Deane Core Strategy Habitat Regulations Assessment May 2011

This report was prepared by County Council on behalf of Taunton Deane Borough Council, as the 'competent authority' under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

Note: This report gives a Habitat Regulations Assessment of SAC sites, including for policy on Hestercombe House SAC, initially assessed in a report dated 2009. The two SPA/ Ramsar sites, the Somerset Levels and Moors and () sites are also assessed in a separate report.

Copyright The maps in this report reproduced from Ordnance Survey material are with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. ()(Licence Number 100038382)(2010) ©

2 Executive Summary

This report contributes to Taunton Deane Borough Council’s legal obligation under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 [the ‘Habitat Regulations’] to carry out a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) on its plans for affects on Natura 2000 sites. In this case it is the draft Published Plan Core Strategy that is assessed.

Before a plan can be adopted the ‘competent authority’ (Taunton Deane Borough Council) needs to prove that the plan would have no significant effects on Natura 2000 sites’ integrity to the satisfaction of Natural England. An uncertain result is not acceptable and is treated as adverse until proven otherwise.

This report constitutes the first step of the HRA process, which is to screen policies in the Core Strategy to determine whether there is any potential for a significant effect on Natura 2000 sites from them, either directly or indirectly, and in combination with other plans and projects. Following analysis of each policy the report then gives recommendations for amendments or additions to policies to ensure compliance with the Habitat Regulations. Where no conclusion can be reached further work is scoped.

Natura 2000 sites consist of Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) designated for habitats and animal species, and Special Protection Areas (SPA) designated for bird species. Ramsar sites designated under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands 1971 are also included following Government policy.

However, this report gives an HRA of the Holme and Clean Moors, and Quants SAC sites. In addition, the Hestercombe House SAC, north of Taunton, is the included so as to update the HRA carried out on that site for the effects from saved policies in September 2009.

The SPA/ Ramsar site, the Somerset Levels and Moors, within the Deane’s influence are being assessed separately by a consultant, as there is potential for significant in-combination effects with three district councils and as a single study was recommended by Natural England.

Following screening of the policies and site allocations contained in the Taunton Deane Borough Council Core Strategy report the policy additions and amendments recommended to ensure compliance with the Habitat Regulations before submission are set out in Chapter 9. Updated calculations for the amount of offsite offset habitat planting required as mitigation for the effects development north of Taunton and Monkton Heathfield on Hestercombe House SAC is given in Appendix 1.

3

Contents

1. Introduction ...... 5 2. Screening Exercise ...... 6 Steps in the Habitat Regulations Assessment Process...... 6 Precautionary Approach ...... 7 Definitions...... 7 Screening Report Methodology ...... 8 3. Potential Impacts of Core Strategy Policy on Ecology ...... 9 Introduction...... 9 Types of Impact ...... 9 4. Characteristics and Description of the Natura 2000 Sites...... 14 Introduction...... 14 Identification of Natura 2000 sites ...... 14 Ecological Zones of Influence...... 15 Description and Characterisation of Natura 2000 Sites ...... 16 5. Other Relevant Plans or Projects...... 50 6. Description of the Development Plan...... 52 Introduction...... 52 Current Progress ...... 52 7. Analysis of Draft Published Plan Core Strategy ...... 53 Introduction...... 53 Management for Nature Conservation Purposes...... 53 Plan Analysis ...... 53 Strategic Site Allocation Policy Analysis ...... 70 8. Analysis of Effects on Natura 2000 Sites ...... 77 Introduction...... 77 Policies Requiring Further Screening ...... 77 Analysis ...... 84 Counter-acting Measures and Conclusions...... 109 9. Recommendations ...... 116 Introduction...... 116 Recommended Policy Amendments and Additions ...... 116 Habitat Regulations Assessment Step 2 – Scoping and Further Information Gathering for Appropriate Assessment ...... 118 10. Conclusion ...... 119 Bibliography ...... 120 Appendix 1 – Recalculation of Offsite Offset Habitat Creation ...... 124 Introduction...... 124 Calculation of Offsets Methodology ...... 124 Calculation of Offset Habitat Requirement...... 128 Summary of Offsite Offset Habitat Creation Required ...... 144

4 1. Introduction

1.1 This report details the findings of the first, screening step of the Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) process of the Taunton Deane Borough Council Local Development Framework Published Plan Core Strategy (the ‘Core Strategy’). As the ‘competent authority’ under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, Taunton Deane Borough Council is required to assess its Core Strategy through the HRA process as policies and site allocations in the plans can potentially affect Natura 2000 sites.

1.2 Natura 2000 sites include European Sites - Special Protection Areas (SPA) classified under the EC Birds Directive 1979 and Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and candidate Special Areas of Conservation (cSAC) designated under the EC Habitats Directive 1992, and, as a matter of Government policy, all Ramsar sites as if they are fully designated European Sites for the purpose of considering development proposals that may affect them.

1.3 The definition of ‘Habitat Regulations Assessment’ is simply an assessment, which must be appropriate to its purpose under the Habitats Directive and Regulations. According to The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, regulation 61 (1) before authorising a plan, which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site, and is not connected to the management of the site, the Council shall assess the implications for the site in view of its conservation objectives.

1.4 The purpose of HRA of land use plans is to ensure that protection of the integrity of European sites (Natura 2000 sites) is a part of the planning process at a regional and local level. The requirement for Appropriate Assessment of plans or projects is outlined in Article 6(3) and (4) of the European Communities (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (known as the ‘Habitats Directive’).

1.5 This report is concerned with all Natura 2000 sites, except the Somerset Levels and Moors and the Severn Estuary SPA/Ramsar sites. A consultant will carry out the HRA of the Levels and Moors/ Estuary sites. However, it is understood a single Appropriate Assessment statement, setting out the results of the three processes, will accompany the submission of the Core Strategy.

5 2. Screening Exercise

Steps in the Habitat Regulations Assessment Process 2.1 The Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG) consultation document ‘Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Appropriate Assessment1’ (August 2006). This document gives three main tasks to the HRA process:

1. Likely significant effects

2. Appropriate assessment and ascertaining the effect on site integrity

3. Mitigation and alternative solutions

2.2 The process is further detailed in ‘The Appropriate Assessment of Spatial Plans in England’, published by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (Dodd et al, 2007).

2.3 The RSPB guidance (2007) sets out a 3-step approach to appropriate assessment as follows.

Step 1: Screening for likely significant effects. This is the initial evaluation of a plan’s effects on a Natura 2000 site. If it cannot conclude there will be no significant effect upon any Natura 2000 site, an AA is required. In the DCLG guidance this is called evidence gathering.

Step 2 Appropriate Assessment – scoping and further information gathering Preparation for the AA where the screening has shown there is likely to be significant effects upon a Natura 2000 site.

Step 3 Appropriate Assessment An evaluation of the evidence gathered on impacts and consideration of whether changes to the plan are needed to ensure that it will have no adverse effect upon any Natura 2000 site. This should be the end of the AA process and the plan can be adopted.

2.4 This report contains Step 1 of the process and compiles information in order to assess the likely effects of potential policy options and development proposals contained within Core Strategy Preferred Option on Natura 2000 sites alone, or in combination with other plans or projects.

1 The term ‘Appropriate Assessment’ is often used to refer to the whole ‘Habitat Regulations Assessment’ process.

6

Precautionary Approach 2.5 When carrying out this screening, it must be viewed as a coarse filter and therefore a ‘Precautionary Approach’ has been taken in the assessment of significance. The EC Guidance sets out a number of principles as to how to approach decision making during the process. The primary one is the ‘Precautionary Principle’, which requires that the conservation objectives of Natura 2000 sites should prevail where there is uncertainty. In other words if the answer is ‘don’t know’ an adverse impact is assumed. This is the case throughout the HRA process.

2.6 Once potential impacts have been identified, their significance will be considered. A judgement about significance is made in relation to the conservation objectives and targets using the Precautionary Principle.

Definitions 2.7 “Significant” is interpreted as an effect likely to adversely affect a Natura 2000 site’s integrity. A useful definition of what a significant effect is contained in an English Nature guidance note2 on the subject: “…any effect that may reasonably be predicted as a consequence of a plan or project that may affect the conservation objectives of the features for which the site was designated, but excluding trivial or inconsequential effects.”

2.8 “Integrity” is described in ODPM Circular 06/2005: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation as 'the site’s coherence, ecological structure and function across its whole area that enables it to sustain the habitat, complex of habitats and/or the levels of populations of species for which it was classified' (ODPM Circular 06/2005, para. 20).

2.9 Significance will vary from site to site according to conservation sensitivities and magnitude of the potential impact. Assessment is triggered by likelihood not certainty in line with precautionary principle. (European Communities, 2000) Therefore, the assessment considers whether effects are ‘likely’ and ‘significant’ and not every conceivable effect or fanciful possibility. The Waddensee tests are used:

• Would the effect undermine the conservation objectives for the site? • Can significant effects be excluded on the basis of objective

2 English Nature. 1999. Habitats Regulation Guidance Note 3: The Determination of Likely Significant Effect under The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994.

7 information?

2.10 Significant effects are also determined in-combination with other plans or projects and take account of cumulative effects.

Screening Report Methodology 2.11 Natural England and other relevant stakeholders will be consulted on the screening opinion to ensure all elements of the plan are considered which, either alone or in-combination, have the potential for a significant effect on relevant sites. This will help the Council identify potential impacts, likely pathways for those impacts and key indicators to be used for identifying impacts. The screening should therefore look at the significant effects of the plan objectives and of each individual policy.

2.12 This screening report will include the following information for the Mendip Natura 2000 sites:

• Why the site is important for wildlife, i.e. the features (species and habitats) for which the site was designated;

• The conservation objectives for the site;

• The latest assessment of the sites ecological condition; and

• Any particular problems or sensitivities of the site’s features that could be affected by a plan’s policies or proposals

8 3. Potential Impacts of Core Strategy Policy on Ecology

Introduction 3.1 Development for housing and business use and its infrastructure such as set out in the Core Strategy can potentially cause severe adverse affects on species and habitats, including the nature conservation interests of Natura 2000 sites. These can be loss, fragmentation or degradation of habitat, or indirect such as emissions from the transportation and street lighting.

3.2 This section considers further the potential ecological impacts of Development arising from Core Strategy policy and the distances from them that environmental affects are likely to occur. The distances will be used in considering impacts that may affect a Natura 2000 site and areas supporting ecological functioning arising from transport, and are explained in the following sections.

3.3 The affects considered are:

• Loss of Habitat • Loss of Supporting Habitat • Habitat Fragmentation Impacts • Proximity Impacts • Hydrological Impacts • Impacts for Increased Use of Roads • Impacts from Recreational Pressure • Impacts from Renewable Energy Schemes

Types of Impact

Loss of Habitat 3.4 This is a loss of habitat within the designated boundaries of a Natura 2000 site – it is expected that there would be no direct loss to development.

Loss of Supporting Habitats 3.5 This is likely to be a loss of land outside the designated boundaries of a Natura 2000 site where land provides habitat which supports qualifying species that are usually mobile, e.g. bats and otters (see also paragraphs 3.7 – 3.10).

3.6 There are specific issues relating to bats (where these are qualifying

9 features) that need to be considered when assessing the potential effects of the plan. In many instances, Natura 2000 sites will have been designated for bat breeding and roosting sites. However, bats often rely on foraging habitat some distance away from the designated sites, and on habitat features linking foraging locations with breeding and roosting sites. As a result, in order to maintain the integrity of the Natura 2000 sites, and in particular to ensure that there are no adverse effects on bats as qualifying features, the foraging habitat and flight paths also need to be considered, and direct effects such as physical loss from development, or from indirect effects such as disturbance from people, traffic or artificial lighting need to be avoided.

Habitat Fragmentation Impacts 3.7 This is where development or other activity (such as tree felling, hedgerow removal or footpath diversion) increases the separation of available habitats, or splitting extensive areas of suitable habitat – SAC bats are the most likely to be affected by such impacts but other relevant species could be common dormouse or great crested newts.

Proximity Impacts 3.8 These are impacts on species and habitats arising from the closeness of development to a Natura 2000 site. They are numerous but can include:

• Disturbance effects from construction activities (including noise and lighting); • Increased traffic impacts from construction activities; • Increase human disturbance from use of the new site • Increased predation from domestic cats and increases in urban living species, such as foxes, rats and corvids; • Increased fly tipping; • Increased incidence of fires on heathland; • Increased levels of lighting; • Increased random disturbance events.

Hydrological Impacts Water Quality 3.9 Many Natura 2000 sites are dependent upon there being appropriate water quality to support their integrity, including water courses and estuaries and other wetland habitats, as well as less obvious habitat types (such as heathlands) which may be dependent on ground water quality. Water quality can be affected by a number of factors, such as:

10 • Pollution from toxic chemicals, metals, oils, pesticides, etc., arising for example from accidental spills, industrial processes, run-off from urban areas, and agriculture. • Pesticides and nutrient enrichment, for example from agricultural fertilisers, leading to eutrophication. • Discharges from sewage treatment works, and over-flowing foul water systems at times of high rainfall and flooding.

3.10 Many of the most significant risks to water quality are as a result of agricultural activity, which largely falls outside the remit of the plan. However, the development can potentially increase the risk of water quality being affected due to extra loads being placed on sewage treatment works, increased hard surfacing and hence run-off, and potential accidental spills, for example from port related activity. Diffuse pollution could result in an in combination impact. Changes in hard surface runoff may leads to changes in flow patterns in watercourses (storm water surges), and increased nutrient and sediment levels in watercourses. River, rhyne and ditch and floodplain habitats such as alluvial forests would be especially vulnerable.

