The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 is the primary mechanism for wildlife protection in Britain. Schedules 5 and 8 list the animal and plant species that are protected under the Act from intentional killing, injuring taking and the damaging of their homes.

Last month, changes to the government’s review process for legal protections for wildlife and plants created the risk that many species will lose existing protections.

Under the Act, species such as slow worms, grass snakes, water voles, purple emperor butterflies, toads and their habitats are protected from developments, hunting and sale. However, in a blow to wildlife and a boon to developers, the threshold to attract such protections will been raised so plants and wildlife would only be protected if in “imminent danger of extinction.”

This is a ridiculously high bar and by the time a species would qualify for protections, we will have already failed in our duties to give them opportunities to thrive.

Our wildlife protections cannot simply be about stopping extinctions. They need to be about helping populations recover and creating healthy ecosystems, not just maintaining them on life support. However, with these changes, habitats can be more easily destroyed and species killed and sold.

The most recent State of Nature Report report found that in England 35% of species have seen their populations decrease. As nature plummets it needs more protection, not less.

We all know that we see less wildlife now than we did a couple of decades ago. Nature is struggling and instead of helping it, this change would be a kick in the teeth at a time the government is saying it wants to protect more land to boost biodiversity.

The government has frequently made promises to restore nature, help species and set the standard for other countries to meet, but all too often it fails to deliver on its promises.

Last year the Prime Minister targeted newts as the enemy in his mission to “build, build, build”, but it seems he now has all species in his sights. Properly designed and implemented planning laws, with local authority resources to implement them can both facilitate development and protect nature. Removing protections is a lazy, ill-considered approach that suggests the government does not value nature at all.

The decision to change the threshold for legal protections was made quietly and without public consultation. It was published in hushed tones as though the decision makers were embarrassed themselves.

This most recent action directly contradicts the government’s own ambition to leave the environment in a better state for the next generation. We risk leaving nothing for the next generation if the changes go through.

If this news worries you, please write to your MP. We cannot allow our wildlife to be silenced by decisions made behind closed doors that do not consider the actual impacts on nature.