 2025
21-017-882 — Wokingham Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council making a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) on trees belonging to a third party, which later damaged the complainant’s property. This is because the actions of the Council did not cause an injustice to the complainant, and liability for the damage …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Apr 2022
21-018-365 — West Lancashire Borough Council
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to allow a bat roost tower to be built on a site adjacent to his property. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Apr 2022
22-007-196 — Liverpool City Council
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council has refused to remove or prune a tree which is harming the amenity of her home. Investigation is not likely to lead to the outcome Ms X wants. It is reasonable for Ms X to use her legal rights and …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Sep 2022
24-008-431 — Hart District Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not processing or responding to a tree felling licence it received from the Forestry Commission to remove from land many trees covered by a Tree Preservation Order, not taking account of its own Climate Change Action Plan, nor using …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Oct 2024
25-006-099 — Malvern Hills District Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to allow tree works on protected trees. This is because it was reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal to a government minister. Part of the complaint is also late, and there are no good reasons to investigate it …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jul 2025
23-020-104 — Environment Agency
Summary: Mrs B has complained that the Environment Agency has wrongly asked for an indemnity from her against the risk of harm caused by it cutting weeds. She also complained that it did not respond to her reports of flooding and damage. There is no fault in the Agency’s decisions. …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Upheld
Oct 2024
21-016-178 — Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s decision not to seek TPO consent for the removal of trees from a development site close to his home. We will not investigate the complaint because Mr X has already taken court action in relation to the issue and so the complaint falls …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Mar 2022
21-017-191 — Cheshire East Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with the complainants request for a Tree Preservation Order. This is because there is no evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with the matter and the issue does not cause the complainant a personal injustice.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Mar 2022
21-018-607 — Portsmouth City Council
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that his car was damaged due to the Council’s failure to maintain a tree. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to pursue his compensation claim at court.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Mar 2022
20-014-350 — Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council
Summary: Mr C complains the Council failed to properly consider a reserved matters application for a development next to an area of Ancient Woodland without ensuring adequate protection to prevent harm. We have found no fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Not Upheld
May 2022
22-002-029 — Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s failure to follow its wildlife and natural habitat policies in relation to a set of planning applications and permissions granted for housing development in her locale. We do not propose to investigate the complaint because Ms X has not suffered significant personal injustice.
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Jun 2022
22-000-708 — East Riding of Yorkshire Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response when Mrs X reported that protected trees were being felled near her home. This is because it is unlikely we can add to what the Council has already said or achieve any meaningful outcome for Mrs X.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jun 2022
22-003-949 — Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to force the complainant’s neighbour to cut back their hedge. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The complainant has been dealt with by a Housing Association …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jul 2022
22-004-209 — Liverpool City Council
Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to act on his complaint about overgrown tree branches made six years ago. We will
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jul 2022
22-005-356 — Birmingham City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with a claim for damage to the complainants car, caused by a falling tree branch. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with the matter and the issue of liability …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Aug 2022
22-006-847 — Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to respond appropriately after the complainant reported wildlife was at risk due to a lack of water. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Other Categories
Sep 2022
22-007-603 — Worcester City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to approve an application for a tenant to keep bees on his allotment plot. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Sep 2022
22-007-638 — Mole Valley District Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council refusing to publish a wildlife report submitted as part of a planning application. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The Information Commissioner is better …
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Oct 2022
22-000-900 — Mendip District Council
Summary: There was no fault by the Council in how it handled planning matters regarding the protection of bat populations. It considered all the relevant information and decided that the applicant had not breached the planning condition.
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Not Upheld
Nov 2022
22-005-682 — Trafford Council
Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to properly deal with her reports of Japanese Knotweed spreading from a neighbouring property into her garden. We have found no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered these matters and so have completed our investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Not Upheld
Dec 2022
23-014-929 — North Somerset Council
Summary: There was no fault by the Council in how it decided to allow long grass to remain at a rewilded site.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Not Upheld
May 2024
25-000-826 — Newcastle upon Tyne City Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions when removing vegetation from the complainant’s garden in 2023. This is because the complaint has been made late and there are no good reasons in the delay.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jun 2025
25-000-480 — South Kesteven District Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the council processed an application to cut down protected trees. The complainant has appealed to the Planning Inspectorate; therefore the complaint is outside our jurisdiction. Also, I consider it is not a good use of our resources to consider a …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jun 2025
25-002-428 — Hampshire County Council
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council's decision not to remove or significantly reduce a tree next to a private estate on which she lives.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jul 2025
25-005-678 — North Lincolnshire Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to carry out tree works. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to warrant an investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Aug 2025
25-010-819 — Transport for London
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a damage claim as it reasonable to expect Mrs X to take court action for the compensation she seeks.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Sep 2025
25-003-784 — North Yorkshire Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to remove a tree. This is because the Council has already provided a satisfactory remedy and there are no wider public interest issues that justify investigating.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Nov 2025
25-016-156 — Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage caused by a Council tree. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to take court action.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Nov 2025
201602468 — Aberdeen City Council
Mr C complained to us that the council failed to take reasonable action in relation to complaints he had made to them. Mr C's home is next to an open area of council greenspace. A nearby school uses the greenspace for organised sports lessons and school team activities. These uses …
SPSO (Scottish Public Se…
Local Government
Upheld
Nov 2017
25-012-627 — North Norfolk District Council
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
25-016-370 — Medway Council
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
21-015-696 — London Borough of Lambeth
Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about Japanese Knotweed spreading to the complainant’s property from the neighbouring Council owned property. This is because we have no power to investigate a council when it is acting as a landlord.
LGO (Local Government & …
Housing
Feb 2022
21-018-939 — Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council not replacing some trees. This is because there is not enough injustice to warrant investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Apr 2022
21-018-836 — Charnwood Borough Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to damage to the complainant’s property caused by badger activity. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council.
LGO (Local Government & …
Other Categories
Apr 2022
21-013-263 — London Borough of Merton
Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s decisions to allow removal of trees in his neighbour’s garden. Mr X said the loss of trees affects his amenity. We ended our investigation as it is unlikely to result in a finding of fault, a remedy for Mr X or others, or …
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Not Upheld
Jun 2022
22-006-902 — Durham County Council
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to remove a tree. This is because there is no evidence of fault on the Council’s part.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Sep 2022
22-004-791 — Herefordshire Council
Summary: Miss D says the Council failed to properly investigate a statutory smoke nuisance caused by a neighbouring property. The Ombudsman has not found evidence of significant fault and has completed the investigation and not upheld the complaint.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Not Upheld
Dec 2022
22-007-183 — South Derbyshire District Council
Summary: There was fault by the Council as it missed about 15 assisted bin collections and/or returns in six months. An apology, payment and agreement to monitor collections for the next month remedies the injustice caused to Mr X.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Upheld
Dec 2022
23-013-240 — Shropshire Council
Summary: X complained the Council failed to be transparent when granting permission to a neighbouring development and failed to notify them about the proposal. They said the Council failed to consider the impact on wildlife and did not investigate alleged breaches of planning permissions. X also said the Council did …
LGO (Local Government & …
Planning
Not Upheld
May 2024
24-001-772 — Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about matters relating to the ownership and replacement of communal waste bins at Ms X’s block of flats. This is because neither fault by the Council nor injustice caused to Ms X is sufficient to warrant an investigation.
LGO (Local Government & …
Environment And Regulation
Jun 2024