Groundwater Supply 3.11 Both groundwater and surface water levels can be affected by abstraction for public water supply and for industrial and agricultural uses. Climate change is likely to lead to drier summers, which could reduce the availability of water at a time when both population growth and per capita water usage is increasing. Particularly vulnerable are those habitats dependent on groundwater

Flood Risk Management 3.12 This impact may arise due to flood management schemes altering flows in river, rhyne and ditch habitats. Such impacts may not necessarily be negative, especially if the flood plain is used to manage flood risk.

Impacts from Increased Use of Roads 3.13 Impacts from increased traffic flows arising from new developments, including:

• increased noise impacts (volume, duration); • increased vehicular emissions; • increased road mortality; and • increased fragmentation impacts.

3.14 Certain interest features of Natura 2000 or Ramsar sites can be directly and/or indirectly affected by pollutants concentrated in the air such as oxides of nitrogen (NOx), oxides of sulphur (SOx) or ammonia, or by

11 pollutants deposited on the ground through acidification or terrestrial eutrophication via soil (deposition of nitrogen). Effects from vehicular emissions are likely to effect sensitive species of certain habitat types, particularly lichens and bryophytes.

3.15 Road mortality is likely to affect SAC bats and other species dispersing or moving across the road network. Fragmentation impacts would be particularly an issue for bats, which rely on contiguous flight lines.

Impacts from Recreational Pressure 3.16 Increased recreational pressure from urban populations, including dog walking, jogging, horse riding, mountain biking, motorbike scrambling, off road car driving and other, mostly informal, are likely to result from housing and other development.

3.17 Somerset is also a popular holiday destination, and has many environmental assets that attract both visitors as well as residents. This can lead to significant pressure on sensitive habitats resulting in damage and disturbance to the species they support. Typical impacts of tourism and recreation include:

• Physical damage, for example from trampling and erosion • Disturbance to species, such as ground-nesting birds and wintering wildfowl, from walking, cycling, and water sports, resulting in increased mortality and nesting success, and displacement • Air pollution (dealt with under air quality below) and disturbance from traffic • Disturbance from dogs and damage from dog excrement

3.18 In addition, in particular where sites are close to urban areas, recreational pressures can be exacerbated by other damaging activities described as proximity impacts above, rubbish tipping, vandalism, arson, and predation particularly by cats.

3.19 The impacts of tourism, recreation and urban effects can affect a wide variety of habitat types. Some of the most sensitive are heathland habitats, coastal habitats including dunes, shingle banks and estuaries, other wetlands and watercourses, woodland and grasslands.

Impacts from Renewable Energy Schemes 3.20 SAC bats may be vulnerable to mortality from the development of wind turbines. There may also be other impacts as described above, such as disturbance effects, habitat loss and fragmentation.

12

Cumulative Impacts 3.21 Cumulative impacts are those where an impact in itself may not be significant, but in combination with other impacts from the plan, or from other plans and projects, may amount to a significant impact.

13 4. Characteristics and Description of the Natura 2000 Sites

Introduction

4.1 This section identifies which Natura 2000 sites are potentially affected

4.2 Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) are designated due to the presence or providing ecological support to habitats, listed in Annex I, and species, listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC).

4.3 Special Protection Areas (SPA) are designated for bird species listed under Article 4 of the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC).

4.4 Ramsar sites are important wetland sites that have been designated under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands 1971. Under Government policy, as set out in Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation, they are to be treated as Natura 2000 sites.

Identification of Natura 2000 sites

4.5 The following Natura 2000 sites have component sites present within the geographic area administered by Taunton Deane Borough Council.

• Clean Moor and Holme Moor SAC

• Hestercombe House SAC

• Quants SAC

4.6 The following Natura 2000 site outside the geographic area administered by the Deane is also been considered as being potentially affected by the plan.

• Exmoor and Quantock Oakwoods SAC

• Exmoor Heaths SAC

• Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC

• and Mendip Bats SAC

14 These SAC lie outside the Taunton Deane Borough Council administrative area but nonetheless is potentially affected by pressures arising in the Deane, such as from recreational pressure and increased levels of traffic.

Map 1: Natura 2000 sites

Ecological Zones of Influence

4.7 Natura 2000 sites are designated for both species and habitat features. Conservation objectives and targets relate to maintaining the integrity of these features. This section describes how ‘Ecological Zones of Influence’ (EZI) are arrived at for each of the Natura 2000 sites potentially affected by the implementation of the Core Strategy. These are areas outside the designated Natura 2000 site, which nonetheless if affected can adversely impact on the integrity of the site’s conservation objectives. For example, bat flight lines and feeding areas supporting a designated roost site if lost may affect the viability of the population.

15 4.8 Habitats are affected directly from on-site loss due to damage or destruction from land use change. However, they can also be influenced by off site factors such as hydrology. Where there are no significant off site requirements in maintaining a sites habitat the EZI is the same as the Natura 2000 sites boundary. However, sites affected by air pollution will be assessed by distances set out below. All flora species are affected by airborne pollution, although some, such as lichens and bryophytes are more vulnerable.

4.9 Unlike habitats, species are not limited by the designated site boundary yet its integrity may depend on habitat several kilometres from the site. For each Natura 2000 site, where a qualifying species is listed as a feature, a description is given, the potential impacts, which are likely to affect that species population’s integrity in terms of the site’s nature conservation objectives, and the methodology of how the EZI is formed.

4.10 Finally all the EZI for each of a site’s features, i.e. the site itself, its species and habitats, are combined into one EZI per site. A map of the EZI is shown accompanying the Hestercombe House SAC site description and for other SACs at the end of this chapter

Description and Characterisation of Natura 2000 Sites

Exmoor Heaths SAC

Component Sites 4.11 Component SACs sites are:

North Exmoor SSSI South Exmoor SSSI Exmoor Coastal Heaths SSSI West Exmoor Coast and Woods SSSI

Site Condition 4.12 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

16 Table 1: Exmoor Heaths Condition Summary SAC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed North Exmoor 23.77 68.47 4.09 3.67 0

South Exmoor 1.47 69.20 29.33 0 0

Exmoor Coastal 49.4 24.46 24.04 2.1 0 Heaths

West Exmoor 34.14 57.53 8.33 0 0 Coast & Woods

The condition also includes areas outside of the SAC. The North Exmoor SAC component of the SSSI is 100% favourable.

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.13 North Exmoor SSSI is a southern outpost of typically northern and upland elements of Britain's flora and fauna. The site is nationally important for its south-western lowland heath communities and for transitions from ancient semi-natural woodland through upland heath to blanket mire. The site is also of importance for its breeding bird communities, its large population of the nationally rare Heath Fritillary butterfly Mellicta athalia, an exceptional woodland lichen flora and its palynological interest of deep peat on the Chains. The site is in two main blocks: the major one to the North and a smaller one by Simonsbath to the South. The highest point, Dunkery Beacon, is 519 metres above sea level, the lowest heathland is at about 250 metres and the site extends down to 80 metres in woodland.

4.14 Exmoor is representative of upland wet heath in south-west England. Exmoor Heath SAC is designated for the presence of Northern Atlantic wet heaths with Erica tetralix habitat. M153 Scirpus cespitosus – Erica tetralix wet heath predominates on gently-sloping and level ground. It is extremely variable in nature and has in places been modified by management, particularly burning. Typically, heather Calluna vulgaris dominates, with scattered plants of purple moor-grass Molinia caerulea, cross-leaved heath Erica tetralix, bilberry Vaccinium myrtillus and deergrass Trichophorum cespitosum. In other areas Molinia and Calluna are more-or-less co-dominant, with the former forming tussocks. There are transitions to H12 Calluna vulgaris – Vaccinium myrtillus heath on well- drained, steeper slopes and to M17 Scirpus cespitosus – Eriophorum

3 Reference numbers refer to the National Vegetation Classification described in Rodwell, J. S. (ed.) 1998/2000. British Plant Communities. Volumes 1 – 5. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.

17 vaginatum blanket mire on deeper peat, where the northern species crowberry Empetrum nigrum occurs.

4.15 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘To maintain, subject to natural change, in favourable condition, the habitats for the Northern Atlantic wet heaths with Erica tetralix’ (Natural England conservation objectives). The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are:

• Extent • Dwarf-shrub diversity and cover • Bryophyte abundance • Age structure • Graminoid cover • Grazing impact • Vegetation mosaic • Water quality and soil nutrient status • Hydrology

4.16 Exmoor Heath SAC is also designated for the presence of European dry heaths. The site is notable because it contains extensive areas of H4 Ulex gallii – Agrostis curtisii heath, a type most often found in the lowlands, and H12 Calluna vulgaris – Vaccinium myrtillus heath, a predominantly upland type, together with areas of H8 Calluna vulgaris – Ulex gallii heath. In wetter situations or on peat there can be a high frequency of purple moor- grass Molinia caerulea and cross-leaved heath Erica tetralix, which results in frequent transitions to wet heaths. The associated valley mires support the oceanic species pale butterwort Pinguicula lusitanica and ivy-leaved bellflower Wahlenbergia hederacea. The Exmoor heaths are also important as the largest stronghold for the heath fritillary butterfly Mellicta athalia, associated with sheltered slopes in the transition to woodland. The site holds a small breeding population of merlin Falco columbarius that is the most southerly in the western Palearctic.

4.17 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘To maintain, subject to natural change, in favourable condition, the habitats for the European dry heaths’ (Natural England conservation objectives). The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are:

• Extent • Bryophyte / lichen abundance • Dwarf-shrub diversity and cover • Grazing impact • Vegetation structure

18 • Vegetation mosaic • Soil structure and nutrient status • Species characteristic of the site: Heath Fritillary

4.18 Blanket bogs are a feature of the Exmoor Heaths SAC. These extensive peatlands have formed in areas where there is a climate of high rainfall and a low level of evapotranspiration, allowing peat to develop not only in wet hollows but also over large expanses of undulating ground. The blanketing of the ground with a variable depth of peat gives the habitat type its name and results in the various morphological types according to their topographical position, e.g. saddle mires, watershed mires, valley side mires.

4.19 Blanket bogs show a complex pattern of variation related to climatic factors, particularly illustrated by the variety of patterning of the bog surface in different parts of the UK. Such climatic factors also influence the floristic composition of bog vegetation. An important element in defining variation is the relative proportion of pools on the bog surface. In general, the proportion of surface patterning occupied by permanent pools increases to the north and west, although the precise shape and pattern of pools appears to depend on local topography as well as geographical location. Variety within the bog vegetation mirrors this pattern and is also affected by altitude. Similarly, the number of associated habitats and communities, such as springs, flushes, fens and heath, is greater in the milder, wetter and geologically and topographically more complex north and west.

4.20 ‘Active’ is defined as supporting a significant area of vegetation that is normally peat forming. Typical species include the important peat-forming species, such as bog-mosses Sphagnum spp. and cotton grasses Eriophorum spp., or purple moor-grass Molinia caerulea in certain circumstances, together with heather Calluna vulgaris and other ericaceous species. Thus sites, particularly those at higher altitude, characterised by extensive erosion features, may still be classed as ‘active’ if they otherwise support extensive areas of typical bog vegetation, and especially if the erosion gullies show signs of recolonisation.

4.21 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘To maintain, subject to natural change, in favourable condition, the habitats for the Blanket bogs’ (Natural England conservation objectives). The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are: • • Extent • Bryophyte abundance • Dwarf-shrub diversity & cover

19 • Graminoid cover • Grazing impact • Extent of bare ground or ground covered by algal mats • Hydrology

4.22 Alkaline fens form another feature of the Exmoor Heaths SAC. They consist of a complex assemblage of vegetation types, characteristic of sites where there is tufa and/or peat formation with a high water table and a calcareous base-rich water supply. The core vegetation is short sedge mire (mire with low-growing sedge vegetation). At most sites there are well-marked transitions to a range of other fen vegetation, predominantly, but not exclusively, to M14 Schoenus nigricans – Narthecium ossifragum mire and S24 Phragmites australis – Peucedanum palustre tall-herb fen in the lowlands. Alkaline fens may also occur with various types of swamp (such as species-poor stands of great fen-sedge Cladium mariscus), wet grasslands (particularly various types of purple moor-grass Molinia caerulea grassland) and areas rich in rush Juncus species, as well as fen carr and, especially in the uplands, wet heath and acid bogs. There is considerable variation between sites in the associated communities and the transitions that may occur. Such variation can be broadly classified by the geomorphological situation in which the fen occurs, namely: flood plain mire, valley mire, basin mire, hydroseral fen (i.e. as zones around open waterbodies) and spring fen. Another important source of ecological variation is altitude, with significant differences between lowland fens, which are rich in southern and continental species, and upland fens, which are rich in northern species.

4.23 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘To maintain, subject to natural change, in favourable condition, the habitats for the Alkaline fens’ (Natural England conservation objectives). The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are sward structure and composition.

4.24 In conjunction with heaths this site also supports tracts of old sessile oak woods. These woods are rich in bryophytes, ferns (including Dryopteris aemula) and epiphytic lichens, the latter often associated with old pollards, since parts are former wood-pasture rather than the oak coppice that is more common with this type.

