You have missed out a key point about “management of beavers” in that DEFRA Press release. It should ring warning bells because there will be heavy pressure from land interests to identify areas of zero tolerance.
We have little conception of strict protection in the UK, but it is important to consider this in relation to the future of the beaver in not just England but the whole of the UK. The strict protection afforded to a range of species under the Bern Convention and the EU Habitats Directive were measures in pursuit of protecting and thus conserving species on the edge that had dwindled through human persecution. It was also important that if these species reappeared in countries either through voluntary or deliberate reinstatement – both the Bern Convention and the Habitats Directive require consideration of reinstatement for former native species no longer present (see Article 11 in the Bern Convention and Article 22 in the Habitats Directive) - then it was necessary to give that strict protection while they were re-establishing themselves towards effective populations in their former native range. The strict protection has also had the effect of a compulsion on land users to learn to deal with human-wildlife conflicts in constructive ways.
The Wildlife and Countryside Act (WACA) 1981 incorporated our commitments under the Bern Convention into UK legislation, in the same way that the EU Habitats Directive incorporated the Bern Convention into EU legislation. There are so few animals given strict protection under UK legislation, and even then it is by varying degree, such as pine marten, red squirrel, otter, wildcat, dormouse, and now beaver in Scotland (see schedules 5 & 6ZA in the WACA). Of those species, the otter and beaver are given both explicit and spatial strict protection as a result of the EU Habitats Directive, which required us for the spatial protection to identify a network of Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) where the habitat needs of those species must be maintained (Article 6, Annex 2 in Habitats Directive). I am not aware of any assignment of beaver in Scotland to SACs, given that the acceptance of beaver as a free-living species that then qualified it for strict protection was only recent. There are, however, 75 SACs for otter where it is either a primary or qualifying feature, most of which are in Scotland and Wales, and we used to report periodically to the EU on the conservation status of this species. These SACs will continue now as part of a “national site network” under The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 and will continue to meet the objectives they held under the Habitats Directive. New regulation 7A in that Statutory Instrument may indicate that there will also be a continuation of designation of national sites for ANNEX II species such as the beaver.
I doubt many people here are aware of this spatial aspect to the strict protection of a species, but that is only half the equation. A comparison of the UK distribution of otters with the location of SACs designated for otters shows there are likely to be many otters out of an estimated total population of around 12,000 that are living outside of these protected areas. This doesn’t mean to say that these otter aren’t also covered by strict protection everywhere it chooses to exist, as should be clear from the explicit strict protection given to them under the EU Habitats Directive (see Article 12 & Annex IV in Habitats Directive). The same should be true for beaver, whether in England or Scotland. However, there is a catch because the beaver is not a strictly protected species under the Bern Convention – it is listed in Appendix III rather than Appendix II. Invariably all strict protections are hedged by exceptions (derogations) but those exceptions are not meant to be used for population control, even if some countries abuse them, such as Sweden and the wolf, and it would seem also Scotland and the high number of beavers (~20% of population) killed in less than 12 months. Unfortunately, listing of beaver in Appendix III leaves it open to population control, and thus for arguments to be made for introduction of areas of zero tolerance, as well as having “open seasons”.
Given the vehemence against the EU in our Government, and that it has already switched to conveying the Bern Convention as now being our obligations to wild nature, then this differential in protection will be exploited.
You have missed out a key point about “management of beavers” in that DEFRA Press release. It should ring warning bells because there will be heavy pressure from land interests to identify areas of zero tolerance.
We have little conception of strict protection in the UK, but it is important to consider this in relation to the future of the beaver in not just England but the whole of the UK. The strict protection afforded to a range of species under the Bern Convention and the EU Habitats Directive were measures in pursuit of protecting and thus conserving species on the edge that had dwindled through human persecution. It was also important that if these species reappeared in countries either through voluntary or deliberate reinstatement – both the Bern Convention and the Habitats Directive require consideration of reinstatement for former native species no longer present (see Article 11 in the Bern Convention and Article 22 in the Habitats Directive) - then it was necessary to give that strict protection while they were re-establishing themselves towards effective populations in their former native range. The strict protection has also had the effect of a compulsion on land users to learn to deal with human-wildlife conflicts in constructive ways.
The Wildlife and Countryside Act (WACA) 1981 incorporated our commitments under the Bern Convention into UK legislation, in the same way that the EU Habitats Directive incorporated the Bern Convention into EU legislation. There are so few animals given strict protection under UK legislation, and even then it is by varying degree, such as pine marten, red squirrel, otter, wildcat, dormouse, and now beaver in Scotland (see schedules 5 & 6ZA in the WACA). Of those species, the otter and beaver are given both explicit and spatial strict protection as a result of the EU Habitats Directive, which required us for the spatial protection to identify a network of Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) where the habitat needs of those species must be maintained (Article 6, Annex 2 in Habitats Directive). I am not aware of any assignment of beaver in Scotland to SACs, given that the acceptance of beaver as a free-living species that then qualified it for strict protection was only recent. There are, however, 75 SACs for otter where it is either a primary or qualifying feature, most of which are in Scotland and Wales, and we used to report periodically to the EU on the conservation status of this species. These SACs will continue now as part of a “national site network” under The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 and will continue to meet the objectives they held under the Habitats Directive. New regulation 7A in that Statutory Instrument may indicate that there will also be a continuation of designation of national sites for ANNEX II species such as the beaver.
I doubt many people here are aware of this spatial aspect to the strict protection of a species, but that is only half the equation. A comparison of the UK distribution of otters with the location of SACs designated for otters shows there are likely to be many otters out of an estimated total population of around 12,000 that are living outside of these protected areas. This doesn’t mean to say that these otter aren’t also covered by strict protection everywhere it chooses to exist, as should be clear from the explicit strict protection given to them under the EU Habitats Directive (see Article 12 & Annex IV in Habitats Directive). The same should be true for beaver, whether in England or Scotland. However, there is a catch because the beaver is not a strictly protected species under the Bern Convention – it is listed in Appendix III rather than Appendix II. Invariably all strict protections are hedged by exceptions (derogations) but those exceptions are not meant to be used for population control, even if some countries abuse them, such as Sweden and the wolf, and it would seem also Scotland and the high number of beavers (~20% of population) killed in less than 12 months. Unfortunately, listing of beaver in Appendix III leaves it open to population control, and thus for arguments to be made for introduction of areas of zero tolerance, as well as having “open seasons”.
Given the vehemence against the EU in our Government, and that it has already switched to conveying the Bern Convention as now being our obligations to wild nature, then this differential in protection will be exploited.