The GoodThe plan is very welcome. It backs some important principles, such as not losing any more wildlife. It contains forward thinking ideas, such as the revolving land bank and a commitment to restore 500,000 hectares of wildlife-rich landscape outside legally protected areas which is one of a handful of hard targets. Promotion of reform of agricultural subsidies is vital if more land is to be rewilded instead of paying landowners to destroy wildlife by producing uneconomic food. The BadThe plan has its huge weakness; some of the targets are very distant and will be left to future governments and not address the dangerous loss of biodiversity today. We could end avoidable waste today and not in 2042. The key problems of land use efficiency and perverse incentives to create waste and not use land efficiently are not addressed by changing tax breaks for landowners who abuse land and the wildlife on it. Key issues regarding developing 'ecosystem services' such as natural flood protection, water quality and carbon loss and soil destruction have not been mentioned and, while the Government has given its backing to reintroducing species like beaver pioneered by the Wildwood Trust, more could have been said on the subject as well as cutting red tape in the process. The UglyMost worrying is the lack of detail, explaining how these ambitions will be delivered in practice, with few real targets or policies explained in any detail. That's why Wildwood Trust is calling for an Environment Act, to turn these 'aspirations' into a legal and enforceable reality. Such promises are being made to help the transition through BREXIT as one of the few really good opportunities our leaving the European Union offers and it is vital that these promises are not forgotten once article 50 is enacted and 70% of our existing environmental laws extinguished when we leave Europe. |
No comments:
Post a Comment