4.25 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘To maintain, subject to natural change, in favourable condition, the habitats for the old sessile oak woods with Ilex and Blechnum in the British isles’ (Natural England conservation objectives). The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are:

• Area

20 • Natural processes and structural development • Regeneration potential • Composition • Distinctive and desirable elements: 1. Rich Atlantic bryophyte communities. 2. Epiphytic lichens 3. Western oakwood 4. Breeding bird community. 5. River, stream and mires. 6. Transition to open heath with c. 3 km of wood/heath edge & Heath Fritillary colony. 7. Heronry

Table 2: Exmoor Heaths SAC Key Environmental Conditions

Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity Northern Atlantic wet heaths with Air quality Erica tetralix Soil conditions

Hydrological conditions

Appropriate management

Control of inappropriate invasive species

European dry heaths Appropriate management

Soil conditions

Control of inappropriate invasive species

Blanket bogs Appropriate management

The control of inappropriate and invasive species.

Hydrology

Water quality

Air quality

21 Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity Alkaline fens Topography

Hydrology

Drainage

Water quality

Soil conditions

Appropriate management

Old sessile oak woods with Ilex Appropriate woodland management (holly) and Blechnum (fern) in the British Isles Air pollution

Ecological Zone of Influence 4.26 For the purposes of this assessment it is considered that the EZI lies entirely within the site boundary as any impacts are only likely to be from visitor pressure.

Vulnerability 4.27 These heathlands retain significant areas of mature heather stands. This habitat is dependent upon low intensity, traditional agricultural management by grazing and controlled burning. Such management is becoming less economic, except with agri-environment funds. Agri­ environment schemes such as the Environmentally Sensitive Area Scheme and more recently the Higher Level Stewardship Scheme have been useful in promoting traditional grazing management, as have other management agreements and conservation body ownership. Illegal and uncontrolled burning is adversely affecting heathland structure in some areas, and localised winterfeeding of cattle and overgrazing has caused some losses to heathland in the past although these have been largely resolved through prescriptions in agri-environment agreements. Incentive payments are currently seen as the only effective means of influencing burning practices. Rhododendron has spread in some areas, and work to eliminate it from heathland sites has been funded through National Park Authority grants and conservation plans which form part of Natural England’s agri-environment scheme agreements.

4.28 This site is also vulnerable to atmospheric deposition and eutrophication.

22 Exmoor and Quantocks Oak Woodlands SAC

Component Sites 4.29 Component SACs sites within the National Park are:

Barle Valley SSSI North Exmoor SSSI South ExmoorSSSI Exmoor Coastal Heaths SSSI West Exmoor Coast & Woods SSSI Watersmeet SSSI

Site Condition 4.30 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

Table 3: Exmoor and Quantock Oak Woodlands Condition Summary S\AC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable no Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering change declining part site destroyed 32.68 52.50 7.73 7.08 0

North Exmoor 41.33 48.01 7.3 3.37 0

South Exmoor 0.71 79.59 19.38 0.32 0

Exmoor Coastal 49.4 24.46 24.04 2.1 0 Heaths

West Exmoor 34.14 57.53 8.33 0 0 Coast & Woods

Watersmeet 32.25 63.70 4.05 0 0

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.31 This site supports extensive tracts of old sessile oak woods in conjunction with heath. They are rich in bryophytes, ferns (including Dryopteris aemula) and epiphytic lichens, the latter often associated with old pollards, since parts are former wood-pasture rather than the oak coppice that is more common with this type.

4.32 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘To maintain, subject to natural change, in favourable condition, the habitats for the old sessile oak woods with Ilex and Blechnum in the British isles’ (Natural England conservation objectives). The attributes that measure the

23 condition of the feature are:

• Age/size class variation within and between stands; presence of open space and old trees; dead wood lying on the ground; standing dead trees • Successful establishment of young stems in gaps or on the edge of a stand • Cover of native versus non-native species (all layers) • Death, destruction or replacement of native woodland species through effects of non-native fauna or external unnatural factors • Ground flora type • Distinctive and desirable elements: 1. Rich Atlantic bryophyte communities. 2. Western oakwood 3. Breeding bird community. 4. Streams and mires. 5. Transitions to alder wood. 6. Transition to open heath with c. 15km of wood/heath edge • Air quality measures • Presence of undesirable indicator species

4.33 Alluvial forests with alder and ash comprises woods dominated by alder Alnus glutinosa and willow Salix spp. on flood plains in a range of situations from islands in river channels to low-lying wetlands alongside the channels. The habitat typically occurs on moderately base-rich, eutrophic soils subject to periodic inundation.

4.34 Many such woods are dynamic, being part of a successional series of habitats. Their structure and function are best maintained within a larger unit that includes the open communities, mainly fen and swamp, of earlier successional stages. On the drier margins of these areas other tree species, notably ash Fraxinus excelsior and elm Ulmus spp., may become abundant. In other situations the alder woods occur as a stable component within transitions to surrounding dry-ground forest, sometimes including other Annex I woodland types.

4.35 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘To maintain, subject to natural change, in favourable condition, the habitats for Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae) [Natural England conservation objectives]. The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are:

• Age/size class variation within and between stands; presence of open space and old trees; dead wood lying on the ground; standing dead trees

24 • Structures associated with the hydrological regime • Successful establishment of young stems in gaps or on the edge of a stand • Cover of native versus non-native species (all layers) • Death, destruction or replacement of native woodland species through effects of non-native fauna or external unnatural factors • Ground flora type • Distinctive and desirable elements: 1. Epiphytic lichens (see Old sessile oak woods) 2. Transitions to old sessile oak woods. 3. Streams and mires.

4.36 There is a maternity colony of Barbastelle Bat Barbastella barbastellus utilising a range of tree roosts in this area of predominantly oak woodland on the Exmoor site. However, recent survey has indicated barbastelle bats are also roosting within the Quantocks component site. Foraging areas can lie several kilometres from the roost sites.

4.37 Barbastelle bats prefer riparian vegetation, broad leaved woodland, unimproved grassland, improved grassland, scrub, mixed woodland, coniferous woodland and avoid urban, upland moor, arable habitats and areas of open water (Zeale, 2009). Over 90% of barbastelle bats from Horner wood in Somerset foraged along linear wooded scrub strips including along watercourses, overgrown hedgerows, uncut grassland, heather moorland edge (within Exmoor Heath SAC), gardens and areas of low level street lighting. Gorse was also important. (Billington, 2002)

4.38 Barbastelle bats go out in groups from the roosting area then disperse to individual hunting grounds (Dietz et all, 2009; Greenway, 2001; Greenway, 2004; Zeale, 2009) Barbastelle bats are reliant on darkened connecting habitat features between roost sites and feeding areas. Typically these are along vegetated rivers and streams or lines of trees and large hedgerows and paths between these. (Greenaway, 2004) Barbastelle bats’ foraging paths are generally within 200 metres of water features (Greenaway, 2008). When barbastelle bats are crossing open ground they will fly low level (Greenaway, 2008).

4.39 The summer foraging range of barbastelle bats was recorded as being up to 9 kilometres in the Horner Wood area on Exmoor (English Nature, Conservation Objectives for North Exmoor SSSI). Other studies have shown that barbastelle bats can fly up to 20 kilometres from roost sites although the average was about 8 kilometres (Greenway, 2004). On Dartmoor the individual mean maximum foraging range of radio tracked barbastelle bats varied from 3.16 to 20.38 kilometres (Zeale, 2009).

25

4.40 Foraging takes place within the home range in core areas of between 2 and 70 hectares (Boye & Dietz, 2005). Dietz et al (2009) report foraging areas of 8.8 hectares with single bats hunting each night in up to 10 separate areas. There is minimal overlap of individual core foraging areas although the home wood is shared (Zeale, 2009).

4.41 Current factors considered to be causing loss or decline in barbastelle include:

• Loss or fragmentation of foraging habitats • Loss/ disruption of flyway, e.g. woodland edges, mature hedge banks • Loss, destruction or disturbance of roost sites • Loss of cover in the vicinity of roost sites • Disturbance of underground swarming sites

(Bat Conservation Trust/ BMT Cordah Ltd., 2005)

4.42 Bechstein’s bat Myotis bechsteinii has not been recorded in the Quantocks component site. However, as the foraging areas can lie several kilometres from the roost sites the species is considered.

4.43 Bechstein’s bat is a woodland species. They prefer semi natural or ancient woodland but will make use of oak and mixed forestry plantations. Most summer roost sites for Bechstein’s bats are in woodpecker holes, although sometimes they use loose bark or tree crevices. They change roosts nearly every day and therefore large number of sites are required, perhaps as many as 50. (Greenway, 2004) In one colony the actual roost site was a hedgerow tree 3.5 kilometres from the main plantation foraging area. Hedgerow trees are not uncommon for colonies foraging in plantations, as frequently they are the only trees available with woodpecker holes (Fitzsimmons et al, 2002)

4.44 The standard pattern of foraging within a colony is for suitable canopy areas within woodland to be divided between individuals. About 50 hectares of mature oak with good understorey and small streams is ideal. (Greenway, 2004) Other woodland would need to be larger to sustain a colony, for example coniferous woodland home ranges of 100 hectares per individual have been recorded. (Boye & Dietz, 2005; Fitzsimmons et al, 2002)

Bechstein’s bats have a small range of movement around summer roost of 1 kilometre. The main foraging areas are usually 500 -1500 metres from roost. Sometimes they will fly up to 3.8 kilometres. Foraging range is smaller in continuous woodlands than those in fragmented forests. (Boye

26 & Dietz, 2005; Fitzsimmons et al, 2002)

4.45 Bechstein’s bats are also sensitive to artificial lighting, which can disrupt or deny habitat use (Outen, 2002; BCT/ILE, n/d).

4.46 Maternity colonies form socially closed units with all the females being related over the summer period from May to August. During this period males occupy separate roosting areas, often in sub-optimal habitat (Schofield and Greenaway, 2008; Safi. & Kerth, 2003; Fitzsimmons et al, 2002).

4.47 Maternity colonies disperse at the end of August and swarm at underground sites to mate (Dietz et al, 2009). Swarming sites have been recorded 4.5 kilometres away from maternity roost sites (Schofield & Morris, 2000).

4.48 Following swarming hibernation roosts are used over the winter usually in caves, tunnels or cellars but tree holes may be used (Schofield & Greenaway, 2008; Boye & Dietz, 2005). Movements between summer and winter roosts are usually less than 10 kilometres but can be up to 73 kilometres (Schofield & Greenaway, 2008; Dietz et al, 2009)

4.49 The conservation objective for the features are ‘To maintain, subject to natural change, in favourable condition, the Barbastelle and Bechstein’s Bats (Natural England conservation objectives). The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are:

• No loss of ancient semi-natural stands • Current area of semi-natural woodland to be retained • At least the current level of structural diversity maintained. • Canopy cover present over 50-90% of area • A minimum of 4 trees per ha allowed to die standing • Signs of seedlings growing through at sufficient density to maintain required canopy cover over a 10-year period • Current length and extent of woodland/moorland scrub edge to be retained • No overall loss of open water • Human access to roost area controlled and limited; no significant increase since previous visit

4.50 Otter Lutra lutra are found on all types of watercourse including canals, ponds, lakes and reservoirs. They use tiny ditches and streams including dry watercourses as regular commuting routes. They may also cross overland between watersheds and will short cut across bends in rivers. (Chanin, 2003)

27

4.51 Otter in Somerset are generally nocturnal and use undisturbed holts and couches in which to rest up. Couches occur in thick vegetative cover. Otter holts are usually tunnels in riverbanks among roots and boulders. Holt sites, used for lying up and breeding areas are located in areas away from human disturbance and can occur up to 50 metres away over dry land (Chanin 1993). Holts are known to occur in urban areas but are likely to be closer to a watercourse than in a rural setting.

4.52 Natal holts seem to be located away from main watercourses and from water altogether even being found 500 metres away. Most sites are within 3.5 metres of water although have been recorded 40 metres from a lake edge and 100 metres in a young conifer plantation. Breeding sites are generally located on but not restricted tributary streams (width 0.7 to 4 metres). (Chanin, 2003)

4.53 Main habitat types for otter breeding sites are: reed beds; ponds and lakes; deciduous woodland (ranging from 20 metre strip to several hectares; young conifer plantations; and extensive areas of scrub. Structures or buildings immediately adjacent to a watercourse may be used occasionally. Mature sycamore and ash trees are important as potential holt sites and holt density is higher in areas dominated by peat. (Liles, 2003)

4.54 Otter breeding sites require security from disturbance; one or more potential natal den sites; play areas for cubs; no risk of flooding; and access to good food supply. (Liles, 2003)

4.55 The presence of ash or sycamore trees along river banks is particularly important to otters as the roots of these species provide the majority of den sites. Other species used include rhododendron bushes, oak and elm trees. Bankside vegetation, such as woodland and scrub, can provide cover for otters. They also use reedbeds and islands as rest sites and marshy areas to forage for frogs. Optimal habitat includes stream banks with dense herbaceous vegetation and fringes of trees (e.g. alder) with branches hanging low near the water, lakes, coastlands, rivers and marshes. (Chanin, 2003)

4.56 A dog otter requires about 20 kilometres of lowland river by about 20 metres wide as territory whilst a bitch requires about 11 kilometres (Wayre, 1979). Estimates for area of water occupied vary between 2 hectares and 50 hectares per otter. This is equivalent to one individual every 3–50km of stream (median value of one otter per 15 km of stream) (Chanin, 2003). An otter territory is approximately 15 to 20 kilometres long in Somerset or approximately three riverside parishes (pers. comm. James Williams, Somerset Otter Group).

28

4.57 Current factors considered to be causing loss or decline in otters include:

• Road mortality • Pollution events • Loss or fragmentation of habitat • Human disturbance • Liver fluke (introduced from ‘alien’ fish species)

4.58 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘To maintain, subject to natural change, in favourable condition, Otter’. The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are water quality, flow rate, site integrity, fish stocks, disturbance, bank side cover and the presence of otters.

