Author Sophie Ramsay
The Agriculture and Rural Communities (Scotland) Act 2024:
The Agriculture and Rural Communities Act has now passed through the Scottish Parliament. https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2024/11 . However, it is ‘framework legislation,’ meaning there is still time to influence the details in forthcoming subordinate regulations. Getting these details right is crucial for the future of Scottish farming and nature conservation – including the protection and expansion of beavers, which as a keystone species, can play a vital role in increasing biodiversity and maintaining healthy and resilient ecosystems. Amendments to the Act during its passage, led by Ariane Burgess MSP (in collaboration with the Scottish Rewilding Alliance), have created opportunities to support nature restoration alongside farming.(See P156, 18 of the Act).
https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:EU:0501addd-0bcb-41a3-9674-bda3603545ae
SWBG calls for currently ineligible (natural) features to be eligible for funding under the new act.

Why is agricultural funding in Scotland relevant to nature?
Seventy-five percent of Scotland’s land is classified as ‘agricultural,’ meaning it is eligible for the basic payment subsidy from the Scottish Government. The remaining 25% of land includes towns, cities, and non-agricultural areas, with only 4% classified as ‘native woodland.’ 12.5% consists of non-native commercial plantations.
Scotland is legally committed to meeting the global 30×30 target. Given the proportion of agricultural land in Scotland, some of it will have to be included as part of this commitment (to protect and manage “at least 30% of Scottish land and sea for nature”) in order to meet the legal target.
Most taxpayer funding for land use in Scotland currently goes to agriculture, but the allocation of these funds must also support nature protection, as stated in the Act. SWBG supports this position and seeks to ensure it will happen on the ground.

Scottish Wild Beaver Group’s Policy Position:
We have some reservations about publicly funded ‘area payments,’ but given that significant decisions on agricultural subsidies have already been taken, SWBG’s current policy seeks to take a pragmatic approach. Our primary aim is to ensure that these future subsidy payments reward (rather than penalise) effective nature restoration.It is widely understood that beavers play a critical role in nature restoration. Their activities, such as building dams and creating wetlands, help other species to thrive and maintain or restore biodiversity and functioning ecosystems. Thus, we would also like to see any agricultural funding system having the effect of encouraging landowners to coexist with wildlife, including beavers, and allow the still relatively small population of Scottish beavers to expand.
A Vision for Scotland’s Land:
Our vision is for a Scottish countryside with ‘nature-rich cores and corridors’ existing alongside and within agricultural landscapes, which over time become more nature- and climate-friendly.
Cores: These larger areas will be sites or landscapes managed effectively for nature protection, rewilding projects, or semi-natural woods, together with areas of less productive farmland where nature is given space to recover. Enabling the development of, and ongoing support for nature cores is essential for meeting the 30×30 target.
Corridors: Riparian corridors, along waterways, should connect the nature-rich cores. We want to see Scotland’s drained, straightened and bare waterways re-naturalised, with riparian trees and other native vegetation lining their banks. Trees will provide cooling shade for salmon, habitat for invertebrates and birds, and will also help sustain our beavers. Increased connectivity helps wildlife to move and disperse into new areas or to connect isolated populations. Riparian habitats also contribute to flood and drought management, which will help Scotland build resilience to extreme weather events caused by climate change.

Before:

After:

Ineligible Features:
To support this vision, a simple change could be made to the implementation of the Agriculture and Rural Communities Act that, although not enough alone, would have transformative benefits.
Under the current rules, farmers are paid per hectare for land deemed ‘eligible’ under the Basic Payment Scheme (BPS). However, ‘ineligible features’—such as ponds, watercourses, marshes, scrub, and trees—must be excluded from these claims. This penalises farmers who want to encourage wildlife habitat on their land, even where those are supported by other government schemes like the Nature Restoration Fund. Specifically, biodiversity rich beaver-created wetlands are often classified as ‘ineligible features’ and must be removed from subsidy claims.
This rule has the effect of discouraging farmers from creating habitats that benefit nature, reinforcing the idea that areas of land that naturally develop into wildlife habitats are undesirable. It has contributed to loss of nature over recent decades. It will also directly undermine other forms of government and private funding which seek to address biodiversity loss. Initial funding may have been provided (e.g. by NRF) to pay for the improvement, but the new feature will then reduce the farmer’s income going forwards.

