Please respond to the Dartmoor Partnership Plan consultation. Here's how...
Dartmoor National Park Authority (DNPA) is consulting on the draft Dartmoor Partnership Plan 2027–2032: the National Park's statutory management plan, setting out how Dartmoor should be protected, restored and managed for the next five years.
This consultation matters to anyone who cares about Dartmoor's nature. The Plan makes a welcome commitment to a "nature-first approach" to decision-making. But the measurable targets don't consistently match that ambition, and in some cases they have actually been weakened between earlier drafts and the version now out for consultation. Most notably, the target to improve the condition of Dartmoor's Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), places legally protected for their wildlife, has been removed. Only 16% of Dartmoor's SSSIs are currently in favourable condition.
Today we're asking you, please, to respond to the consultation. It closes on 22 November 2026.
It isn't a long or technical consultation. Below, you'll find some background, followed by step-by-step guidance on how to complete it. You don't need to be an ecologist, farmer or policy expert: if you care about Dartmoor's wildlife, landscapes, rivers and future, your views matter.
DNPA's Partnership Plan Consultation page is here:
Background
What is the Partnership Plan?
The Partnership Plan is not simply a plan for the National Park Authority. It guides the work of the many organisations that shape Dartmoor's future: Natural England, Defra, the Duchy of Cornwall, Dartmoor Commoners' Council, farmers and commoners, landowners, conservation organisations, businesses and local communities.
It sets out a series of outcomes (what should be achieved by 2032) and targets (how progress will be demonstrated) under seven themes: nature and natural beauty, climate change, farming and forestry, cultural heritage, people (access and recreation), business and communities, and future generations.
These targets matter. They will shape what gets prioritised, where effort and resources go, and how we judge success or failure over the next five years.
What do we think?
Dartmoor Nature Alliance (DNA) welcomes much in the draft Plan: the commitment to putting nature first, landscape-scale nature recovery, peatland restoration, species recovery and natural woodland regeneration. It aligns with much of our Call to Action.
But a vision is only as good as the actions taken to deliver it. Our principal concerns are:
The SSSI target has been removed. An earlier draft included a target for increasing the proportion of SSSI land in favourable condition; it has been deleted from the consultation version. DNA is calling for it to be reinstated and strengthened: recovery measures in place and demonstrably on track for at least 60% of recoverable SSSI features by January 2028, and at least 35% of SSSI land in favourable condition by 2032.
There is no heathland or grazing target. Dartmoor's dwarf-shrub heathlands, the heather and bilberry that should characterise the Moor, are declining. Yet the Plan commits to nothing: no restoration, and no grazing regimes driven by habitat need rather than fixed livestock numbers.
The Plan measures participation, not recovery. Too many targets count whether an activity has taken place (farms in agri-environment schemes, agreements signed) rather than whether nature has benefited. Dartmoor's protected habitats have been in such schemes for over two decades, yet they continue to decline.
The woodland ambition falls far short. The draft proposes just 570 hectares of woodland creation, restoration and woody habitat improvement by 2032. The National Park Authority's own earlier vision was for 2,000 hectares of new broadleaf woodland. DNA is calling for that ambition to be restored.
No one is clearly accountable for delivery. The Plan often doesn't say who will deliver its targets, how it will be funded, or what happens if recovery isn't happening.
You can read DNA's full consultation response here, including our suggested wording for stronger targets on protected sites, grazing, heathland, peatland, rivers, woodland and accountability.
Filling out the consultation
The consultation is here.
What you say is entirely up to you, but here are some pointers. These aren't for copying and pasting; they're guidance to help you write your own answers, and responses in people's own words carry the most weight.
After you fill out your details (this bit's easy), the consultation is organised by theme. Here's our suggested approach, question by question…
General questions
Question 1: Overall, how well do you think the proposed outcomes of the Partnership Plan reflect what matters most for Dartmoor?
You might say the Plan reflects many of the right priorities, particularly the commitment to putting nature first, but that its targets don't yet match the scale of ambition, and that key measures of ecological accountability (notably the SSSI condition target) have been weakened or removed.
Question 2: What do you like most about the proposed direction of the Partnership Plan?
Here you might welcome the nature-first approach, landscape-scale nature recovery (40% of Dartmoor under coordinated agreements), the increased peatland restoration target (1,500 hectares), the proposed Land Use Framework and Data Observatory, and the recognition of natural regeneration, species recovery and temperate rainforest.
Question 3: Is there anything important that you think is missing from the Partnership Plan?
This question is worth spending time on. We suggest you mention some or all of:
A quantified target for restoring Dartmoor's protected wildlife sites (SSSIs), which was removed from the consultation draft.
A target for recovering heather and bilberry (dwarf-shrub heathland).
Grazing regimes based on best available evidence and driven by ecological condition: livestock numbers, types, timing and rest periods responding to what habitats need, rather than fixed prescriptions.
Measurable commitments on soil health and river water quality (both weakened between drafts).
Clear accountability: who is responsible for delivering each target, and how progress is monitored and funded.
An end to managed burning on peat soils of any depth.
Better for Nature and Natural Beauty
Question: How well do the proposed outcomes and targets for nature address the key priorities for Dartmoor?
You might say the outcomes are broadly right, but the targets are not ambitious or measurable enough. Several measure scheme participation rather than actual ecological recovery, and the SSSI target has been removed.
