Consultation On The Legislative Proposals Contained Within The Review Of Non-Native Species Policy

This document is also available in pdf format (20k)

Contents

Introduction
Background
Options for Scotland
Regulatory Impact Assessment
Appendix

Introduction

1. The purpose of this consultation is to seek the views of consultees on the legislative aspects of the Review of non-native Species Policy, which was published on 28 March 2003.

Background

2. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) imposes an international obligation on the United Kingdom to address the issue of invasive non-native species. Although nature conservation, including the handling of non-native species issues, is a devolved matter, Scottish Ministers agreed that any Review of this issue should be undertaken on a GB basis. Defra is the lead Whitehall Department.

3. Set up in March 2001, and chaired by representatives from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), the Review Group included representation from Devolved Administrations, other Government Departments, statutory nature conservation bodies, non Government organisations (NGOs) and trade interests. The impact and potential threat posed by non-native species throughout Great Britain was reviewed by this Group, which also considered policy or legislative measures which might minimise existing or potential such threats. On 28 March, the Government report entitled Review of non-native Species Policy, was published and outlined 8 Key Recommendations for improving the handling of non-native species issues, these are detailed in the attached Appendix and will be subject to consultation in September 2003. But in advance of that, the Executive is consulting initially on the legislative aspects of the Review, particularly as the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Bill has just completed its consultation process.

4. While non-statutory measures are in place to address problems posed specifically by invasive non-native species, the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (the 1981 Act), is the principal legislation which regulates the release of non-native species into the wild; prohibiting the introduction of all non-native animal species but only specified plant species. Section 14 of the 1981 Act states that it is an ‘offence to release or cause to escape into the wild any animal which is not ordinarily resident or a regular visitor to the United Kingdom in a wild state, or is specified in Schedule 9 of the Act’. Similarly, Section 14(2) of the 1981 Act makes it an offence to plant or otherwise cause to grow in the wild any plant listed on Schedule 9, Part II. Invasive non-native species, which are already established in the wild, are listed on Schedule 9 of the 1981 Act, which prohibits them from further release.

Options for Scotland

5. Views are particularly sought on the proposal to revise and update existing legislation to improve handling of invasive non-native species issues as set out in Key Recommendation 5 of the Review. Your comments are invited on the following:-

Possible changes to Section 14 of the WCA to minimise the release of species and allow a more regular update of Schedule 9 to incorporate problem (actual or potential) species.

6. This Section of the Act originally attempted to introduce a blanket ban on releases affecting all non-native animals and a partial prohibition on plants. The Review considered it to be ineffective at preventing further introductions and difficult to enforce. The Review also accepted that many of the released animals or plants were as a result of unintentional or accidental acts and very few prosecutions have been mounted using this Section of the Act for these reasons.

7. Section 14 also does little to address the problems posed by invasive non-native species that are already established in the UK. Schedule 9 of the WCA 1981 lists those invasive species already established in the UK which are prohibited from being released further but the Schedule has not been updated for some years and therefore takes no account of new or potential threats.

8. The fines for criminal offences under this Section are low when contrasted to the potentially high costs of damage, control and repair and are no deterrent to individuals who might act recklessly or through malice. The Review estimated at £1.56bn the cost to remove Japanese Knotweed from watercourses in the UK, and a further £100m to eradicate Giant Hogweed. The removal of Coypu in East Anglia in the 1980s is estimated to be £10m at current values. The Review therefore recommends that consideration be given to introduce "polluter pays" principles as they affect release or spread of invasive species, together with measures that allow statutory bodies greater powers to control or remove non-native species.

For consideration

Do consultees accept that Section 14 of the Wildlife & Countryside Act should be amended to take account of the greater appreciation of the threat of invasive species?

What particular aspects of this Section are now weak or ineffective and how might improvements be introduced.

Do you accept that measures should be introduced to ensure that those found guilty of releasing invasive species should be regarded as "polluters"?

Should any penalty imposed upon them reflect the damage their actions have caused or the cost which Government or its agencies incur in tackling they problem they have caused?

Do you see merit in extending the powers of Government and its agencies to prevent or remedy such releases, and if so, what provisions would you wish introduced?

Revisions to the broad definitions of "the wild" and "wild birds"

9. The Review identified the existing threat of many species particularly plants and appreciated the efforts of many local authorities and agencies in controlling the problem. An obvious example of this is the spread of Japanese Knotweed and other plants through fly-tipping and inappropriate disposal of garden waste which has included invasive plants. While there have been some successful prosecutions for fly-tipping activities, the natural spread of invasive plants is not an offence and consideration should be given to ensuring that garden plants are contained within residential or public amenity boundaries. Any such changes might be accompanied by educational programmes with garden centres who might also act as hosts/advisers on safe disposal of plants, and improved/increased use of composting facilities.

