1. Conservation Advice - Next steps
Where do we go from here?

2. Major progress over last 4 years
Transparent, consistent & evidence-based approach to advice provision
Mapping
AoOps (sensitivity, A-P justifications, Risk Pressure Profile)
Seasonality tables
SACOs
Access to evidence
Streamlined a complex process
STAKEHOLDER engagement!

3. Some numbers…… 3,000+ activity-pressure justifications
~200,000 words, 1,500+ citations
~1m lines of advice
identified 0.25m are relevant (75% erroneous combinations screened out)
2,000+ sensitivity assessments
Birds, fish, mammals, habitats (marine & coastal)
1m+ points, lines, and polygons mapped
2,000+ integrity attributes described (x site-spp targets)
3,000+ Risk profiles of pressure
200+ staff, stakeholders, contractors involved

4. Review against original intent
Facilitating NSIPs
Improve the quality and quantity of data
Make it operator focussed
Make it consistent
Show our workings
Follow NE and governments Standards
Improve the customer experience
Make it simple

5. Is my Activity likely to have a Significant effect on site integrity?
Improving the customer experience
Facilitating nationally significant infrastructure projects
Improving the quality, quantity and sharing of data
Evidence standards:
all the advice we give and all the decisions we take are underpinned by sound evidence
we are impartial and consistent

6. Is my plan or project likely to have a significant effect on the site?
Screening tools
Advice on feature seasonality
Risk profiling of pressures
Sensitivity evidence
Feature maps
AoOps
SACO

7. Potential issues with current approach
Aside from the already stated benefits
developers could well argue that:
We can rapidly solve these issues!
We propose a screening tool connecting AoOps to SACO
Information overload
Time consuming
Potential for subjectivity
>$ consulting costs for developers

8. Feature screening (x)
maps, sensitivity, seasonality tables
Pressure screening (y)
Pressure risk assessments, sensitivity

9. Proposed approach 11x16 =176 4x9=36
Proposed screening tool connecting AoOps to SACO
11x16 =176
4x9=36
tLSE?

10. Is my Activity likely to have a Significant effect on site integrity?
Improving the customer experience
Facilitating nationally significant infrastructure projects
Improving the quality, quantity and sharing of data
Evidence standards:
all the advice we give and all the decisions we take are underpinned by sound evidence
we are impartial and consistent

11. Tweed Estuary AoSI – 198 integrity attributes

12. 1 2

14. What would be the value in this next step?
Rapid/timely
Consistent
Could dramatically reduce subjectivity
Reduce risks in the assessment process
Reduce developer costs

15. Conservation Advice – future investment
Natural England has made considerable investment to meet statutory requirements and stakeholder requirements;
Significant projected funding pressures from Government;
To sustain and improve this service will need to recover ongoing costs for conservation advice (following updates);
Annual cost of service is not presently known but considered to be <£100k

16. Future investment principles
New conservation advice will be published and freely available
Cost recovery will be for the use and advice of the proposed screening tool – this is a discretionary service
This service will be provided and managed by Natural England (could be longer term licence options)
Recovery will be for annual maintenance costs of managing the service and some investment in improving the evidence base

17. Cost recovery options
Charges based on the time it takes to undertake screening and provide advice (extension to existing Discretionary Advice Service);
Flat rate cost for the use of the screening tool;
Combination of the above;
Option of annual industry sector contributions – could reduce cost to members.

18. Next steps
Subject to funding, aiming for the service to be available from April (with some pilot work done ahead of then);
Welcome feedback on cost recovery options;
Welcome further discussions with Industry Sectors / Groups if interested, on the development of the screening tool.

19. Thanks for listening Questions? Edward.mayhew@naturalengland.org.uk

20. Questions for small-group discussion
What do you like/dislike in our current marine conservation advice model?
How useful would the screening tool be to your work, and is there anything else that would help?
How would you like to be involved with the development of these tools?