England has made a small but meaningful change to its biodiversity net gain rulebook. The Biodiversity Gain Site Register (Amendment) Regulations 2026 were made on 5 May 2026, laid before Parliament on 6 May, and will come into force on 29 May 2026. According to the statutory instrument and its explanatory note, the amendment brings land linked to development consent under the Planning Act 2008 into the biodiversity gain site register. In plain terms, the register can now work not only for schemes with planning permission, but also for the consent route usually used by nationally significant infrastructure projects. The instrument was signed by Mary Creagh, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at Defra, and extends to England and Wales.

The legal text also tightens the wording around what counts as a biodiversity gain site for the 2024 register rules. It now spells out that the land must be subject to a conservation covenant or planning obligation requiring habitat enhancement works, that the enhancement must be maintained for at least 30 years after those works are finished, and that the biodiversity gain can be allocated to one or more developments. That may read like legal housekeeping, but it matters on the ground. A clearer definition gives land managers, habitat providers and project teams a firmer basis for registering sites and showing how habitat gains will be secured over time. For the purposes of the 2024 regulations, this new wording replaces the earlier section 100 definition in the Environment Act 2021.

The practical changes sit in four places. Regulation 4 widens the land that is eligible to be registered, so sites linked to development consent under the Planning Act 2008 can be included. Regulation 5 updates what must be supplied in an application to register land, allowing habitat enhancement from that land to be allocated to a development that has development consent rather than standard planning permission. Regulations 6 and 7 do the same job for land that is already on the register. That means a site does not have to start again simply because the biodiversity gain will now support a project approved through the Planning Act route. It is a technical shift, but one that should remove friction where habitat delivery and major project consenting meet.

For habitat banks, farmers, estate owners, local authorities and infrastructure developers, the amendment widens the pool of projects that can connect with registered off-site gains. A habitat site that is legally secured and managed for the long term can now be matched more clearly to a major scheme once development consent has been granted. That could help biodiversity delivery keep pace with the scale of new energy, transport and utility investment, provided the sites are well chosen and properly maintained. It also gives the nature market a more consistent route into larger projects, which could support longer-term management funding for habitat creation rather than short-lived fixes.

Just as important is what the regulation does not do. It does not lower the bar for habitat enhancement, shorten the 30-year maintenance period, or create a new right to claim biodiversity gains without legal backing. The same need for robust covenants, planning obligations and allocation records still applies. The explanatory note says no full impact assessment has been produced because no, or no significant, effect on the private, voluntary or public sector is expected. On paper, that may be fair: this is mostly an amendment to process. But the value for nature will depend on delivery quality, clear records and active monitoring, especially if larger projects begin drawing on the register more often.

For Eco Current readers, this is a good example of how dry planning law can still shape real habitat outcomes. Major infrastructure can affect land for decades, so giving those schemes a cleaner route into the biodiversity gain register increases the chance that habitat enhancement is planned early and secured properly, rather than treated as an afterthought. From 29 May 2026, organisations preparing biodiversity gain sites or project consents should review registration documents, covenant wording and long-term management plans to make sure they reflect the amended rules. If that work is done well, this modest change could help turn a narrow administrative register into a more useful tool for nature recovery alongside development.