The author considers ministerial decisionmaking under reactive arrangements designed to limit environmental damage. The effect on outcomes of the support given by ministers to a conservation authority is explored and it is shown that wholesale ministerial support is not invariably to the authority's advantage. In resolving cases of conflict between farming and conservation interests in national parks and at sites of special scientific interest in Britain, ministers initially made their decisions on the relative merits of the cases put to them, as they saw those merits. However, conservationists were critical and ministers moved rapidly to making decisions that limited the political damage to themselves. This effectively precludes the development of decision by policy which offers a number of advantages, not least to conservation interests.