Table 4: Exmoor and Quantock Oak Woodlands Key Environmental Conditions

Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity Old sessile oak woods with Ilex Appropriate woodland management (holly) and Blechnum (fern) in the British Isles Air pollution

Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa Appropriate woodland management (alder) and Fraxinus excelsior (ash) Hydrology

Barbastelle bat Barbastella barbastellus Undisturbed roosts

Woodland management

Availability of decaying and veteran trees

Bechstein’s bat Myotis bechsteinii Maintenance and connectivity of habitats used as flight lines on and off site

Feeding areas

Otter Lutra lutra Maintenance of river water quality and flow

Fish stocks

Bankside vegetation

Levels of disturbance

29 Ecological Zone of Influence 4.59 The woodland habitats are sensitive to changes in hydrology and to changes in air quality. The habitat therefore may be influenced outside the SAC by air pollution resulting from issues set out in Chapter 6. Any watercourse entering and upstream of the site in the catchment is mapped by enclosing within a Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP).

4.60 For components of the SAC where barbastelle bats are present a buffer of 9 kilometres around the maternity roost site area is formed. The area of likely habitat use is then digitised by copying whole polygons from OS Mastermap, particularly flyways through woodland and along watercourses and hedgerows in unfragmented corridors connecting to the roost area. This process uses aerial photographic interpretation and available radio tracking data (Billington, 2000). This forms the EZI for barbastelle bats.

4.61 For components of the SAC where Bechstein’s bats are present a buffer of 3.8 kilometres around the maternity roost site area is formed. Starting with maternity roosts, woodland feeding areas are digitised by copying whole polygons from OS Mastermap, as are any connecting flyways to other woodland blocks. This forms the EZI for Bechstein’s bats.

4.62 There are records of Otters for every watercourse within the SAC. The watercourses are digitised for 15 kilometres both sides of a record and then buffered each side of the watercourse by 20 metres.(Wayre, 1979). Watercourses are then buffered by 100 metres. Areas of scrub and woodland within the buffer are then added (which may serve as lying up places, i.e. couches and holt sites [Chanin 1993]) by extracting and copying the appropriate habitat polygons from the OS Mastermap layer. This then forms the Ecological Buffer for otters.

Vulnerability 4.63 Some grazing/browsing is essential to maintain conditions suitable for lower plant assemblages, which are a key feature of the woodlands. However, sheep and/or red deer graze many woods and this can prevent regeneration and change the ground flora. Invasive non-native species such as Rhododendron are a problem in some woods and beech continues to be problematic in many sessile oak woodlands. Conservation bodies or management agreements are eliminating these species. Dense monocultures of coppiced oak occur, of little structural or species diversity., Opportunities are being taken to diversify age and species composition to restore near-natural conditions where possible, especially to encourage important upland breeding bird migrants such as wood warbler, redstart and pied flycatcher for which Exmoor woodlands has a stronghold.

30

4.64 Drainage and potential impacts of lowering water table (including abstraction) is potentially an issue. In the review of Agency consents, there are seven Agency consented abstraction and two discharge consents identified as potentially having a significant effect on the site.

4.65 There is potential conflict between forestry and woodland management, and potential impacts from surrounding land use (e.g. agriculture, pheasant rearing affecting bats and otter)

Hestercombe House SAC

Component Sites 4.66 Component SACs sites are:

• Hestercombe House SSSI

Site Condition 4.67 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

Table 5: Hestercombe House Condition Summary SPA Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed 0 0 0 100 0

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.68 Hestercombe \House hosts a large lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros maternity site in the vale of Taunton Deane. The bats roost in the roof void of part of a large building. Although only a small proportion of the UK population, this site has been included as representative of the species in South West England.

4.69 The most significant foraging habitat for lesser horseshoe bats is woodland. In Bavaria, where forests covered 60% of the landscape surrounding a maternity roost, and about 90% of foraging time was spent in the habitat type. Hedgerow, tree lines and streams were only exploited only where there was less forest. (Holzhaider et al, 2002)

4.70 In Belgium research has shown that the feeding grounds for lesser horseshoe bats were deciduous woodland along with copses or mixed

31 coniferous woodland. Woodland occupied 25% of the area within 1 kilometer of the roost. However, some foraging was observed in hedgerows. Bats selected areas that were undulating countryside with hedgerows, tree lines and woodland in preference to flat open intensively farmed areas. (Motte & Dubois, 2002)

4.70 In the Wye valley in Monmouthshire studies have also revealed that lesser horseshoe bats significantly spend the majority of their time foraging in broadleaved woodland. Pasture and arable areas were least used for foraging (Botadina et al, 2002).

4.71 The Ciliau SSSI is designated for its lesser horseshoe bats. The Ciliau SSSI, again on the River Wye. Here lesser horseshoe bats foraged predominately in broadleaved woodland along the banks of the River Wye and its tributary streams. They were also recorded foraging in conifer plantations. (Schofield et al, 2002)

4.72 In fragmented habitats linear features, such as hedgerows, provided valuable corridors between roosts and foraging areas. Commuting corridors are important features for lesser horseshoe bats as they avoid crossing open areas and are vulnerable to the loss of these corridors. Where lesser horseshoes foraged along linear features, such as hedgerows, it was always within 10 metres of the feature (Bat Conservation Trust, 2005). In Belgium no bat was recorded more than 1 metre from a feature (Motte & Dubois, 2002).

4.73 They were found over water and in farmyards in Ireland (McAney & Fairley, 1988: in Vaughn et al, 1997) and among vegetation on the banks of rivers and lakes in France (Barataud, 1993: in Vaughn et al, 1997).

4.74 In a study carried out by Cresswell Associates (2004) on the Sherborne Park Estate in Gloucestershire for the National Trust it was considered that the presence of cattle might be an important factor in foraging by Lesser Horseshoe Bats. It was found that habitats that were most important contained a high proportion of woodland, parkland and grazed pasture woodland, combined with linear features, such as overgrown hedgerows. Through radio tracking it was found that occasionally bat activity was concentrated in fields containing cattle and that the bats foraged directly over cattle. However, the same lesser horseshoes foraged little, if at all, over the same pasture immediately after the cattle were removed.

4.75 At Hestercombe House lesser horseshoe bats were radio tracked in the late summer of 2005 and found to be primarily feeding around tall hedgerows and moving in open pasture, through woodlands, over arable fields, along woodland tracks, field edges, over private allotments, across

32 amenity grasslands (lawns, playing fields, etc.), marshy fields, ditches and lakes. In addition, marshland was being used for foraging. (Billington, 2005)

4.76 Night roosts are particularly important. These are used by lesser horseshoes for resting, grooming, eating or sheltering in bad weather. Importantly some bats, especially pregnant females, can extend their foraging range from the maternity roost by using such roosts. In Bavaria one was located in a large, dense spruce (Picea abies) and another in a house (Holzhaider et al, 2002). Night roosts can occur in rock fissures (Schofield et al, 2002).

4.77 Botadina et al (2002) considered that a large colony size increases the foraging range of individuals, and conversely that the average foraging distance in smaller colonies might be even smaller. As afore mentioned, in the Botadina et al study (2002) a colony of 300 had a maximum foraging range of 4.2 kilometres. However, at Hestercombe House SAC individual lesser horseshoes were recorded in late July/early August travelling distances of 5 and 6 kilometres to feeding areas (Billington, 2005).

4.78 Current factors considered to be causing loss or decline in lesser horseshoe bats include:

• Loss, destruction or disturbance of roost sites • Loss, damage or fragmentation of important foraging habitats, such as deciduous woodland, and connecting linear features such as hedgerows and tree lines • Lack of suitably connected foraging habitats (a mosaic of deciduous woodland, hedgerows and tree lines)

4.79 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain*, in favourable condition, the habitats for the population of: lesser horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus hipposideros)’. The attributes that measures the condition of the feature are the roosts’ roof covering, entrances, light levels, the degree of disturbance, the general condition and security of building, the internal condition in roost area, signs of bats and the population size, and flight lines from roost in surrounding habitat and feeding habitat

Table 6: Hestercombe House Key Environmental Conditions Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Lesser horseshoe bat Undisturbed roosts

Roost conditions maintained

Appropriate management of vegetation at roost entrances

33 Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Maintenance and connectivity of habitats used as flight lines on and off site

Feeding areas

Ecological Zone of Influence 4.80 Map 2 below shows the EZI for Hestercombe House SAC in the landscape north of Taunton. Reference should be made to the Habitats Regulations Assessment of Hestercombe House SAC carried out by Somerset County Council in September 2009 for further detail.

Map 2: Hestercombe House SAC EZI

34 Vulnerability 4.81 Bat numbers are down by more than 25% since notification. The cause is unknown. This could be a number of factors. There has been physical loss of habitat (woodland work/ building work) near to the roost. There has been housing development in the foraging area. Other reasons could be change in agricultural practice in the area south of the Quantocks resulting in degradation of feeding habitat and loss or severance of hedgerows.

Holme Moor and Clean Moor SAC

Component Sites 4.82 The component sites of the Holme Moor and Clean Moor SAC are:

• Clean Moor SSSI • Holme Moor SSSI

Site Condition 4.83 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

Table 7: Holme Moor and Clean Moor Condition Summary SAC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed 31.2 0 62.49 6.31 0

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.84 This is a relatively small site but it is important as an outlier of calcareous fens in south-west England, where Cladium is a local and rare species. The site occupies an unusual ecological situation on the spring line at the foot of a scarp slope. Although not currently managed, management continued until comparatively recently and in part explains the high species-richness of this site. There are important species-rich transitions from Cladium fen to mire with black bog-rush Schoenus nigricans and blunt-flowered rush Juncus subnodulosus, as well as to fen-meadow vegetation with purple moor-grass Molinia caerulea and meadow thistle Cirsium dissectum.

4.85 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the ariciondavallianae.’ The attributes that measures the condition of

35 the feature are the NVC communities as appropriate to base status, fertility and degree of succession. (Site specific)

4.86 These sites are situated on the north-facing slope of the upper reaches of a small valley and are fed by a mix of acidic and base-rich springs. The most species-rich example of alkaline fen is on Clean Moor, where black bog-rush Schoenus nigricans and blunt-flowered rush Juncus subnodulosus have many associates including the moss Scorpidium scorpioides, small sedges such as Carex pulicaris, C. panicea and C. viridula ssp brachyrrhyncha, and other low growing species such as lousewort Pedicularis palustris and the orchids Gymnadenia conopsea, Dactylorhiza fuchsii and D. praetermissa. In addition to NVC type M13 Schoenus nigricans – Juncus subnodulosus mire around the base-rich seepages there is also species-poor swamp with great fen-sedge Cladium mariscus and hemp agrimony Eupatorium cannabinum, and fen meadow on Holme Moor. Holme Moor & Clean Moor is important as a south- westerly site for alkaline fen.

4.87 The conservation objective for is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the alkaline fens.’ The attributes that measures the condition of the feature are the NVC communities as appropriate to base status, fertility and degree of succession. (Site specific)

4.88 Unimproved marshy grassland habitat, Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae), is also present on the sites. Molinia meadows are found mainly on moist, moderately base- rich, peats and peaty gley soils, often with fluctuating water tables. They usually occur as components of wet pastures or fens, and often form mosaics with dry grassland, heath, mire and scrub communities. This habitat type includes the most species-rich Molinia grasslands in the UK, in which purple moor-grass Molinia caerulea is accompanied by a wide range of associated species, including rushes, sedges and tall-growing herbs.

4.89 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt­ laden soils (Molinion caeruleae).’ The attributes that measures the condition of the feature are the extent of the habitat, the sward composition (positive indicator species/ frequency and cover of Molinia caerulea/negative indicator species/cover of Juncus spp./negative indicator species/ % cover of Phragmites australis/ % cover of Myrica gale), sward structure (average height/ litter/ bare ground)

36

Table 8: Holme Moor and Clean Moor Key Environmental Conditions Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Calcareous fens Hydrological conditions maintained.

Water quality is extremely important.

Healthy stands of Cladium are required in communities in which short herbs/sedges are a major and characteristic component Alkaline fens Appropriate management

The control of inappropriate and invasive species.

Hydrology, water quality and air quality must be maintained.

Purple moor grass meadows on Appropriate management calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils The control of inappropriate and invasive species.

Hydrology, water quality and air quality must be maintained

Ecological Zone of Influence 4.90 The fen and grassland habitats are sensitive to changes in hydrology as described in the Types of Impact Section.

Vulnerability 4.91 The fen communities here had been neglected for several decades and as a result had deteriorated a great deal through the invasion of woody species. This situation has now been entirely reversed through management agreements with Natural England. However, it is important to note that neither of the two owner/occupiers has expressed any interest in undertaking or organising essential management themselves and Natural England has had to do this directly with their permission.

4.92 No particular existing trends or pressures were identified in site information, except for one off damage from an off road vehicle and deer browsing within woodland habitats. All habitats are sensitive to recreation pressure particularly the use of off road vehicles.

4.93 The site is however known to be susceptible to drought/dry conditions, which have occurred in recent years, although there is no indication whether this has yet caused a problem. The Environment Agency’s review

37 of consents has assessed existing consents as unlikely to have a significant impact.

Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC

Component Sites 4.94 Crook Peak to Shute Shelve Hill SSSI Cliff SSSI SSSI

Uphill Cliff SSSI lies within the geographic area administered by North Somerset Council.

