Nature recovery plan in England faces setback due to a clause allowing contracts to be terminated with a year's notice, conservationists warn. This clause undermines the ambitious scheme to restore England's nature over the coming decades, as it could lead to low take-up and less land protected for nature.
The project aimed to fund landscape-scale restoration across thousands of hectares, creating reserves for rare species to thrive. Conservationists argue that allowing contracts to be terminated after a year is unworkable, as it would leave landowners with rewilded land they can no longer farm and too little time to reconvert it.
The environmental land management schemes (ELMs), introduced by the previous Conservative government, were designed to replace EU farming subsidies. Initially, the schemes were to be split into three strands, with landscape recovery receiving a third of the £2.4bn annual funding pot. However, the environment secretary, Emma Reynolds, announced that the projects would only receive £500m over 20 years, sparking concerns among conservationists and landowners.
Jake Fiennes, director of conservation at the Holkham estate, expressed disappointment, stating that £500m over 20 years is insufficient. He emphasizes the importance of the original funding allocation, which would have supported the ambitious nature recovery schemes. The reduced funding will result in only a few million pounds a year for landscape recovery, despite the high costs and ambitious goals associated with the projects.
Farmers and landowners who signed up to the scheme found that their contracts allowed the government to terminate them for convenience with just 12 months' notice. This has led to uncertainty and hesitation among participants, as some legal advice suggests not signing due to the potential for the government to end the scheme in a year.
The RSPB's head of sustainable land policy, Alice Groom, highlights the setback, noting that the new target of 41% of farmers managing only 7% of land for nature is a significant step backwards. She emphasizes the need for high-quality, well-placed habitat to support thriving wildlife populations, and criticizes the government's approach as insufficient and risky.
The controversy surrounding the funding and contract termination clauses has sparked discussions and concerns among conservationists, farmers, and policymakers. The future of nature recovery in England remains uncertain, as the government's environmental improvement plan has watered down the overall ambition for nature on farmland.
