Recover or Remove

One of the core parts of the job is to review the status of Local Sites in the County and then make or recommend changes where they are necessary or as appropriate. Minor changes can include amendments to the boundary where it is clear that the change is simply a reflection of more accurate technology or knowledge from more recent field survey (many old boundaries pre-dating modern GIS, for example).

Changes can also include more significant amendments such as extensions to the site; to include additional areas found to support or form part of the existing site. Or deletions to the site; such as the removal of an area or parcel which no longer qualifies under existing or other qualifying guidelines. Such major changes are put forward as recommendations to an independent panel for review and decision.

Also included under major changes are the listing of a new local site; the panel must find that the recommended site has sufficient evidence to show it meets the selection guideline for which it has been proposed. And also removal of local sites from the list; this can occur where a site is found to no longer be able to support the features for which it is listed and cannot be selected under other features, ultimately that it is not ‘recoverable’.

Our approach differs from some other local site partnerships in that some will deselect as soon as it is known that a site does not meet the guideline for which it was selected. We consider this to be a risky approach as it leaves the system more open to damaging behaviour; say someone wants a site selected, it would be straight forward to destroy or damage the interest with no repercussions. Similarly, a site may suffer a setback or some damage out of ignorance or poor knowledge of the land manager yet that interest may be restored should the land be brought back into appropriate management following a visit and subsequent advice and support.

This is a collection of sites, which will not be named or otherwise located (i’m doing this to share thinking and my day to day, not name and shame); where i have either been frustrated at the condition of the site and have had to decide whether or not i should recommend ‘deletion’ or ‘recovery’, have found the site to require some kind of major amendment or have otherwise been in the fortunate position of helping to put forward a new site for listing.

---