Question: Which priorities for nature should receive the greatest focus? (select at most 3)
If we were choosing three, we'd pick:
A nature-first approach to decision-making
Peatland restoration
Landscape-scale nature recovery
If you'd rather highlight elsewhere, improving the condition of priority habitats is also a strong choice, as is better evidence and monitoring of habitats; the natural environment baseline should be completed by 2028, not 2032, so it can actually guide the Plan.
Question: Are there any outcomes or targets in the Nature theme that you feel are particularly important?
You might single out the nature-first approach (Target 1.1), landscape-scale nature recovery (Target 1.3), and the peatland restoration target (Target 2.1), and suggest strengthening each with published frameworks, ecological outcomes, and long-term funding.
Question: Are there any proposed outcomes or targets for nature that you think should be changed or added?
This is your chance to propose the missing targets. We suggest:
Reinstate an SSSI recovery target: by January 2028, recovery actions for at least 60% of recoverable SSSI features demonstrably on track; by 2032, at least 35% of Dartmoor's SSSI land in favourable condition, with a funded trajectory to favourable condition for all recoverable designated features by 2042.
Add a dwarf-shrub heathland target: measurable increases in the extent and favourable condition of heather and bilberry heathland by 2032.
Add a grazing target: by 2030, evidence-based adaptive grazing regimes across all priority upland habitats and designated sites, with livestock numbers, types, seasonality and rest periods determined by ecological condition, supported by active shepherding, regular monitoring and independent oversight.
Strengthen river recovery: specify the numerical water-quality improvement target before the Plan is adopted, and establish at least two whole-catchment river restoration programmes by 2030.
Restore the soil health target: measurable improvements in soil organic matter and hydrological function across monitored sites by 2032.
Add a managed burning target: end managed burning on peat soils of any depth by 2028; elsewhere allow burning only where a demonstrable ecological benefit is established and no alternative exists.
Judge schemes by results: agri-environment schemes should deliver monitored improvements in habitat condition, water quality, soil health and biodiversity, not just participation.
Better for Farming and Forestry
Question: How well do the proposed outcomes and targets address the key priorities for farming and forestry?
You might welcome the support for viable farm businesses, accessible agri-environment schemes, and landscape-scale farming collaboration, while noting that nature-friendly farming targets are unambitious (65% of land managers across just 10% of their land), and that the sustainable land-management target has been replaced by a duplicate scheme-participation measure.
Question: Which priorities should receive the greatest focus? (select at most 5)
We suggest choosing from:
Advocating for the improvement of Environmental Land Management schemes for Dartmoor (with schemes that reward demonstrable ecological recovery and enable adaptive grazing)
Sustainable land management (defined by verified improvements in soil, water, carbon and biodiversity)
Wildfire management (addressed through integrated vegetation management and appropriate grazing, not managed burning)
Supporting viable and resilient farm businesses
Woodland and woody habitat creation
Question: Are there any targets that you feel are particularly important?
The proposed Land Use Framework and Dartmoor Data Observatory are among the most valuable mechanisms in the Plan. You might particularly support these, and ask that they provide accessible, regularly updated evidence of ecological recovery.
Question: Are there any proposed outcomes or targets that you think should be changed or added?
Increase the woodland target from 570 hectares to at least 2,000 hectares of native woodland creation, restoration, and woody habitat enhancement by 2032, prioritising natural regeneration and expanding native woodland and temperate rainforest, and reporting each habitat type separately.
Strengthen nature-friendly farming: support at least 80% of farm businesses to implement whole-farm nature recovery plans by 2030, not confining nature-friendly practices to 10% of each holding.
Restore the sustainable land-management target with verified improvements in soil health, water quality, carbon storage and biodiversity.
Other themes
The remaining themes, covering climate change, the next generation, cultural heritage, people, and business and communities, are quicker to complete, and your answers are entirely up to you. A few thoughts:
Climate change: you might welcome the annual commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and suggest correcting the apparent duplication between Targets 2.1 and 3.1. Peatland restoration, woodland expansion and river recovery are among the best climate actions Dartmoor can take.
Cultural heritage: DNA recognises the importance of Dartmoor's archaeology, but suggests that where heritage and ecological restoration objectives interact, decisions should be proportionate, enabling nature recovery wherever it can occur without unacceptable harm to significant heritage assets.
People: you might suggest visitor communications explain how behaviour affects wildlife and habitats, covering disturbance, fires, dogs and inappropriate vehicle use, not just where to park.
Business and communities: consider asking the Plan to recognise nature recovery as a source of local employment, skills and enterprise: a nature-based economy. And if you have views on making engagement with DNPA more accessible (Question 40), do share them.
Final question
Question 40: Do you have any comments on how DNPA could make future engagement more accessible or inclusive?
Optional, but worth answering if you have views. For example: publish plain-English summaries of the Plan.
A few final tips
Use your own words. Short, personal responses count just as much as detailed ones; even a few paragraphs show the breadth of public support for real nature recovery.
Reference target numbers where you can (e.g. "Nature and Natural Beauty – Target 2.1"). It shows the Partnership exactly which commitments you mean.
You don't have to agree with everything DNA says. What matters is that the Partnership hears from people who want a healthier, more wildlife-rich Dartmoor.
Please share this guide with friends, family and anyone else who loves Dartmoor.
That's it! Thank you for responding to the consultation. The consultation runs from 12 October to 22 November 2026; please don't leave it until the last minute.
Dartmoor has enormous potential to become a richer, more resilient landscape: one where peatlands function naturally, heathlands recover, native woodland expands, rivers thrive and wildlife returns. The new Partnership Plan could help make that happen, but only with targets that match its ambition. Putting nature first must mean more than good intentions. It must mean measurable recovery on the ground.
Comments