Site Condition 4.96 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

Table 9: Mendip Limestone Grasslands Site Condition SAC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed Crook Peak 6.08 83.63 0 10.29 0 to Shute Shelve Hill 31.98 68.02 0 0 0 Brean Down 100 0 0 0 0

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.97 The primary reason for the sites designation is Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco- Brometalia). This site comprises coastal and inland sections of the Carboniferous Limestone outcrops of the Mendips. The coastal headland and inland hills support the largest area of CG1 Festuca ovina – Carlina vulgaris grassland in England, including two sub-types (CG1a Carex humilis and CG1c Trinia glauca sub-communities) known from no other site in the UK. Areas of short-turf CG2 Festuca ovina – Avenula pratensis grassland also occur inland. The site is exceptional in that it supports a number of rare and scarce vascular plants typical of the oceanic southern temperate and Mediterranean elements of the British flora. These include white rock-rose Helianthemum apenninum, Somerset hair-grass Koeleria vallesiana and honewort Trinia glauca. Transitions to limestone heath (European dry heaths) situated on flatter terrain also occur.

38 4.98 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia)’. The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are the extent of the habitat, the sward composition and the sward structure.

4.99 Transitions to European dry heaths occur on flatter terrain. European dry heaths typically occur on freely-draining, acidic to circumneutral soils with generally low nutrient content. Ericaceous dwarf-shrubs dominate the vegetation. The most common is heather Calluna vulgaris, which often occurs in combination with gorse Ulex spp., bilberry Vaccinium spp. or bell heather Erica cinerea, though other dwarf-shrubs are important locally. Most dry heaths are managed as extensive grazing for livestock

4.100 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, European dry heaths’. The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are the extent of the habitat, the amount of bare ground, the vegetative structure and composition, the presence of negative indicators and the sward composition and structure.

4.101 Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines occur in the Crook Peak to Shute Shelve Hill component site of the SAC. Tilio-Acerion ravine forests are woods of ash Fraxinus excelsior, wych elm Ulmus glabra and lime (mainly small-leaved lime Tilia cordata but more rarely large-leaved lime T. platyphyllos). The habitat type typically occurs on nutrient-rich soils that often accumulate in the shady micro-climates towards the bases of slopes and ravines. Therefore it is found on calcareous substrates associated with coarse scree, cliffs, steep rocky slopes and ravines, where inaccessibility has reduced human impact. This habitat type is ecologically variable, particularly with respect to the dominant tree species.

4.102 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines. The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are maintenance of the area of the habitat, natural processes and structural development, the regeneration potential, composition and that species, habitats, structures characteristic of the site are present.

4.103 Caves not open to the public are present on the Crook Peak to Shute Shelve Hill component sites and are selected as features of the SAC as they provide important hibernation sites for greater and lesser horseshoe bats. Greater horseshoe bats are also a feature of the SAC.

4.104 Greater horseshoe bats forage in the winter when temperatures are over 5°C. Eight species of prey is consumed. Ophion wasps provide a large amount of the prey consumed through the winter period, which occur in

39 dense swarms in deciduous woodland. They are also dependent on the dung of grazing animals, especially cattle, for Geotrupes beetle, the Aphodius beetle and the Scathophaga stercoraria dung fly. (Ransome, 2002)

4.105 The lesser horseshoe bats also feed throughout the winter, depending on temperature (Williams 2001: in Bat Conservation Trust/BMT Cordah, 2005). In England radio-tracking of bats revealed that they foraged on average to a maximum distance of 1.2 kilometers from the hibernation site. One bat traveled to an absolute maximum distance of 2.1 kilometers. The winter foraging range appears to be approximately half the area covered in the summer months. (Bat Conservation Trust/BMT Cordah, 2005)

4.106 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the caves not open to the public’. The attributes that measure the condition of the feature as hibernation roosts are the state of entrance, the security of the entrance, external conditions, lack of disturbance and use by bats in winter. In addition it is a conservation objectives ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the habitats for the population of Greater horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum) and Lesser horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus hipposideros)’

Table 10: Mendip Limestone Grasslands Key Environmental Conditions Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Semi-natural dry grasslands and Sward structure and composition scrubland facies on calcareous substrates Absence of negative indicator species

European dry heaths Appropriate management

Control of inappropriate or invasive species

Tilio-acerion (lime-maple) forests Appropriate management on slopes, screes and ravines

Caves not open to the public Pressure from human activity above and below ground

Management of overlying land and catchment

40 Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Greater horseshoe bat Undisturbed roosts

Roost conditions maintained

Appropriate management of vegetation at roost entrances

Maintenance and connectivity of habitats used as flight lines on and off site

Feeding areas

Ecological Zone of Influence 4.107 The unimproved calcareous grasslands, dry heath and Tilio-Acerion forests are sensitive to changes in air quality. The habitat therefore may be influenced outside the SAC by air pollution resulting from issues set out in Chapter 6. Air pollution from traffic may have eutrophication effects, which would impact on species composition in the sward. 200 metres is the distance from a road where nitrogen deposition is expected to occur in the Habitat Regulations Assessment of the draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West (2006). Bignall et al, (2004) consider that 150 metres air quality returns to background levels. The greater distance is used, as a precautionary approach is required.

4.108 For horseshoe bats a buffer of 2.1 kilometres around the hibernation roost site area is formed. Flyways and feeding areas are digitised based aerial photographic interpretation and available habitat data. Minimum Convex Polygons (MCP) of feeding areas within home range are formed. There is more than one MCP as feeding areas are sufficiently separated. Include other roosts with in the home range in the MCP. The MCP is then modified by either inclusion or exclusion of whole fields using OS Mastermap. This forms the EZI for horseshoe bats for this SAC.

Vulnerability 4.109 These sites are all open-access and are heavily used for informal recreation. Recreational pressure is becoming a problem with increased levels of trampling and erosion leading to localised loss of habitat (Natural England). There is also the illegal setting of fires.

4.110 Maintaining appropriate grazing levels, currently under grazing is a problem on some of the grassland and heath, and inappropriate / overgrazing is a problem in some of the woodland. The balance of habitats is heavily dependent upon adequate grazing, which is not always available. Cutting or grazing may be used to maintain these habitats,

41 including control of scrub encroachment (including Cotoneaster), though some scrub can be ecologically beneficial. Bracken is also invasive. The commoning system on which the management of the Crook Peak part of the site depends has broken down and a grazing system, using an absentee grazer, has been established by the National Trust, who manage the site, supported by Natural England.

4.111 Caves are sensitive systems, which often suffer significant pressure from human activities, both above and below ground. It is important to manage the overlying land and catchment in a manner, which takes account of potential consequences on the caves.

4.112 Light pollution is also becoming a problem, especially affecting the behaviour of bats. (prof. judgment) (Land Use Consultants, 2006)

North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC

Component Sites 4.113 The component sites for the North Somerset & Mendip Bats SAC are:

• Compton Martin Ochre Mine SSSI • SSSI • Banwell Ochre Mine SSSI • SSSI • King’s Wood and Urchin Wood SSSI • The SSSI • Wookey Hole SSSI

4.114 Compton Martin Ochre Mine, Banwell Caves, Banwell Ochre Mine, Brockley Hall Stables and King’s Wood and Urchin Wood SSSIs are all located in the geographic area administered by North Somerset Council. Compton Martin Ochre Mine is within 300 metres of the Somerset border. Banwell Caves is within 2 kilometres and Banwell Ochre Mine just over 2 kilometres.

Site Condition 4.115 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

42 Table 11: North Somerset and Mendips Bat Site Condition Summary SAC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed Banwell 100 0 0 0 0 Caves Banwell 100 0 0 0 0 Ochre Mine Brockley Hall 100 0 0 0 0 Stables Cheddar 40.66 54.27 5.07 0 0 Complex Combe Martin Ochre 0 0 0 100 0 Mine Kings Wood and Urchin 36.36 54.09 4.92 4.62 0 Wood Wookey Hole 72.26 27.74 0 0 0

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.116 This site in south-west England was selected on the basis of the size of population represented (3% of the UK greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum population) and its good conservation of structure and function, having both maternity and hibernation sites. This site contains an exceptionally good range of the sites used by the population, comprising two maternity sites in lowland north Somerset and a variety of cave and mine hibernation sites in the .

4.117 The ecology of greater horseshoe bats have been described previously in sections on the Mells Valley and Mendip Limestone Grassland SACs.

4.118 The limestone caves of the Mendips provide a range of important hibernation sites for lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros. The Cheddar Complex component site supports a number of possible bat hibernacula and a single maternity roost. The maternity roost is located in the show caves. At Wookey Hole the roost site is located off the show caves.

4.119 Lesser horseshoe bats hibernate between September/October and April/May although they remain active and will forage when temperatures are above 5°C. Many lesser horseshoes hibernate in an alternative site to their summer roost sites, using caves, tunnels, mines or cellars where temperatures are below 11°C and with high humidity. Hibernation sites often contain few in number. (Bat Conservation Trust, 2003)

43 4.120 Lesser Horseshoe Bats forage in winter during warmer weather. They use similar habitats to those used in the summer months - that of woodland and particularly over pasture. (Boye & Dietz, 2005) In England radio tracking of bats revealed that they foraged on average to a maximum distance of 1.2 kilometres from the hibernation site. One bat travelled to an absolute maximum distance of 2.1 kilometres. The winter foraging range appears to be approximately half the area covered in the summer months. (Bat Conservation Trust/BMT Cordah, 2005)

4.121 Current factors considered to be causing loss or decline in lesser horseshoe bats include:

• Loss, destruction or disturbance of hibernation sites through change of use, leisure use or safety purposes • Loss, damage or fragmentation of important foraging habitats, such as deciduous woodland, and connecting linear features such as hedgerows and tree lines • Lack of suitably connected foraging habitats (a mosaic of deciduous woodland, hedgerows and tree lines)

4.122 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the habitats for the population of Greater horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus ferrumequinum) and Lesser horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus hipposideros)’. The attributes that measures the condition of the feature are the buildings containing bat roosts’ roof covering, entrances, light levels, the degree of disturbance, the general condition and security of building, the internal condition in roost area and signs of bats. The attributes that measures the condition of the feature as hibernation roosts are the state of entrance, the security of the entrance, external conditions, lack of disturbance and use by bats

4.123 The Cheddar complex and Wookey Hole areas support a wide range of semi-natural habitats including Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia). The principal community present is CG2 Festuca ovina – Avenula pratensis grassland that occurs on rock ledges and on steep slopes with shallow limestone soil, especially in the dry valleys and gorges and on the south-facing scarp of the Mendips. The site is also important for the large number of rare plants, which are associated with Carboniferous limestone habitats. These include dwarf mouse-ear Cerastium pumilum, Cheddar pink Dianthus gratianopolitanus and rock stonecrop Sedum forsterianum, which occur on rocks, screes, cliffs and in open grassland. Transitions to and mosaics with limestone heath, calcareous screes, scrub and Tilio- Acerion forests are a particular feature of the Cheddar complex part of the site.

44 4.124 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia)’. The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are the extent of the habitat, the sward composition and the sward structure.

4.125 The main block of Tilio-Acerion forest, listed on the SAC citation, is at King’s and Urchin’s Woods located in North Somerset.

4.126 Caves not open to the public are selected as features of the SAC as they provide important hibernation sites for greater and lesser horseshoe bats.

4.127 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the caves not open to the public’. The attributes that measure the condition of the feature as hibernation roosts are the state of entrance, the security of the entrance, external conditions, lack of disturbance and use by bats in winter.

Table 12: North Somerset and Mendip Bats Key Environmental Conditions

Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Horseshoe bats Undisturbed roosts Roost conditions maintained Appropriate management of vegetation at roost entrances Maintenance and connectivity of habitats used as flight lines on and off site Feeding areas

Semi-natural dry grasslands and Sward structure and composition scrubland facies on calcareous Absence of negative indictor species substrates

Caves not open to the public Pressure from human activity above and below ground Management of overlying land and catchment

Ecological Zone of Influence 4.128 For greater horseshoe bats a buffer of 6 kilometres around the maternity roost site areas are formed. Starting with maternity roosts OS Mastermap polygons of connected habitat within home range is digitised. This process is further analysed using aerial photographic interpretation and available habitat data. Identification of flyways and feeding areas are also based on radio tracking data produced in 2000 for the Mells Valley SAC (Billington,

45 2000). This forms the EZI for greater horseshoe bats.

4.129 Similarly lesser horseshoe bat roosts are mapped using data on roost size to determine the distance buffered. Hibernation roosts are buffered by 2.1 kilometres. This forms the EZI for horseshoe bats with roosts located in the SAC.

4.130 The unimproved calcareous grasslands are sensitive to changes in air quality. The habitat therefore may be influenced outside the SAC by dust and air pollution resulting from issues set out in Chapter 3. Air pollution from traffic may have eutrophication effects, which would impact on species composition in the sward. 200 metres is the distance from a road where nitrogen deposition is expected to occur in the Habitat Regulations Assessment of the draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West (2006). Bignall et al, (2004) consider that 150 metres air quality returns to background levels. The greater distance is used, as a precautionary approach is required.

Vulnerability 4.131 There is concern regarding loss of bat foraging areas (Natural England). Problems are known to exist with recreational cavers in some of the caves used as hibernacula by bats. Natural England is working with the owners of these caves in order to minimise disturbance at critical times of the year. Further breeding roosts are believed to occur in the Cheddar area and steps are being taken to identify these. The bat population will potentially be at risk until these are discovered.