The Tier System:
The Agriculture and Rural Communities Act introduces a four-tier system of funding:
Tier 1: The base level of funding for all land-based claims.
Tier 2: ‘Greening’ payments for small mandatory environmental mitigations to agricultural impacts.
Tier 3 and Tier 4: These tiers reward more substantial environmental initiatives and provide access to advice and training.
Under the current proposals, land managers who allow land to re-naturalise risk losing eligibility for both Tier 1 and the higher-tier payments that are intended for environmental improvements. This is likely to deter many farmers from supporting nature restoration on their land.
Additionally, Tier 1 and Tier 2 will receive 70% of the available funding, while Tier 3 and Tier 4 will share the remaining 30%. This means that higher-tier funding (e.g. for nature restoration or maintenance) will be highly competitive, which has been a major source of frustration for farmers in the current AECS scheme.
Achieving 30×30: The global 30×30 target, which aims to protect 30% of the planet’s land by 2030, was included in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and endorsed at the COP15 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) conference. The Scottish Government has committed to protecting at least 30% of its land and sea by 2030, and this protection must be of “natural or semi-natural” land – meaning that it excludes anthropogenic land use, no matter how nature-friendly it may appear.
While SWBG supports a transition to regenerative and nature-friendly farming, we also recognise the urgency of fulfilling the 30×30 target. Creating nature-rich ‘cores and corridors’ is a way to begin this transition immediately, in turn benefiting biodiversity, farming and wider society by providing flood and drought resilience, fire breaks, pollination, and other critical ecosystem services.Importantly, if the new agri-environment legislation and funding continues to require the removal of ‘ineligible features’ from Tier 1 claims, it will make it much harder to achieve the 30×30 target.
Cost Implications:
Dropping the requirement to remove “ineligible features” could be cost-neutral and easy to implement. This simple change would not affect how payments are calculated, making it a practical way to support nature restoration without creating an extra administrative burden.This change would make it easier for farmers to participate in schemes which promote effective nature restoration and could reduce the need for them to seek additional funding under the higher tiers. The resulting acceleration of nature restoration would provide long-term benefits for farming,wildlife and people.

We acknowledge that many farmers are concerned about the practical implications of supporting wildlife (including beavers). However, creating wide riparian corridors will enable peaceful coexistence with wildlife habitats, which will help reduce conflict. It will also perform vital ecosystem services: for example, riparian buffer zones help slow water flow, retain water on farmland (and underground aquifers) where it is needed, reduce downstream flooding, and absorb agricultural runoff, which in turn can improve water quality, including at sea by preventing algal blooms.
If farmers are incentivised to create and coexist harmoniously with these wilder habitats on and around farmland, we can materially reduce the need for lethal control of beavers, which is a threat to their genetic diversity and ability to expand into new river catchments.
The current area-based subsidy system discourages the creation of wildlife habitats, such as scrub, wetlands, ponds, and riparian zones. If this area-based funding system is to continue, it must be reformed so that it does not undermine efforts to restore nature and meet global commitments. Dropping the requirement to remove natural features, currently classed as ineligible, from the Tier 1 funding claim, will encourage farmers to support nature restoration, bring many ecological and ecosystem benefits, and potentially reduce land manager conflict with beavers.
This shift will not only align with Scotland’s biodiversity goals but also provide a more sustainable future for farming, with fewer financial barriers to the integration of nature restoration into agricultural practices.
Support the Campaign:
If you agree with this vision, please spread the word using the hashtag #fundhabitat or the slogan:
“Scotland’s creatures need natural features”
Author Sophie Ramsay