Purpose

Use of Conservation Covenants for legally
securing offsite Biodiversity Net Gain habitat banks sites that
geographically span the Buckinghamshire boundary with a
neighbouring local authority

Content

Conservation Covenants were a legal tool,
introduced by the Environment Act 2021, that could be used to
conserve natural or heritage features of land in England. They were
voluntary agreements between a designated Responsible Body and a
landowner to deliver lasting conservation benefits. Each CC
described what the landowner would do to help conserve the land for
public good. They were bespoke legally
binding agreements so they could be tailored to suit different
circumstances. CCs were a helpful tool for BNG in relation to
securing sites for offsite Biodiversity Net Gain. They presented
another opportunity to facilitate the BNG offsite market, which was
important in Buckinghamshire, recognising the scale of housing
growth required. In addition to get onto the national biodiversity
site register (to sell BNG unites to developers), an offsite BNG
site must have been secured using a standalone S106 agreement or a
CC.
 
A CC must be agreed with a designated
Responsible Body who could be a local authority, a public body or
charity, where at least some of its main purposes or functions
relate to conservation; or a private sector organisation, where at
least some of its main activities relate to conservation.
Buckinghamshire became a Responsible Body in May 2024.
 
The Council was able to enter into a CC including land beyond its boundaries
on the basis it was not seeking to exercise a statutory role on
behalf of, or in place of, another (neighbouring) authority.
Therefore, no authority or agreement was needed from the other
Council. A CC was a private, voluntary agreement with a
landowner.
 
The Cabinet Member for Climate Change and
Environment reported that they were looking at Option 3 to secure
offsite BNG sites that geographically cross authority boundaries
with a neighbouring authority. A CC would be a much simpler and
more streamlined way to secure nature related outcomes at these
sites. It would reduce costs by having one agreement instead of two
and be much easier to deliver large landscape scale nature recovery
sites that span the geographic boundary. The only risk would be
managing and enforcing the agreement that would lie outside the
Council boundary. Option 2 was already authorised under delegated
powers. Any revenue cost would be settled by the maintenance fee.
Any fees charged should be set on a full cost recovery basis
including for corporate overheads and cover the full duration of
the agreement.
 
The use of Conservation Covenant in relation
to Option 3 would enable the easier delivery of a landscape scale
habitat bank helping deliver some of the key priorities within the
recently approved Local Nature Recovery Strategy. Importantly, they
also presented opportunities to enable delivery of projects that
supported emerging markets for biodiversity (i.e. mandatory
Biodiversity Net Gain) but also other nature markets, such as
Carbon, Water Quality and Flood Protection. It would also provide
much needed river offsite BNG units, which were currently scarce
nationally in the BNG offsite market.
 
RESOLVED that the
use of Conservation Covenants, in relation to Option 3 (securing
offsite Biodiversity Net Gain Habitat Banks on sites that
geographically cross our boundary with a neighbouring authority),
noting that use of Option 2 is already authorised under delegated
powers, be approved.