4.132 There are significant management problems associated with both the grassland and woodland elements of the SAC. Maintaining appropriate grazing levels is a problem. Low levels of grazing are resulting in scrub invasion and the development of secondary woodland. There is also a problem with invasive and inappropriate species, such as gorse and bracken in the grassland.

Quants SAC

Component Sites 4.133 The component sites for the Quants SAC is:

• Quants SSSI

46 Site Condition 4.134 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

Table 13: Quants Condition Summary SAC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed 45.02 17.56 37.42 0 0

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.135 This damp and sheltered site supports a medium-sized but strong marsh fritillary Euphydryas aurinia population in a neutral grassland/fen mosaic. It is strategically placed close to other smaller sub-populations, with which it forms a metapopulation, and may exchange individuals with the large population at Southey Moor (outside the SAC series).

4.136 The marsh fritillary is found on damp grasslands, which tend to be level or on gentle slopes in valley bottoms in Somerset. The adult emerges in late May or early July. The most important food plant for the species is devil's­ bit scabious Succisa pratensis. Caterpillars will occasionally feed on small scabious Scabiosa columbaria or field scabious Knautia arvensis. However, generally, devil's-bit scabious needs to be abundant: in breeding sites. In addition, if the grassland sward is too tall and coarse, or too low and uneven adults may abandon its existing sites.

4.137 The marsh fritillary is essentially highly colonial with limited and sporadic dispersal. Colonies may occupy areas of less than 0.5 hectares up to over 20 hectares in size. 70 hectares of suitable habitat is required to sustain populations in the long term. It has been known to colonise between 5 and 20 kilometres away from its core sites However, the species is reluctant to fly over hedges and is restricted by open water, arable land, woodland and even beds of sedges.

4.138 The major threats to the marsh fritillary are the wholesale loss of its habitat caused by development and agricultural intensification and the inappropriate management of sites including abandonment of grazing resulting in increasing fragmentation and isolation of its habitats. (Hobson et al, 2002; Schtickzelle et al, 2005)

4.139 The conservation objective for the feature is ‘to maintain, in favourable condition, the habitats for the population of Marsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia)’. The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are Succisa pratensis density, the sward height, and floral richness, lack of scrub invasion, and the presence of larval webs

- 47 ­

Table 14: Quants Key Environmental Conditions Site Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Quants SAC Marsh fritillary butterfly Appropriate management to maintain a mosaic of grassland and scrub habitats.

Significant population of devil’s bit scabious

Ecological Zone of Influence 4.140 Within Quants SAC suitable habitat is digitised using aerial photographic interpretation and available layers of habitat mapping. A buffer zone of 2 kilometres is created around the habitat (Fowles, A. P. 2003, amended 2004). Any marsh fritillary sites within this zone are also analysed by means of aerial photography and habitat data. This cluster of sites is then buffered by 2 kilometres to create the EZI for the marsh fritillary.

Vulnerability 4.141 The marsh fritillary population here is restricted to a comparatively small area (c. 2 ha) and is kept high by a considerable level of management directed at producing 'ideal' habitat in this area. If the highly interventionist nature of management is disrupted or discontinued the population may drop.

- 48 ­ Ecological Zone of Influence Map

Map 3: Ecological Zones of Influence

- 49 ­ 5. Other Relevant Plans or Projects

5.1 Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive requires a HRA of ‘…any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect there on, either individually or in combination with other plan or projects’. Therefore it is necessary to identify plans and projects that may have ‘in-combination’ affecting the Nature 2000 sites, which are the focus of this assessment.

5.2 The assessment of significant effects for the Core Strategy needs to take account of the impact in combination with other plans and projects. For Natura 2000 sites where it is unlikely that the Core Strategy on its own will require a stage 2 Appropriate Assessment in relation to that site, it has been necessary to consider whether ‘in-combination’ effects are likely to result in an Appropriate Assessment being required.

5.3 The guidance states that only those that are considered most relevant should be collected for ‘in combination’ testing - an exhaustive list could render the assessment exercise unworkable. The following plans or strategies are considered to have potential effects and therefore have been included within the assessment.

Table 15: Assessment of Plans and Projects for In-Combination Effects

Plan or Project Implications for Taunton Deane Core Strategy

Somerset Local New housing resulting from policy in other district and borough council Authorities’ Core Strategies could have in-combination effects from increased traffic Development Plan generated by development. The A38 runs within 200 metres of the Documents Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC and provides a link to and Bristol Airport from the Borough.

There are potential recreational effects on Natura 2000 sites from new housing development. This is most likely to occur at the Exmoor and Quantocks Oak Woodlands SAC and Exmoor Heaths SAC.

Water abstraction from new housing and other development may affect groundwater.

Somerset Waste Core There is unlikely to be in combination effects as Somerset waste Strategy strategy is likely to focus growth on existing facilities.

Somerset Minerals There could be in-combination effects from transport resulting from Core Strategy housing development and minerals operations.

Somerset Local Major infrastructure schemes are concentrated within Taunton and Transport Plan 2 other policies work towards a reduction of traffic using roads. There is a Freight Strategy, which directs HGV traffic onto certain routes through the County. There could be in-combination effects where these routes run within 200 metres of sensitive Natura 2000 sites. The A38, a strategic freight route, runs within 200 metres of the Mendip Limestone

- 50 ­ Plan or Project Implications for Taunton Deane Core Strategy Grasslands SAC.

Somerset Rights of As there are potentially in-combination impacts arising from increased Way Improvement recreational pressure where previously obstructed rights of way are Plan 2006 opened up to access.

Somerset Community Any new development should consider the objectives set out in the Strategy Community Strategy. As such, there are unlikely to be any in- combination impacts.

River Tone Catchment The strategies set out in the CAMS identify that water is limited in this Abstraction region and that additional abstraction in Taunton Deane will not be Management Strategy permitted unless necessary. Settlements in Taunton Deane receive water from Wimbleball, Clatworthy or Fulwood Reservoirs.

- 51 ­ 6. Description of the Development Plan

Introduction 6.1 This section sets out brief description of the Core Strategy to be assessed. Policies and proposals in the plans may need to be further assessed as the Core Strategy develops. The Core Strategy is part of the Local Development Framework, a set of documents, which together will set out the spatial strategy for the district.

6.2 The Core Strategy Development Plan Document (DPD) will set the broad local planning framework for the Borough Council up to 2026. It will set out a broad approach in terms of planning policies and allocations of land for strategic site development against which decisions on future development relating to where we live, work, spend our leisure time and how we travel, will be considered. The broad principles and policies in the Core Strategy will form the basis for more detailed policies and proposals to be prepared in other documents and will be used directly in respect of decisions on planning applications. The emerging Core Strategy will also contain the urban extension sites.

6.3 Small Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) and Area Action Plans would be produced in accordance with the Core Strategy and identify specific sites for development in the Borough over the next 20 years. (An Area Action Plan for Taunton Town Centre was produced ahead of the Core Strategy) These documents will identify non-strategic sites, which meet the broad strategy for locating smaller scale development set out in the Core Strategy, identify the type and level of development on each site, and identify when and how development will be implemented. Work is due to begin on the Small Site Allocations DPD in May 2011.

6.4 The DCLG guidance recommends that Appropriate Assessments be undertaken throughout the production of Core Strategy.

Current Progress 6.5 The Core Strategy and Small Sites Consultation at the time of writing this report is in its ‘Preferred Option’ or Regulation 25 Stage in its development. The Core Strategy is being consulted on between January and March 2010. It is intended to use comments received during this consultation to inform the draft Core Strategy (pre-submission stage) scheduled for consultation in September/ October2010.

- 52 ­ 7. Analysis of Draft Published Plan Core Strategy

Introduction 7.1 This screening assessment is made on the Core Strategy policy presented in the Preferred Options report. Each policy is outlined in Table 16 below, together with a broad assessment of impacts. For full details of each of the policies refer to the Core Strategy Preferred Option consultation report. Table 17 similarly sets out the Strategic Site Allocation Policies.

7.2 Each Core Strategy policy has then been assessed against each of the qualifying features for the Natura 2000 site. Many policies will have a neutral effect on each site feature and are therefore not detailed any further within this report as they would not have any significant effect on a Natura 2000 site.

Management for Nature Conservation Purposes 7.3 The Core Strategy does not introduce any management measures for nature conservation purposes at this stage.

Plan Analysis 7.4 Table 16 analyses the policies given in the Preferred Options Consultation Report and for each gives an assessment of its potential impact on Natura 2000 sites. Those policies that have a potential significant effect are highlighted in Orange. Impacts on each qualifying feature for each site affected are then assessed in detail in Chapter 8.

- 53 ­ Table 16: Plan Analysis Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected CP1 – Climate Development should: The policy is non Impacts on nature conservation Change locational interests are neither sufficient nor Contribute to CO2 targets specified. The text of the policy Renewable energy is not Hestercombe refers to details of impacts of Protect water resource specified nor is it House SAC wind turbines on bats in Policy locational but there are CP8 but this is not the case. Incorporate measures for potential impacts from Exmoor & ecosystem resilience and wind turbines on bats Quantocks Renewable energy from wind biodiversity networks and birds. Wind turbines Oak turbines are likely to have are likely to cause Woodlands adverse effects on bat Mitigate heating of urban mortalities if wrongly SAC populations if located in areas environment sited. used as flight lines or for feeding4 . These features are likely to be Sequential approach to flood outside the boundaries of a SAC risk supporting bats but nonetheless support the site’s integrity. Even Renewable and low carbon though horseshoe bat populations proposals favoured if: are considered a low risk species other forms of renewable energy Assimilated into the landscape and the associated infrastructure or built environment of wind farms may impact on flight lines and/or feeding areas. Impact on the local community, economy, nature conservation Barbastelle bat populations are or historical interests does not considered to be of ‘medium’ risk5 outweigh the economic and of mortality. Those present in wider environmental benefits roosts in the Quantocks are likely to be using parts of Taunton Provision is made for removal Deane for foraging of the facilities’ and reinstatement should it cease

4 e.g. see Hötker, H., Thomsen, K-M. & Jeromin, H. 2006. Impacts on biodiversity of exploitation of renewable energy sources: the example of birds and bats. Norderstedt: Books on Demand GmbH 5 Mitchell-Jones, T. & Carlin, C. 2009. Natural England Technical Information Note TIN051 Bats and onshore wind turbines: Interim guidance. Peterborough: Natural England.

- 54 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected operationally Potential drying impacts Holme Moor It is assumed that SAC habitats from wind turbines near & Clean Moor are subject to management sensitive habitats which SAC agreements and would be are hydrologically affected by Regulations for dependent Quants SAC operations affecting SSSIs and therefore damaging development would not be permitted within or adjacent to the Natura 2000 site itself.

CP 2 ­ 11,000 additional jobs – The policy is concerned with Economy provision in town centres. Around 22 hectares of land for However, the policy for provision focussed within the Taunton at Monkton Heathfield is not urban area with complementary specific and could result in provision at Wellington additional retail floorspace affecting the lesser horseshoe bat Around 46,000 square metres habitat. of additional office space, focussed on Taunton town Lesser horseshoe bats are centre susceptible to loss of linear features, such as mature Around 80,500 sq.m. of hedgerows, which act as additional retail floorspace As the policy is non- Hestercombe commuting routes between roost focussed on Taunton town locational for Monkton House SAC sites and foraging areas and centre, with complementary Heathfield and further indeed to other roost sites. They provision at Monkton site allocations could can cross short breaks in linear Heathfield and Wellington potentially incur loss of structures, but do so by flying habitat, reduction in prey very close to the ground. They Around 32,500 sq.m. of availability from street will fly across roads on traditional additional assembly and leisure lighting and perhaps routes. 6 space, focussed on Taunton severance of flight lines. town centre Lesser horseshoe bats are disrupted from flying along Provision for around 250 hedgerows by artificial light levels additional hotel bedspaces, As the policy for Hestercombe above 0.5 Lux. It was also found within Taunton town centre residential institutions is House SAC that continued disruption non locational and could increased the effect, i.e. lesser Around 114,000 sq.m. of be expansions on site Exmoor & horseshoe bats do not become additional floorspace for there is a potential loss Quantocks habituated to the presence of residential institutions of habitat, reduction in Oak artificial lighting and would through on site expansions, prey availability from Woodlands therefore permanently disrupt site allocations and street lighting and SAC their behaviour.7 Development Management perhaps severance of (criteria based) policies flight lines. Recent Quants SAC With regard to recent survey data survey has shown lesser it is indicated that barbastelle bats horseshoe bat activity roosting within the SAC may use south of the A3259. the area to the east of the There is also potential to Quantocks. affect habitat outside the Quants site boundary Marsh fritillary butterflies are that could impact on the reliant on habitat configurations dispersal of marsh around the SAC in order to fritillary butterflies. successfully disperse. This is an important factor in maintaining the population8 .

