Protected species: good or bad selling point?

fannyanna

I often wonder with this type of thing how you'd get found out if you "broke the law".

What if OP sells to seomeone who then moves the newts somewhere else. Who would know?

martinsurrey

fannyanna wrote: »

I often wonder with this type of thing how you'd get found out if you "broke the law".

What if OP sells to seomeone who then moves the newts somewhere else. Who would know?

It’s a dangerous game, with very expensive consequences.

All it takes is one eagle eyed busy body and you are in the deep stuff.

if you are caught (and by being caught moving them they can prove you knew they were protected), they can give you a massive fine, and I mean 5 figure £10,000+

And as the people who regulate this stuff are in general animal welfare fanatics, they do not give in, they do not stop, the do not care about the practicalities of living in the house, the newts are all that matters to them.

namecheck

martinsurrey wrote: »

It’s a dangerous game, with very expensive consequences.

All it takes is one eagle eyed busy body and you are in the deep stuff.

if you are caught (and by being caught moving them they can prove you knew they were protected), they can give you a massive fine, and I mean 5 figure £10,000+

And as the people who regulate this stuff are in general animal welfare fanatics, they do not give in, they do not stop, the do not care about the practicalities of living in the house, the newts are all that matters to them.

Good grief. I was trying to decide how I would vote; husband would be thrilled with GCNs, I would have been less so.

However, having read this I'm afraid I would not now buy a property with GCNs in residence.

somethingcorporate

I would certainly see it as a plus. The only downside I could see with such an issue would be same as dvardy - the pond could pose a risk to kids but the GCN do not add or detract from this!

fannyanna

martinsurry - could you pay to have them "rehoused" by a specialist?

martinsurrey

fannyanna wrote: »

martinsurry - could you pay to have them "rehoused" by a specialist?

Only after a lot of expensive studies, and then only if a more suitable site is found, so you can’t just throw them in the local pond!

I speak from knowledge of a developer who had to do just that, and it cost £100,000+ (it was a big site though).

Its probably easier for the government to LEGALLY force you to sell them your house (a compulsory purchase order), than it is for you to LEGALLY evict GCN from your garden!

G_M

martinsurrey wrote: »

Do you have a licence to pull out the vegetation?

if not you are breaking the law.

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/protecting-wildlife/legislation-licenses-protect-wildlife/species-protected-eulaw/

ANY thing that disturbs their environment requires a licence, and this will require a specialist to come and do an assessment, which will cost £££'s.

Like everything involving DEFRA and animal protection, its great in principle, but a pain in the rear practically, so it would be a definite no no for me.

I take on board what you say, but your link relates to 'disturbance' of GCNs.

This has a legal definition, described by naturalengland's explanation of the two Acts (the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (‘WCA’) and applied to species listed on Schedule 5 to the Act. A similar but slightly wider offence was introduced by the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 (‘the Habitats Regulations’)

which says:

This offence incorporates two elements adapted from the Article 12 guidance document. The first is that disturbance must be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the animals involved; and the second is that the disturbance must significantly impact on the local distribution or abundance of the species.

I'm no expert, and may be wrong, but I've always considered that removing overgrown plants (NOT by any means reducing the cover, oxigenation etc needed) OUT of the breeding season, AND allowing any newts to easily return to the water, would not constitute a disturbance as described above.

But who knows?

GDB2222

I voted against for a slightly odd reason. We are hoping fairly soon to have grandchildren, and my wife is convinced that ponds of any kind are absolutely lethal for small children. With an ordinary pond, we'd just fill it in, but with GCNs there we can't do that. I'm not sure many other people have that particular hang-up, but there you are.

GDB2222

martinsurrey wrote: »

Only after a lot of expensive studies, and then only if a more suitable site is found, so you can’t just throw them in the local pond!

I speak from knowledge of a developer who had to do just that, and it cost £100,000+ (it was a big site though).

Its probably easier for the government to LEGALLY force you to sell them your house (a compulsory purchase order), than it is for you to LEGALLY evict GCN from your garden!

Can you LEGALLY get a cat, IYSWIM?

chewmylegoff

I expect Ken Livingstone will be along to buy your house shortly.