The conservation charity fears wildlife may not be given adequate consideration when decisions are made about developments on these three sites. This could have major impacts on the natural environment.
Dr Kate Willshaw, Planning and Policy Officer for Cumbria Wildlife Trust, said: "One, in particular, (Kirksanton) poses a threat to biodiversity as the site is next to the Lake District National Park boundary and lies directly adjacent to a Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Specially Protected Area (SPA), Ramsar and a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). It also has at least three European Protected Species: two species of bat are found in the area and it is within one of the most important sites for natterjack toads in Britain - it hosts up to 30% of the UK's population of this species. It is also home to other protected species such as slow worms and common lizards, and is designated locally as a site of invertebrate interest. On top of all this it has Priority Habitats and Species, and part of it is a County Wildlife Site."
Cumbria Wildlife Trust's concerns have been voiced following the publication of six National Policy Statements which state the IPC - which has no ecological expertise - will give the final go-ahead on major infrastructure projects. This overrides the current democratic process where local people, through bodies such as local Wildlife Trusts, can raise objections to developments on environmental grounds.
Peter Bullard, Director of Cumbria Wildlife Trust, said: "Cumbria Wildlife Trust scrutinizes and monitors planning applications. Our local expertise and knowledge is second to none. It often adds value to the planning system on major infrastructure and other projects.
"The new process must allow this careful consideration and involvement to continue with major infrastructure projects, whether it is the siting of ports, wind farms or nuclear power stations. For the future of our natural environment and our wildlife, it is vital we continue to have that say.
"This comes at a time when we should be ensuring precious habitats are at the core of restoring our fragmented landscape - which needs to be strengthened in the face of climate change. The natural environment appears to be forgotten in this new process. Where is the Government's vision for the future of our wildlife?"
Dr Willshaw went on to say, "[Kirkstanton] is certainly as environmentally sensitive as Dungeness which was omitted from the list. We have to ask the question: why is this site still included?
"The outcome of the first round of consultation ( <http://data.energynpsconsultation.decc.gov.uk/documents/ssasummary.pdf>) identified Kirksanton as having received the greatest number of objections - on biodiversity, flooding and other issues - and yet it's still in the running. This is utterly perverse.
"A nuclear power station on the Kirksanton site will devastate the natural environment."