6 Motte, G. & Libois, R. 2002. Conservation of the lesser horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus hipposideros Bechstein, 1800) (Mammalia: Chiroptera) in Belgium. A case study in feeding requirements: in Belg. J. Zool., 132 (1): 47-52;

- 55 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected CP3 - Towns Town and other centres will be None predicted None The policy is concerned with town and Other promoted and enhanced as the and other centre development Centres primary location for main town relating to retail, leisure and other centre uses. The following uses only principles will apply:

i. Taunton town centre strengthened including for residential use

ii. Wellington and Monkton Heathfield secondary centres

iii. Local and rural centres – daily needs

iv. Rural areas - New and loss of rural services

Scale and intensity of development

Provision of floor space

Sequential approach

Sub division of existing out of centre retail floorspace

CP 4 ­ Housing supply None predicted None The policy is for housing criteria Housing only and the indirect effects of Creation of sustainable mixed housing numbers are described in communities, mix of housing the assessment for CS1 – types Sustainable Development Locations below. 35% affordable

Reflect Taunton Strategic Housing Market Area Assessment

Gypsy and Traveller Area Accommodation studies – scale of provision

Schofield, H. W. 2008. The Lesser Horseshoe Bat Conservation Handbook. Ledbury: The Vincent Wildlife Trust; Knight, T. 2006. The use of landscape features and habitats by the Lesser Horseshoe bat. Ph.D thesis. University of Bristol. 7 Stone, E. 2009. The impact of street lighting on lesser horseshoe bats: Unpublished PhD, University of Bristol. Presented at the South West Bat Conservation Trust Conference, 25 April, 2009; Outen, A. R. 2002. The ecological effects of road lighting: in Sherwood, B., Cutler D. & Burton J. (eds.) 2002. Wildlife and Roads: The Ecological Impact. London: Imperial College Press. 8 Hobson, R., Brown, N. & Warren, M. 2002. Conserving the Marsh Fritillary in Britain: in British Wildlife, 13, 405-411; Schtickzelle, N., Choutt, J., Goffart, P., Fichefet, V. & Baguette, M. 2005. Metapopulation dynamics and conservation of the marsh fritillary butterfly: Population viability analysis and management options for a critically endangered species in Western Europe: in Biological Consevation 126 (2005) 569-581

- 56 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected CP5 ­ Development proposals None predicted None Policy is concerned with the Inclusive considered in context of effects of development on certain Communities Sustainable Community social aspects only Strategies, Town and Parish Plans

Proposals considered for effects on:

Older people for housing and services; Younger people for affordable housing, recreation, etc.; Needs in rural areas; Disabled people; Deprived areas; Reduction in crime

CP6 – Achieved by: None predicted None Policy is concerned with Transport and managing transport only Accessibility Corridor management

Improved public transport, cycling and walking routes in Taunton

Development supports expansion of rail network

Robust evidence from developments

Smarter choices

Car parking

Location of major industrial and warehousing

- 57 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected CP7 – The Borough Council will work None predicted None The policy does not set out Infrastructure with partners to ensure that specific projects. However, any infrastructure is in place at the SPD will also need to assessed right time to meet the needs of under the Habitats Regulations Taunton Deane. It will also secure developer contributions towards the provision of physical, social and community, and green infrastructure. This will be achieved by the following means:

Preparation and regular review of an Infrastructure Delivery Plan for the Borough that will set out the infrastructure to be provided by partners

Preparation of a Planning Obligations SPD that seeks to mitigate impacts of proposed development through developer contributions towards new or upgraded infrastructure.

Securing contributions to all aspects of land use, infrastructure and services that may be affected by development, in accordance with the Borough Council’s identified priorities and objectives for delivering sustainable communities.

Reflecting the cumulative impact of all developments and varying needs for infrastructure in the level and type of developer contributions that are sought.

- 58 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected

CP8 ­ Conserve and enhance the Potential impact on Hestercombe The policy is concerned with Environment natural and historic lesser horseshoe bat House SAC safeguarding, protecting and environment, and wider flight lines, feeding areas enhancing the natural and historic countryside. Safeguard and night roosts from environment and with criteria for biodiversity, geology, history development north of development and flooding only and archaeology through the Taunton protection and enhancement of However, the area north of the sites. A3259 at Monkton Heathfield around the northern urban edge Proposals that will have an of Taunton is constrained by the adverse impact on Natura 2000 presence of flight lines and sites will not be supported. feeding areas used by lesser horseshoe bats from the Improve green infrastructure, Hestercombe House SAC. Radio public access, visual amenity tracking was carried in 2005, and the overall quality of the 2007 and 2008 and there have natural environment. Minimise been subsequent field surveys on and mitigate adverse impacts sites in the area (Somerset on protected species, river and County Council, 2009) The text of ground water quality. the policy gives areas for offset habitat creation which are out of Seek to direct development date and therefore there is a away from land at risk of fluvial possibility of significant effects or other causes of flooding occurring.

Unallocated greenfield land outside of settlement boundaries will be protected and where possible enhanced. Development outside of settlement boundaries will be permitted where it will: be in accordance with national, regional and local policies; be appropriate in terms of scale, siting and design; and protect, conserve or enhance landscape character; and protect, conserve or enhance the interests of natural and historic assets; and follow the sequential approach to land at risk of fluvial flooding; and protect habitats and species and conserve and enhance the biodiversity of the Plan Area; and provide for any necessary mitigation and compensatory measures.

- 59 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SP1 – Proposals should: Potential impact on Hestercombe The area north of the A3259 at Sustainable lesser horseshoe bat House SAC Monkton Heathfield around the Development Efficient use of land flight lines, feeding areas northern urban edge of Taunton is Locations and night roosts from constrained by the presence of Support principles of development north of flight lines and feeding areas sustainable development by Taunton used by lesser horseshoe bats minimising and/or mitigating from the Hestercombe House pressures on the natural, built SAC. Radio tracking was carried an historic environment and in 2005, 2007 and 2008 and natural resources; sufficient there have been subsequent field utilities and infrastructure; away surveys on sites in the area from areas of greatest flood (Somerset County Council, 2009) risk

Development will be focussed on:

Taunton

Wellington

Higher order Rural Settlements – Wiveliscombe, Bishops Lydeard and Cotford St Luke Lower order Rural Settlements – Milverton, Creech St Michael, North

- 60 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected Curry, Churchinford and Oake Population growth could Exmoor Increases in population and place pressure on sites Heaths SAC encouragement of tourism could Proposals outside above will be from increased place pressure on sites from Open Countryside and not recreational use Exmoor & increased recreational use and have development boundaries resulting in habitat loss Quantocks visitor pressure. Habitat and/or degradation. Oak deterioration and loss is possible Woodlands due to increased leisure use from SAC walkers, dogs, cyclists, horse riders and possibly off road Mendip vehicles arising from increased Limestone population due to proposed9 , 10). Grasslands There are potential significant SAC effects on Exmoor and Quantock Oak Woodlands, Exmoor Heaths, North North Somerset and Mendip Bats Somerset and and Mendip Limestone Mendip Bats Grasslands SACs. SAC There is also potential for disturbance of sensitive bat roost within the Exmoor & Quantocks Oak Woodlands SAC, which hosts sites for barbastelle and Bechstein’s bats. Otherwise bat roosts within the SACs are inaccessible. There is potential for increased disturbance to otter resting places.

Levels of traffic are likely Exmoor Possible increase vehicular to go up causing Heaths SAC access to Exmoor for leisure increases in air pollution, visits. which may affect sensitive sites. Mendip Probable increases to traffic Limestone along M5 and accessing Bristol Grasslands Airport and Bristol along A38. SAC Nitrogen and other deposits from transport may affect sensitive North sites at Mendip Limestone Somerset and Grasslands SAC due to the Mendip Bats potential presence of sensitive SAC lichens and bryophytes. Increases in traffic are also likely in Cheddar Gorge. 11

9 Penny Anderson Associates. 2009. Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 Part1: Access to the Countryside. Peterborough: Natural England. 10 Footprint Ecology. 2009. Access and Nature Conservation reconciliation: Supplementary Guidance for England. Peterborough: Natural England. 11 Bignall, K., Ashmore, M. & Power, S. 2004. The ecological effects of diffuse air pollution from road transport. English Nature Research Report No. 580. Peterborough: English Nature.

- 61 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected Water abstraction could Holme Moor There would be an increase in be an issue. and Clean demand for water supply that may Moor SAC affect hydrologically sensitive features. However, water is Quants SAC abstracted from Wimbleball, Clatworthy or Fulwood reservoirs which are not linked hydrologically to the SACs.

- 62 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SP2 ­ The Taunton Urban Area (TUA) Population growth from Exmoor Increases in population and Realising the will provide the strategic focus 13,000 net additional Heaths SAC encouragement of tourism could vision for for growth The key features of dwellings could place place pressure on sites from Taunton the vision will: pressure on sites from Exmoor & increased recreational use and Realise forecast growth in the increased recreational Quantocks visitor pressure. Habitat local economy; use resulting in habitat Oak deterioration and loss is possible loss and/or degradation. Woodlands due to increased leisure use from Focus on town centre SAC walkers, dogs, cyclists, horse regeneration opportunities; Levels of traffic are likely riders and possibly off road to go up causing Mendip vehicles arising from increased Deliver around 13,000 net increases in air pollution, Limestone population due to proposed12 ,13 ). additional dwellings, which may affect Grasslands There are potential significant sensitive sites (Mendip SAC effects on Exmoor and Quantock Contribute approximately 2,500 Limestone Grasslands) Oak Woodlands, Exmoor Heaths, new net affordable dwellings; North North Somerset and Mendip Bats Somerset and and Mendip Limestone Create balanced and Mendip Bats Grasslands SACs. sustainable, mixed-use SAC communities; There is also potential for disturbance of sensitive bat roost Protect and enhance the within the Exmoor & Quantocks distinctive green wedges and Oak Woodlands SAC, which corridors; hosts sites for barbastelle and Bechstein’s bats. Otherwise bat Provision of high quality, roosts within the SACs are cycle and pedestrian inaccessible. There is potential networks. for increased disturbance to otter resting places. Encourage sustainable transport choices; Probable increases to traffic along M5 and accessing Bristol Improvements to Creech Airport and Bristol along A38. Castle junction; Nitrogen and other deposits from transport may affect sensitive Progressive construction of sites at Mendip Limestone new highway links within Grasslands SAC due to the northern Ta unto n as an potential presence of sensitive inte gral part of new lichens and bryophytes.14 developments; Development at Hestercombe These affects have been Com pletion of a Norton Monktron Heathfield, House SAC assessed in the Habitats Nerrols and Priorswood Regulations Assessment of Fitzwarren Bypa ss and will affect habitat use by Hestercombe House SAC improve d access to the West lesser horseshoe bats. (Somerset County Council, 2009) Somerset Railway Provision of cycle networks especially if lit The area north of the A3259 at Progressive improvements to between the town and Monkton Heathfield around the key road junctions; adjoining settlements northern urban edge of Taunton is may cause constrained by the presence of Provision of Park and Ride fragmentation of flight flight lines and feeding areas site at Monkton Heathfield lines or degradation of used by lesser horseshoe bats and Park and Bus site at habitat from the Hestercombe House Chelston; The location of the Park SAC. Radio tracking was carried and Ride at Monkton in 2005, 2007 and 2008 Urban traffic management; Heathfield is not given (Somerset County Council, 2009). therefore there is a Further surveys have shown Provide strategic surface water potential loss of habitat, presence to the south of the attenuation reduction in prey A3259 at Maidenbrook availability from street Improvements to Junction 25. lighting and perhaps severance of flight lines. Reviewing the need for new Recent survey has motorway junctions shown lesser horseshoe bat activity south of the A3259.

- 63 ­

Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SP3 ­ Provide the bulk of new Population growth from Exmoor Increases in population and Realising the employment growth required 2000 net additional Heaths SAC encouragement of tourism could vision for outside of the Taunton Urban dwellings in combination place pressure on sites from Wellington Area; with the 13000 for Exmoor & increased recreational use and Taunton could place Quantocks visitor pressure. Habitat Promote limited expansion pressure on sites from Oak deterioration and loss is possible within the town centre increased recreational Woodlands due to increased leisure use from use resulting in habitat SAC walkers, dogs, cyclists, horse Deliver around 2,000 net loss and/or degradation. riders and possibly off road additional dwellings; this will Mendip vehicles arising from increased include strategic sites at Levels of traffic are likely Limestone population due to proposed15 ,16 ). Longforth Farm and to go up causing Grasslands There are potential significant Cades/Jurston); increases in air pollution, SAC effects on Exmoor and Quantock which may affect Oak Woodlands, Exmoor Heaths, Contribute approximately 500 sensitive sites (Mendip North North Somerset and Mendip Bats new net affordable dwellings in Limestone Grasslands) Somerset and and Mendip Limestone accordance with Core Policy Mendip Bats Grasslands SACs. CP3 Housing; SAC There is also potential for Create balanced and disturbance of sensitive bat roost sustainable, mixed-use within the Exmoor & Quantocks communities Oak Woodlands SAC, which hosts sites for barbastelle and Protect and enhance the Bechstein’s bats. Otherwise bat Town’s distinctive green roosts within the SACs are wedges and corridors and inaccessible. There is potential develop a comprehensive for increased disturbance to otter network of green and blue resting places. infrastructure across the town. Probable increases to traffic Encourage sustainable along M5 and accessing Bristol transport choices; Airport and Bristol along A38. Nitrogen and other deposits from Provision of a Northern Relief transport may affect sensitive Road as an integral part of the sites at Mendip Limestone proposed development at Grasslands SAC due to the Longforth Farm, and an potential presence of sensitive eastern relief road at lichens and bryophytes.17 Cades/Jurston.

Reopening of the railway station.

Introduction of a town bus service.

Improvements to assist pedestrians and cyclists on existing radial roads and at intersections.