10. The WCA 1981 provides protection to non-native bird species due to the broad definition of wild birds in the Act. This can pose problems when management/eradication measures are required for certain species. The Review is seeking to put improvements in place so that non-native species can be given legal protection while allowing Government or its agencies to act with greater ease when problems arise.

For consideration

What additional measures might be put in place to prevent the accidental or deliberate release of species into the wild?

What aspects of legislation need to be improved or introduced to ensure that such releases are minimised if not prevented altogether?

What measures might be introduced to allow management of problem species, particularly birds? Are changes needed to existing licensing procedures currently in place which control such activities?

Introduction of Codes of Practice, underpinned by legislation, to prevent deliberate and unintentional introduction of non-native species.

11. The Review accepted that introductions of non-native species arise unintentionally as a result of legitimate activities but felt that measures must be taken to ideally prevent or at least minimise the chances of such acts from arising. To bring this about, the Review recommended that Codes of Conduct/Best Practice be prepared with key stakeholders to prevent such introductions and that consideration be given to them having some form of statutory underpinning.

12. Such changes might also be helpful to ensure that improved licensing or management measures can be put in place to control invasive bird or other species. The wording of Section 14 of the WCA 1981 prohibits the release of all non-native animals but is considered weaker for plants and micro-organisms. It is only the invasive non-native plant species listed on Schedule 9 of the Act that are prohibited from release and there is no current legal provision for invasive micro-organisms.

13. The Review considered that risk assessment procedures would be useful to prioritise those areas or species in need of the most urgent action and accompanying Codes of Practice might be tailored to address particular industries or known or suspected routes by which invasive species were introduced. The Review considered that such Codes might benefit from being underpinned in legislation so that a clear failure to comply with the Codes may leave the offender liable to prosecution.

For consideration

Do you see benefits from introducing Codes of Practice as a means of addressing invasive species issues?

If so, should such Codes be subject to statutory provisions?

How should such Codes be monitored and policed?

Which aspects of non-native/invasive species issues are thought to need priority action?

Who should contribute to drawing up the Codes of Practice?

Regulatory Impact Assessment

14. A draft RIA has not been produced. The Scottish Executive believes that the specific proposals outlined, to update existing legislation to improve handling of non-native species issues, will not have a significant economic impact.

15. Consultees’ views are invited on the proposals contained within this document by Tuesday 16 September 2003. Responses should be sent to:-
Margaret Blake
The Scottish Executive Environment and Rural Affairs Department
Wildlife & Habitats
Area 1-H South
Victoria Quay
Edinburgh
EH6 6QQ
Fax: 0131 244 4071
E-mail to: legislationNNR@scotland.gsi.gov.uk

16 The Executive may wish to publish responses to this publication document in due course and to deposit them in the Executive’s Library. The Executive will assume that a response can be published or deposited unless a respondent specifically asks for it to be treated as confidential. Confidential responses will nevertheless be included in any statistical summary of numbers of comments received and views expressed.

17. Further copies of this paper can be obtained from Margaret Blake at the above address or it can be accessed on the Scottish Executive’s website http:/www.scotland.gov.uk.

The Scottish Executive
15 August 2003

Appendix

8 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE REVIEW OF NON-NATIVE SPECIES POLICY

Recommendation 1: The government should designate or create a single lead co-ordinating organisation to undertake the role of co-ordinating and ensuring consistency of application of non-native species policies across government.

Recommendation 2: Develop comprehensive, accepted risk assessment procedures to assess the risks posed by non-native species and identifying and prioritising preventative action.

Recommendation 3: Develop codes of conduct to help prevent introductions for all relevant sectors in a participative fashion involving all relevant stakeholders.

Recommendation 4: Develop a targeted education and awareness strategy involving all sectors.

Recommendation 5: Revise and update existing legislation to improve handling of invasive non-native species issues.

Recommendation 6: Establish adequate monitoring and surveillance arrangements for non-native species.

Recommendation 7: Policies should be established with respect to management and control of invasive non-native species currently present or newly arrived in the wild, and operational capacity is developed to implement these policies.

Recommendation 8: Stakeholders should be fully consulted and engaged in development of invasive non-native species policies and actions through a mechanism such as a consultative forum.