There are some positives, including a tiered system which recognises and encourages restoration of new sites (silver category) and the value of doing good things for nature across the wider 70% (bronze category), but we remain concerned that the criteria for what ultimately counts (gold category) fail to meet the clear international standards set by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).
Similarly, the Government’s annual progress report looks good on paper. It’s a more detailed report this time and lists some positive actions; both the publication of a Land Use Framework, a tool for making decisions about how to use our finite land, and the publication of some Local Nature Recovery Strategies, which map out potential actions for nature in our local area. These are positive steps, but without incentives, it’s hard to see them as any more than just words on a page.
We’ve seen some positive funding announced for some of our species, but critically progress against the apex target, to halt the decline in our species, continues to go backwards; populations of monitored species have declined on average by about 40% since 1970, and it’s doubly bad for our priority species (those needing targeted conservation action), which declined by about 80% over the same period. There’s even been a marked downturn in monitored species in the short term too.
