In Europe, vital laws protect our most precious nature. Our wildlife and most valued natural places all depend on these rules.
Sadly, right now the European Commission is considering undermining these laws, undoing years of progress.
The European Commission is asking for our opinion and now is the time to make our voices heard.
The Commission’s consultation asks several questions and below we have suggested the answers that best protect nature.
We must act now and say that we want these laws to be maintained, enforced and not weakened.
To save nature, simply fill in your details and click TAKE ACTION NOW.
Watch the spot campaign HERE.
Our Answers to best support nature
Question 1: How important is nature conservation to you?
Question 2: How familiar are you with EU nature conservation measures?
Birds Directive: Slightly familiar
Habitats Directive: Slightly familiar
Natura 2000 network of protected areas: Slightly familiar
Question 3: How important to nature conservation are the Birds and Habitats Directives?
Question 4: Are the Directives’ strategic objectives appropriate for protecting nature in the EU?
The Nature Directives aim to improve the fortunes of nature-rich habitats and species. The vision they describe is supported by nature organisations across the EU.
Question 5: Is the approach set out in the Directives an appropriate way to protect species and habitats in the EU?
The Nature Directives require EU countries to establish strict rules protecting all of Europe’s wild birds and a wide range of other threatened species, and to identify and protect important areas of natural habitat.
Question 6: Have the Directives been effective in protecting nature?
The area of nature-rich habitat protected in Europe has increased dramatically thanks to the Directives. Scientific studies show that some threatened wildlife has started to recover following protection under the Directives.
Question 7: How important is the Natura 2000 network for protecting threatened species and habitats in the EU?
The Natura 2000 network comprises some 27,000 areas of nature-rich habitat covering approximately 18% of the EU and over 4% of its seas. Evidence shows that these sites have been behind the recovery of some of Europe’s most threatened species.
Question 8: How do the costs of implementing the Birds and Habitats Directives compare with the benefits from their implementation?
The benefits of implementation far exceed the costs
Studies show that the benefits from the Nature Directives substantially outweigh the costs. As well as protecting wildlife, Natura 2000 sites provide a range of other benefits.
Question 9: While the Directives are primarily focused on conserving nature, to what extent have the following been taken into account in implementing them?
Economic concerns – Very well
Social concerns – Very well
Cultural concerns – Very well
Regional characteristics – Very well
Local characteristics – Very well
This legislation accommodates well Europe’s diversity of socio-economic concerns, governance structures, local cultural preference and traditions.
Question 10: Do EU policies in the following areas generally support the objectives of the Birds and Habitats Directives?
Agriculture & rural development – No
Fisheries & maritime – Could contribute more
Cohesion (regional) – Could contribute more
Energy – No
Transport – No
Environment – Yes
Industry/enterprise – Could contribute more
Climate change – Could contribute more
Health – Could contribute more
Research & innovation – Could contribute more
Many pieces of EU environmental law support the Directives but others give nature organisations concern. EU agriculture policy pushes farming intensification and fails sustainable farmers. Energy policy, despite attempts to focus it on promoting sustainable renewable, still supports fossil fuels and has been subsidising biofuels despite negative impacts on biodiversity. Transport policies have been pushing poorly-located infrastructure development with little regard for habitats and species.
Question 11: To what extent have the Directives provided more value than could have been achieved through national or regional laws in this area?
Significant added value
As nature knows no borders, to be effective nature conservation action must be coordinated at international level, justifying an EU-level approach. There has been a step-change in nature conservation efforts in Europe thanks to the Directives.
Question 12: To what extent have the Directives added value to the economy (e.g. job creation, business opportunities linked to Natura 2000)?
Significant added value
By ensuring the same clear rules apply to all businesses, and by attracting visitors and tourists, the Directives have added significant value to the economy. In fact, the value of the economic benefits provided by the Natura 2000 network has been estimated to be in the order of €200 to €300 billion per year.
Question 13: To what extent have the Directives brought additional social benefits (e.g. health, culture, recreation, education)?
Significant added value
Thanks to the Directives, nature-rich habitats have been protected for both current and future generations to learn about and enjoy. There is strong evidence linking contact with a healthy natural environment to a range of physical and mental health benefits.
Question 14: Is there still a need for EU legislation to protect species and habitats?
The Directives were adopted to address failures and inconsistencies in national nature protection laws. The justification for EU-level action on biodiversity conservation remains as strong as ever. The next step should be to ensure the Directives are fully enforced in every country in the EU.