Natura 2000 Site Selection
OF PROPOSED (OR CANDIDATE) SPAS AND SACS
35. DETR, speaking on behalf of the UK as a whole,
told us that it was accepted practice in the UK to treat proposed
or candidate SPAs and SACs as if they were fully designated and
accepted by the Commission as Sites of Community Importance.
36. Most EU Member States, including the UK,
have still to finalise their lists of SPAs and SACs. This delay
is to be regretted, but we consider the policy of the UK in
offering candidate sites protection through land-use planning
policies is a sound stop-gap measure. We consider that this should
be recommended to other Member States as an example to be followed.
of SPAs and SACs in the United Kingdom
37. We were told that the JNCC, on behalf of
the UK nature conservation agencies, had a well-developed system,
based on science, which the devolved administrations and their
agencies couldfollow (IR QQ 437, 439, 440). As we stated
in our Interim Report (paragraph 33), we were persuaded by
our witnesses that the United Kingdom had approached this important
task in a logical manner. The commitment, however, to consult
landowners and managers had slowed the process and added a large
burden to the work programmes of the statutory conservation agencies.
We believe this has been under-estimated by sponsoring departments
in the past.