New Environment Agency Handbook: What It Means for Wetland, Habitat and Natural Flood Management Projects

The Environment Agency published its new Nature-based solutions for water resources handbook on 17 August 2026. It provides England-wide guidance on how nature-based solutions should be planned, designed, built, monitored and maintained.

For landowners, estates, local authorities, environmental organisations and project partners considering substantial wetland, habitat or natural flood management work, the message is clear: successful delivery starts well before machinery arrives on site and continues after construction is complete.

The practical change is not that every pond now needs a complex regulatory process. It is that larger, higher-risk schemes should treat site understanding, design, permissions, construction controls, monitoring and maintenance as visible parts of the project from the outset.

Which projects does the handbook cover?

The guidance focuses on nature-based solutions that work with natural processes to support water resources. Examples include:

• runoff attenuation features such as retention basins, ponds, bunds, trenches and swales;
• wetland and peatland restoration;
• leaky barriers and riparian habitat measures;
• river and floodplain restoration, including floodplain reconnection; and
• land-management measures intended to improve infiltration, groundwater recharge or low river flows.

This makes the handbook directly relevant to larger wetland creation, natural flood management, runoff attenuation, river restoration and landowner habitat schemes. Its principles may also be useful where a project has water quality, biodiversity or flood-risk benefits alongside its main objective.

The site must be understood in its wider catchment

A nature-based solution only works if it is the right intervention in the right place. The handbook therefore calls for a clear understanding of the site and the wider landscape, including geology, soils, topography, hydrology, hydrogeology, flood and drought risk, and the relationship between surface water and groundwater.

That context affects both the choice and positioning of features. A measure that performs well in one catchment may be ineffective, or create an unintended consequence, in another. Existing infrastructure, access, public rights of way, heritage assets, ecological designations and land use can also constrain what is practical.

For a substantial scheme, the initial assessment should therefore do more than record the proposed footprint. It should explain how water moves through the site, what the project is intended to change and which opportunities or risks need further investigation.

Build a permissions map early

The handbook brings the main regulatory checks together in one delivery process. The exact permissions depend on the location, activities and risks, but they can include:

• a flood risk activity permit for work on or near a main river;
• ordinary watercourse consent from the lead local flood authority or internal drainage board;
• planning permission, particularly where earthworks are involved;
• Natural England assent for work affecting a Site of Special Scientific Interest;
• protected-species licences; and
• other licences or environmental permits where water is diverted, impounded, abstracted or discharged.

This is why a permissions map should be prepared early. It should identify the likely consent, the responsible regulator, the supporting surveys or designs, the application lead and the programme allowance. Leaving this exercise until construction is ready to begin can expose a project to redesign, delay and unplanned cost.

Ecology and biosecurity belong in the construction plan

Ecological constraints are not limited to obtaining a survey report. Protected species, sensitive habitats and invasive non-native species can influence the design, working method and timing of construction.

The handbook recommends using ecological information to develop an appropriate working calendar. It also identifies biosecurity procedures, method statements, risk assessments and environmental or site-management plans among the controls a principal contractor may need in place.

In practice, this means defining how people, plant and materials will enter and leave the site; how soil, sediment and water will be managed; how the spread of invasive species will be prevented; and how sensitive habitats and species will be protected during the works.

CDM duties need named owners

Where the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 apply, the project needs clearly defined dutyholders and documentation. Depending on the project, these may include the client, principal designer, designers, principal contractor and contractors.

The handbook highlights design risk assessment, pre-construction information, hazards and constraints, and the principal contractor’s responsibility for planning, managing, monitoring and coordinating health and safety during construction.

These are not administrative details to be reconstructed after a contractor has been appointed. Roles, information requirements and residual risks need to be addressed as the design develops.

Monitoring starts before construction

One of the handbook’s most important points is that monitoring and evaluation should be planned and budgeted at the start of the project. If monitoring is only considered after construction, it may be too late to obtain useful evidence of what changed.

Baseline monitoring should normally take place before the measures are installed. The appropriate evidence will vary by project, but it might include flow or water-level data, groundwater levels, soil condition and infiltration, fixed-point photography, habitat surveys or records of high- and low-flow events.

The monitoring plan should be proportionate to the project and answer defined questions. Is the feature holding or slowing water as intended? Has infiltration changed? Are habitats developing successfully? Is the scheme causing an unexpected effect elsewhere? The answers inform maintenance and, where necessary, adaptive management.

Maintenance and handover are part of delivery

Nature-based does not mean maintenance-free. Vegetation can establish differently from the design intent, structures can become damaged or obstructed, channels can erode and access arrangements can change.

The project should identify who will inspect and maintain each feature, what competence is required, how access will be provided, what events trigger an inspection and how long-term work will be funded. Where an asset is handed back to a landowner, responsibilities and records should be agreed rather than assumed.

What changes in the SAS Aquatics workflow?

For substantial habitat, wetland, runoff attenuation and natural flood management work, our assessment and delivery workflow will explicitly consider:

• catchment, hydrology, hydrogeology and topography;
• ecological constraints and invasive non-native species;
• the project permissions map;
• CDM roles and pre-construction information;
• construction risk controls and biosecurity;
• baseline evidence and the monitoring plan; and
• inspection, maintenance, adaptive management and handover.

Where these items are material, design, specialist surveys, permitting support, monitoring and maintenance planning should be identified and priced as project scope. Treating them as invisible overhead within a construction price makes it harder for clients to compare proposals, manage risk or understand what is — and is not — being delivered.

Some projects will need input from ecologists, hydrologists, engineers, planning advisers or other specialists, as well as early engagement with the relevant regulators. Identifying that need during assessment allows the right team and programme to be assembled before commitments are made on site.

Related SAS Aquatics services include hydrology and water-feature design reports, habitat creation proposals, wetlands and rewilding, and farm and estate pond construction.

A proportionate approach

The full process is intended for projects whose scale, location or environmental risk justifies it. Routine garden pond construction will not normally need catchment modelling, a formal monitoring programme or a multi-agency permissions strategy. The usual site-specific safety, planning, drainage and ecological checks still apply where relevant, but the level of assessment should remain proportionate.

For a larger wetland, habitat or water-management scheme, early assessment is valuable precisely because it establishes the appropriate level of work. It turns regulatory, ecological and performance questions into planned scope instead of late surprises.

If you are considering a substantial wetland, habitat, runoff attenuation or natural flood management project, involve the delivery team early enough to assess the site, define the permissions route and build monitoring and maintenance into the project brief.

Send SAS Aquatics your wetland, habitat or water-management enquiry

Official guidance

Nature-based solutions for water resources handbook — Environment Agency, published 17 August 2026

This article provides general information, not project-specific legal or regulatory advice. Requirements depend on the site, activity and project risk, and should be confirmed with the relevant authorities and competent specialists.