Natural England’s Merlin Survey Access Requests: Members Should Not Be Bounced Into Consent
- Rob Beeson
- 2 hours ago
- 3 min read
✅ KEY TAKEAWAY: Resist pressure from vague Natural England access requests. Insist on full written clarification regarding contractors and safeguards before granting entry. Use the Moorland Association’s template to demand absolute transparency.
The Moorland Association is aware that members are now being approached by Natural England for access in connection with the 2026 national Merlin survey. These requests appear to be arriving late and with limited detail. Members should proceed with care and should not feel under pressure to respond before proper questions have been answered.
The issue is not that Natural England has made contact. It is that members are being asked to consider access requests on the basis of incomplete information, including requests involving third-party contractors.
Before any member is expected to agree to entry, they are plainly entitled to know exactly what is proposed, who will be entering, on what basis access is being sought and what safeguards will apply.
What NE is asking for
In one example seen by the MA, Natural England sought permission for up to four visits between 13 April and 31 July 2026 in connection with Merlin survey work. The proposed fieldwork was to be carried out not by Natural England staff, but by RSPB research assistants acting as Natural England’s approved contractors. Members were also asked whether their contact details could be passed on to the RSPB.
The same correspondence also shows why members are right to proceed cautiously. Natural England initially referred to “Merlin surveys and condition assessments”, before later correcting that wording to say that the proposed visits would be for Merlin survey work only and would not include condition assessments.
That sort of correction, after the request has already been issued, only underlines why members should insist on clarity before responding.
This sits uneasily with NE’s own strategy
Natural England’s recently published Strategic Direction for 2025-2030 says it will work in partnership, provide clear advice and deliver a better service to those it deals with. It also says it wants to make it easier for landowners and other partners to engage in nature recovery.
Against that background, a late and thinly explained request for access sits uneasily with those stated commitments. That is all the more so where the request first referred to “condition assessments” before being corrected, and where the proposed use of RSPB contractors was not properly explained at the outset.
The point is not that Natural England should never seek access for legitimate survey work. It is that members are entitled to expect a request that is clear, specific and transparent about who is involved, why access is sought and what safeguards will apply. Until that standard is met, members are fully entitled to proceed cautiously.
MA draft response available for members
For members seeking guidance, the Moorland Association has prepared a draft response which can be adapted to individual circumstances.
The draft asks Natural England to clarify the scope of the proposed access, the statutory basis said to justify it, the role of RSPB personnel and whether any Raptor Study Group personnel are involved. It also asks why the approach is being made so late, who exactly is proposed to attend, under what authority, and what risk assessments, insurance and data-handling arrangements are in place.
Importantly, it also makes clear that no consent is given to the onward disclosure of estate contact details, and no agreement is given to third-party access, unless and until these matters have been properly addressed in writing.
A cautious response is entirely justified
Members should not feel under pressure to give an immediate answer to a request that is short on notice and short on detail.
If Natural England wants access, especially where third-party contractors are involved, it should first provide a clear, lawful and properly particularised explanation of what is proposed. Until then, members are entirely justified in taking a cautious approach and in requiring full written clarification before deciding how to respond.
If you receive one of these requests, do not feel obliged to respond immediately. Ask for full written clarification before agreeing to access. Do not assume that vague or incomplete requests should simply be accepted. Contact the MA if you would like support at agilruth@moorlandassociation.org.
The MA has prepared a draft response for members to use and adapt as they see fit.
Don't Miss the Latest Moorland News
Get news of policy shifts, new research and land management changes that affect upland Britain, delivered free every week. If it matters on the moor, you'll hear it from us first.
