Areas of Special Scientific Interest

A report published today by John Dowdall, the Comptroller and Auditor General for Northern Ireland, examines the arrangements operated by DOE's Environment and Heritage Service for safeguarding Areas of Special Scientific Interest (ASSIs). ASSIs are sites with important, special characteristics related mostly to their flora, fauna, geological or physiographical features. Many of these sites are also designated as Special Areas of Conservation under the terms of the European Union's Habitats Directive, or Special Protection Areas, under the EU Birds Directive. Consequently, ASSIs can have international, as well as national, importance.

Main Findings

Identifying and designating sites as Areas of Special Scientific Interest

In 1993, a formal programme was set out to complete the survey, designation and protection of ASSIs by 2001. EHS said that the necessary additional resources necessary to undertake this work were not forthcoming, and the objective has not been achieved. At the time of NIAO's audit, EHS had not produced any revised long-term strategy for completing designation of the ASSI network, nor a time scale within which it intended to do so (paragraphs 1.2 to 1.4 and 1.10).

Designation delays mean that there is a risk of non-compliance with EU Directives and, at worst, this could expose the UK government to EU infraction proceedings and fines. In 2000, EHS estimated that these fines could be "hundreds of thousands of pounds" (paragraph 1.11).

Because EHS's databases do not contain any information relating to potential candidates for designation, it is not possible to identify the number of sites that have been damaged as a result of delays in designation. A case example (Ballynahone Bog, Co Londonderry) illustrates the potential environmental damage and cost that can result from not providing sites quickly with appropriate statutory protection, such as ASSI designation (paragraphs 1.13 and 1.14).

Managing ASSIs and protecting them from damage

Until January 2000, EHS management agreements with landowners/occupiers usually resulted in one-off lump sums in return for landowners not performing certain operations on their land. An economic appraisal of conservation site management, carried out for EHS in 1998, pointed out that this type of management agreement had a potential for greater loss through damage "because all of the money has been paid out" (paragraph 2.9).

Since January 2000, EHS policy has been to make management agreements that will result in smaller annual payments, in line with practice in Great Britain since the early 1990s. If payments in Northern Ireland had been reduced to the £25 per hectare rate achieved in England, this could have yielded savings of up to £1.57 million in the 8 years up to March 2000 (paragraphs 2.10 to 2.12).

In March 2002, EHS introduced monitoring programmes for newly designated ASSIs. EHS does not yet have a comprehensive, up-to-date, picture of the condition of ASSIs overall and has been unable to produce the kind of condition reports available for other parts of the United Kingdom (paragraph 3.4).

In addition to providing restoration of damaged sites, enforcement action can be a deterrent to others who may be tempted to destroy or damage environmental assets. It is important, therefore, that enforcement action is commensurate with the nature of the offence and that it is carried out as quickly as possible after the offence has taken place. The report provides an example relating to the construction of a harbour development on Lough Neagh ASSI (Co Antrim) and illustrating the potential consequences of inadequate monitoring of designated sites and delayed, or weak, enforcement action (paragraphs 3.6 and 3.7).

EHS's 1996-97 Operational Plan gave a commitment to implement a formal enforcement policy by December 1996. At the time of NIAO's audit, EHS still did not have any enforcement policies or procedures in place, despite producing a draft policy in 1998. A new deadline of 31 March 2003 has been set for completing this work (paragraph 3.11).

Arrangements for delivering an efficient and effective service

Owing to the substantial overlap between agri-environmental, forestry and ASSI schemes, there is an obvious need for close liaison between EHS and the relevant Divisions and Agencies of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD). The report recommends that EHS should put in place a Service Level Agreement (SLA) with DARD without delay, and renew and update its SLA with Planning Service (paragraph 4.7).

Much of the monitoring carried out in respect of individual sites is carried out by local EHS staff. However, local offices have access to only one of the central databases that cover different aspects of ASSI-related work, and manual files relating to individual ASSIs are held centrally in EHS headquarters. The report recommends that EHS should consolidate all ASSI data into one database and provide on-line access to all staff who require it. It also recommends that consideration be given to providing Planning Service and DARD with on-line access to relevant parts of the database to prevent recurrence of some of the problems that the report identifies (Paragraphs 4.12 to 4.14).

An economic appraisal of site management, commissioned by EHS in 1998, recommended that conservation payments should be administered by a single body (probably DARD). The Audit Office considers that this recommendation still merits serious consideration(paragraph 4.16)