<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
	<rss version="2.0">
		<channel>
			<title>Green Building Forum - Habitat bank</title>
			<lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 10:50:13 +0100</lastBuildDate>
			<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/</link>
			<description></description>
			<generator>Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3</generator>
			<item>
		<title>Habitat bank</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305595#Comment_305595</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305595#Comment_305595</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:49:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<author>fostertom</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[<a href="https://news.exeter.gov.uk/exeter-is-home-to-the-first-registered-habitat-bank-in-the-country/" target="_self" rel="nofollow">https://news.exeter.gov.uk/exeter-is-home-to-the-first-registered-habitat-bank-in-the-country/</a><br />Sounds scammy! An easy-out for developers. Having destroyed biodiversity on their own site, as per normal, a payment to the council gets some wildflowers and hedges on a tiny (3.2ha) site, which is itself protected against development or agri-monoculture for a whole 30yrs!<br /><br />"our mission to have a registered habitat bank in every local planning authority"<br />How can each authority's small habitat bank's biodiversity gain possibly match the cumulative loss, whether by %age or by acreage, on any number of developers' sites?]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Habitat bank</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305597#Comment_305597</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305597#Comment_305597</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:20:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<author>Dominic Cooney</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[I think that biodiversity offsetting can work. Everything is assessed and scored (by a suitably qualified ecologist)<br />Hierarchy of locations for the offsetting - on site first, then nearby, then elsewhere.<br />Some sites will score so highly that they can’t realistically be offset (ancient woodland)<br />Some places, like the improved grassland around us, will be the lowest score possible, so could easily score higher with different management methods and would love to see trees or wild places instead.<br />Hedgerows and tree planting on many sites can easily increase the score.]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Habitat bank</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305598#Comment_305598</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305598#Comment_305598</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Mar 2024 13:51:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<author>fostertom</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Yes, I agree - but they seem to be talking one Habitat Bank per district council - Exeter's being 3.2ha. How much %age improvement x ha will that little site provide, to offset umpteen biodiversity-loss developments across the city - unless it's really difficult and exceptional for developers to opt to do it elsewhere?]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Habitat bank</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305599#Comment_305599</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305599#Comment_305599</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:26:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<author>Dominic Cooney</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Having now read the article (bad me)<br />I don’t think they are suggesting that it will provide for all of the developments, it’s just the first one to get registered. Probably more of an advertisement than an article!]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Habitat bank</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305600#Comment_305600</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305600#Comment_305600</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:40:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<author>fostertom</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[I suppose the key thing is that hopefully "it's really difficult and exceptional for developers to opt to do it elsewhere" - not another tickbox they can exploit to game the system - like those infamous birdboxes that got brownie points in the abandoned Code for Sustainable Homes scheme (and others no doubt)]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Habitat bank</title>
		<link>https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305604#Comment_305604</link>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=18108&amp;Focus=305604#Comment_305604</guid>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Mar 2024 19:26:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<author>Dominic Cooney</author>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[The hierarchy means that the further away the offsetting is, the more they have to provide (or pay)<br />I think it’s called a multiplier or something]]>
		</description>
	</item>
	
		</channel>
	</rss>