Summary of key points

In the Government’s consultation paper of November 2006 views were sought as to the application of a site integrity test to judge biodiversity damage.  This is very different test to that of conservation status, focusing on the site and not on the contribution made to the conservation status of the EC interests it hosts.  The application of the site integrity test is undoubtedly easier to apply than the making of judgements on local impacts on conservation status, but is not consistent with the provisions of the Environmental Liability Directive.  The proportional impact on biodiversity at site level and at conservation status level being different.  For example a site hosting Great crested newts, a species listed in the EC Habitats Directive, could be affected by the application of the site integrity test but may have little impact on its conservation status because the species is so numerous and widely dispersed.  Conversely it may be possible that a very scare species may not be affected by applying the site integrity test but the possible impact on its conservation status could disproportionately high.

Were the Government to add SSSI interest features to those protected species and natural habitats listed in the Environmental Liability Directive, given that there is no assessment of conservation status for such features, apart from those listed in the EC Habitats Directive, and it would be difficult to establish such values given territorial and local variations and priorities, the site integrity test would be the most logical option to determine the threshold for biodiversity damage.