Skip to main content

Agenda item

West Oxfordshire Nature Recovery Plan

Purpose

To provide a progress update on the delivery of the Council’s Nature Recovery Plan (2024 – 2030) and an outline of the requirement to publish a report on the implementation of the Council’s statutory biodiversity duty for the reporting period 12th February 2024 to 1st January 2026.

 

Recommendation

That Overview and Scrutiny Committee resolves to:

1.            Note the progress made in delivering the Nature Recovery Plan (2024 – 2030); and

2.            Note the requirement to publish a report on the Council’s implementation of the statutory biodiversity duty within 12 weeks of the end of the reporting period (26th March 2026).

Minutes:

Councillor Andrew Prosser, Executive Member for Climate Action and Nature Recovery, presented the item to the Committee, the purpose of which was to provide a progress update on the delivery of the Council’s Nature Recovery Plan (2024 – 2030) and an outline of the requirement to publish a report on the implementation of the Council’s statutory biodiversity duty for the reporting period 12 February 2024 to 1 January 2026. Councillor Prosser advised that the Nature Recovery Plan had three themes which could be seen at section 2.3 of the report.

 

In the discussion the following was discussed:

 

  • The Committee explored the likely impact of the Infrastructure Planning Bill on the Nature Recovery Plan. It was noted that the impacts of this were not yet known as secondary legislation was still awaited. Further, it was the intention that the Nature Recovery Plan would apply to a broader area than planning alone and included Council owned land and policies.
  • Members suggested that the report should show more clearly how the investment and officer work was resulting in outcomes that were measurable. It was suggested that it may be beneficial for targets and KPI’s to be set on an annual basis, with an eventual ten-year review, so that the impacts of the work could be seen. The officers advised that there was an action tracker with some KPI’s and that this could be included in future reports. A Member also suggested that fewer work streams with key deliverables could be beneficial for reporting and more focused work.
  • It was noted that the report did not feature a sewerage map, this was seen as an important area of action, and it was suggested that this could be included.
  • The Committee considered targets for the use of glyphosate and questioned how its use was tracked. It was suggested that there were challenges in obtaining data to monitor the historic and current use of glyphosate. The Executive Member noted that the target for its use was zero in 2026 but noted exceptions to this for cases of certain invasive species. The Principal Ecologist advised that the Council’s Woodgreen offices had been trialling zero glyphosate use for the past year which could be expanded. It was proposed that a policy on glyphosate use should be created.
  • The Council’s engagement with Town and Parish Councils on the plan was explored. Efforts to engage had seen disappointing results and officers were considering meeting in person with representatives as a potential next step. It was suggested that the varying levels of expertise and resource at Town and Parish Councils may have been a barrier to implementing aspects of nature recovery. Members were encouraged to advise Parish and Town Councils that the Council did fund organisations, such as Wild Oxfordshire, to give support in this area and to contact officers for information.
  • Within new housing developments it was suggested that Management Companies did not undertake the required biodiversity work that was promised. Solutions to this issue were explored. Officers suggested that the emerging Local Plan included ongoing stewardship requirements on developers and Biodiversity Net Gain would be monitored for thirty years. A Member suggested that in future the Council could own and manage the green spaces to ensure the biodiversity work continued and was completed. The Chair suggested that this topic could be added to the work plan.
  • It was suggested that the Council’s approach to the biodiversity of rivers was fragmented and value could be added by the Council through providing support, co-ordination and overarching strategies. Examples were given where the Council could have assisted projects by helping to establish land ownership. The Executive Member noted that the emerging Local Plan was an overarching strategy. The Officer noted that the Council did facilitate collaboration between catchment projects. A Member suggested that while smaller projects added value for rivers, Thames Water needed to be held accountable.
  • A query was raised to the number of swift bricks on Council owned land. The Officer advised that installation at Woodgreen was imminent following maintenance work.
  • Members discussed who was responsible for handling the removal of non-native invasive species. Officers advised that cases could be reported and dealt with by the Council however in some cases it was the landowner’s responsibility.
  • The Chair queried when a decision would be made on the ongoing support for the Windrush Project. Officers advised that positive meetings had been held and the service level agreement had been reviewed. A further meeting was planned for later in February, but the Council’s expectation was that bids should be delivered in the year.

 

RESOLVED:

That the Overview and Scrutiny Committee

  1. Noted the progress made in delivering the Nature Recovery Plan (2024 – 2030); and
  2. Noted the requirement to publish a report on the Council’s implementation of the statutory biodiversity duty within 12 weeks of the end of the reporting period (26th March 2026).
  3. Agreed to submit the following recommendations to the Executive:

                      i.        That the Council sets out a clear policy and timeline for ceasing the use of glyphosate.

                     ii.        That the Council’s nature recovery reporting is focused on a more limited number of work streams, with clear Key Performance Indicators.

Supporting documents:

 

Related Pages