- 64 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SP4 ­ Provide small-scale local Population growth from Exmoor Increases in population and Realising the opportunities for employment 1000 net dwellings in Heaths SAC encouragement of tourism could vision for the growth including rural combination with 13000 place pressure on sites from Rural Areas diversification; for Taunton and 2000 Exmoor & increased recreational use and dwellings for Wellington Quantocks visitor pressure. Habitat Encourage the provision of could place pressure on Oak deterioration and loss is possible

additional services such as sites from increased Woodlands due to increased leisure use from shops and community halls to recreational use SAC walkers, dogs, cyclists, horse serve identified local needs; resulting in habitat loss riders and possibly off road and/or degradation. Mendip vehicles arising from increased Deliver around 1,000 net Limestone population due to proposed18 ,19 ). additional dwellings (including There is a potential loss Grasslands There are potential significant existing planning consents and of bat flight lines and/ or SAC effects on Exmoor and Quantock allocations); feeding areas outside of Oak Woodlands, Exmoor Heaths, the designated SACs. North North Somerset and Mendip Bats Enable a step change in the Around the east of the Somerset and and Mendip Limestone delivery of affordable housing, and to Mendip Bats Grasslands SACs. through specific allocations but the north of Taunton and SAC also Rural Exception Sites in Monkton Heathfield new There is also potential for accordance with Policy DM2; sites may involve loss of Hestercombe disturbance of sensitive bat roost bat feeding habitat House SAC within the Exmoor & Quantocks Encourage sustainable and/or flight lines outside Oak Woodlands SAC, which transport choices. An the designated SAC. hosts sites for barbastelle and enhanced network of bus and Bechstein’s bats. Otherwise bat cycle links will be provided at There may be impacts Quants SAC roosts within the SACs are settlements where growth is on habitats used by inaccessible. There is potential proposed, linking new marsh fritillary butterflies for increased disturbance to otter development with the existing around the Quants SAC resting places fabric of the villages. Marsh fritillary butterflies are reliant on habitat configurations around the SAC in order to successfully disperse. This is an important factor in maintaining the population20 .

- 65 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected DM1 - General Development will be required to None predicted None Policy is concerned with Requirements meet criteria: development criteria only. Effects from renewable energy Effective and efficient use of installations are dealt with under land, sustainably located CP1

Road traffic not lead to overloading of access roads, road safety, noise, vibration or visual impact

Not lead to harm to protected wildlife species or their habitats

Character of landscape, settlement, building or street scene not harmed

Pollution resulting will not harm public health and safety, amenity of individual dwellings/ residential areas or other elements of the local and wider environment

Health, safety and amenity of development will not be harmed by existing pollution

Served by utilities

Structures and installations: i. Telecommunications installations must be sensitively designed and sited. ii. Renewable energy installations – see policy CP1 (renewables)

DM2 – Support outside of settlements Development limits for: in the Countryside Community Uses None predicted None Policy is concerned with need for Local need for centre local centres only

- 66 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected Class B Business Use It is assumed that SAC With regard to recent survey data Small scale development habitats are subject to it is indicated that barbastelle bats management roosting within the SAC may use Extensions to existing business agreements and would the area to the east of the be affected by Quantocks. Regulations for operations affecting The area north of the A3259 at SSSIs and therefore Monkton Heathfield around the Holiday & Tourism damaging development Hestercombe northern urban edge of Taunton is Tourist accommodation within would not be permitted House SAC constrained by the presence of existing buildings within or adjacent to the flight lines and feeding areas Natura 2000 site itself. Exmoor and used by lesser horseshoe bats Caravan and camping sites not Quantocks from the Hestercombe House in floodplain However, there is a Oak SAC. Radio tracking was carried potential loss of bat flight Woodlands in 2005, 2007 and 2008 Facilities provided not harm lines and/ or feeding SAC (Somerset County Council, 2009) natural environment or man areas outside of the made heritage designated SACs. New Night and satellite roosts provide sites may involve loss of roosts away from the main roost bat feeding habitat where lesser horses bats will rest, and/or flight lines outside feed and groom. These therefore Affordable Housing the designated SAC. perform a vital function in Adjoining settlement limits Quants SAC maintaining a population. Loss is Potential loss of night or likely to lead to an area of Local need satellite roosts in foraging becoming out of reach or existing buildings increased individual energy budgets21 .

There may be impacts Marsh fritillary butterflies are on habitats used by reliant on habitat configurations marsh fritillary butterflies around the SAC in order to around the Quants SAC. successfully disperse. This is an However, this is within important factor in maintaining the the floodplain population22 .

The criteria to ‘…not harm… ecology of local area…’ is not sufficient to offset impacts on Natura 2000 sites. Bats travel many kilometres away from roosts sites to forage and effects at distance may not be recognised.

Agriculture & related None predicted None Policy is for small scale New agricultural storage development only and therefore is buildings unlikely to have a significant effect. Farm shops

Replacement dwellings Potential loss of night or Hestercombe Night and satellite roosts provide Replacement of existing satellite roosts House SAC roosts away from the main roost dwellings where lesser horses bats will rest, feed and groom. These therefore Conversion of existing perform a vital function in buildings maintaining a population. Loss is Criteria for building likely to lead to an area of foraging becoming out of reach or increased individual energy budgets23 .

- 67 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected Subject to the above criteria None predicted None The policy gives additional criteria includes that all must: for development in rural areas. It specifically states that the Be compliant with the Habitats Habitats Regulations 2010 must Regulations 2010 and any be complied with and that there subsequent amendment would be no harm to local ecology. This is considered to be Not harm the… ecology of the sufficient to prevent harm local area… occurring to Natura 2000 sites from the potential impacts identified and commented on above.

DM3 - Gypsy Following criteria satisfied: It is assumed that SAC Hestercombe Environmental impacts minimised and Traveller habitats are subject to House SAC is not sufficient to offset impacts Site Selection Meet need through the GTAA management on Natura 2000 sites. Wildlife is Criteria agreements and would Exmoor & not specified and too generic. Related to local services and be affected by Quantocks facilities Regulations for Oak With regard to recent survey data operations affecting Woodlands it is indicated that barbastelle bats Environmental impacts SSSIs and therefore SAC roosting within the SAC may use minimised including likely damaging development the area to the east of the impacts on wildlife, built would not be permitted Quants SAC Quantocks. heritage and flood risk within or adjacent to the Proposals should in particular Natura 2000 site itself. The area north of the A3259 at avoid any adverse impact on Monkton Heathfield around the Natura 2000 sites and comply However, there is a northern urban edge of Taunton is with the Habitats Directive potential loss of bat flight constrained by the presence of 2010. Details of habitats lines and/ or feeding flight lines and feeding areas protection and mitigation is areas outside of the used by lesser horseshoe bats including bat protection zones designated SACs. from the Hestercombe House is covered under Environment Around the east of the SAC. Radio tracking was carried Policy Quantock Hills and to in 2005, 2007 and 2008 the north of Taunton and (Somerset County Council, 2009) Not prejudice amenity of Monkton Heathfield new adjoining or adjacent occupiers sites may involve loss of Marsh fritillary butterflies are bat feeding habitat reliant on habitat configurations Served by adequate and/or flight lines outside around the SAC in order to infrastructure the designated SAC. successfully disperse. This is an No unacceptable traffic important factor in maintaining the movements, or disturbance There may be impacts population24 . from vehicles on habitats used by marsh fritillary butterflies Policy wording is considered Acceptable impact on trsffic around the Quants SAC sufficient to counter-act any potential effects as described above.

Sites in proximity to Exmoor & SAC is located within Wets SACs could place Quantocks Somerset and Sedgemoor District pressure on sites from Oak Councils’ areas and is remote increased use resulting Woodlands from administrative border with in habitat loss and /or SAC Taunton Deane. degradation.

- 68 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected DM4 - Design New development should: None predicted None It is assumed that public art would Objectives be contained within the Places people enjoy and are development. Lighting of these safe, secure and attractive products can have an adverse effect on bats. Sense of place

Respect the amenity of the site

Greater equality of access

Sustainable construction, recycling, energy efficiency, contribute to climate change

High quality public space

High quality architecture

Public art

DM5 - Delivery Town wide design strategy None predicted None Policies are concerned with the of Design delivery of design objectives only Objectives Town wide design strategies for Taunton and Wellington

Masterplans

Design codes to amplify Masterplans

Village design statements

Referred to in Site Allocations DPD

Design policies in the Development Management DPD

- 69 ­ Policy Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected DM6 – Use of Development proposals shall: Off site generation ­ Hestercombe In support of energy efficiency Resources Policy is not locational House SAC policy renewable energy sources and a. Minimise energy use by therefore there is are not specified in the text Sustainable design of layout potential impacts from Exmoor and supporting policy and ‘…micro Design wind turbines on bats Quantocks renewables from individual b. Minimise energy and birds. Wind turbines Oak buildings to wider community or requirements of construction are likely to cause Woodlands district wide schemes…’ is mortalities if wrongly SAC supported. c. New build minimum sited. standards: CO2 standards one Renewable energy from wind code higher than national turbines are likely to have standards in urban extensions adverse effects on bat and town centre populations if located in areas used as flight lines or for d. development requirement for feeding25. These features are c likely to be outside the boundaries of a SAC supporting e. Allowable solutions for bats but nonetheless support the carbon dioxide reductions site’s integrity. Even though including offsite generation horseshoe bats are considered a low risk species other forms of f. Conversion and extensions renewable energy and the associated infrastructure of wind g. Minimise pollution farms may impact on flight lines and/or feeding areas. h. Minimise water consumption

i. Maximise use of building Off site generation - Holme Moor It is assumed that SAC habitats waste and spare soil Potential drying impacts & Clean Moor are subject to management from wind turbines near SAC agreements and would be j. Flexibility and adaptability sensitive habitats which affected by Regulations for future modifications are hydrologically Quants SAC operations affecting SSSIs and dependent therefore damaging development k. evaluation monitoring and would not be permitted within or improvement adjacent to the Natura 2000 site itself.

Strategic Site Allocation Policy Analysis 7.5 Table 17 analyses the strategic site allocation policies given in the draft Core Strategy and gives for each an assessment of its potential impact on Natura 2000 sites. Those policies that have a potential significant effect are highlighted in Orange. Impacts on each qualifying feature for each site affected are then assessed in detail in Chapter 8.

- 70 ­ Table 17: Strategic Site Allocation Policy Analysis Strategic Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Policy Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SS1- Monkton Within the area identified, a new Potential loss of habitat, Hestercombe The policy for provision of a Heathfield compact settlement will include: reduction in prey House SAC strategic site at Monkton Strategic Site Phased delivery of around 5,000 availability from street Heathfield is accompanied Allocation dwellings; lighting and perhaps by a location plan showing 25%of new homes affordable severance of flight lines. development north of the A new mixed-use district centre; Recent survey has A3259 which is likely to 13 hectares of additional shown lesser horseshoe result in affects on lesser employment land; bat activity south of the horseshoe bat habitat. This 3 new primary schools and a A3259 and depending is a greater area than secondary school; on phasing of assessed in the Appropriate A country park within the green development could Assessment of wedge; isolate habitat. Hestercombe House SAC Infrastructure for a bus rapid transit (2009) system; Energy efficient new homes; Western development spine Energy centre to generate could potentially effect electricity; lesser horseshoe bats at Provision of a park and ride site Maidenbrook south side of the A38 at Walford Cross; Lesser horseshoe bats are A3259 corridor strategy susceptible to loss of linear Improvements to the A38 to features, such as mature transform it into an urban street hedgerows, which act as A new ‘western development commuting routes between spine’ to connect the A38 and roost sites and foraging the A3259 to the south-west of areas and indeed to other Monkton Heathfield roost sites. They can cross Eastern development spine short breaks in linear Rapid bus transit infrastructure structures, but do so by SUDS infrastructure; flying very close to the A multi-purpose ‘green necklace’ ground. They will fly across providing allotments, outdoor roads on traditional routes. recreation and wildlife habitat. This will also include -; Lesser horseshoe bats are • A 20m wide buffer of disrupted from flying along woodland planting around hedgerows by artificial light the boundaries; and levels above 0.5 Lux. It was • Offsite offset habitat in also found that continued accordance with the disruption increased the recommendations of effect, i.e. lesser horseshoe Hestercombe House SAC bats do not become Appropriate Assessment. habituated to the presence The offsite offset habitat of artificial lighting and should be functional prior to would therefore permanently the commencement of any disrupt their behaviour. development. The development form and layout should provide; • A variety of character areas to create a place that is distinctive and memorable; • An accessible village centre; • A connected street network which accommodates pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles and promotes a viable public transport system; • Well designed public open spaces which are enclosed and overlooked; and • A positive relationship between new housing and existing communities.

- 71 ­ Strategic Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Policy Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SS2 - Within the area identified a new Potential loss of habitat, Hestercombe The policy for provision of a Priorswood / compact settlement will be reduction in prey House SAC strategic site at Nerrols / Nerrols delivered including: availability from street Priorswood could result in Strategic Site • Phased delivery of around 900 lighting and perhaps affects on lesser horseshoe Allocation dwellings; severance of flight lines. bat habitat. The site • A new mixed-use local centre; Recent survey has allocation is extends further • 1 hectare of employment land; shown lesser horseshoe east than that assessed in • 1 new primary school bat activity south of the the Appropriate Assessment • A country park within the green A3259. of Hestercombe House SAC wedge between Monkton (2009) Heathfield and Priorswood; Lesser horseshoe bats are • Infrastructure for a bus rapid susceptible to loss of linear transit system; features, such as mature • SUDS infrastructure; hedgerows, which act as • A multi-purpose ‘green necklace’ commuting routes between providing allotments, outdoor roost sites and foraging recreation and wildlife habitat. This areas and indeed to other will also include -; roost sites. They can cross • A 20m wide buffer of short breaks in linear woodland planting around structures, but do so by the boundaries; and flying very close to the • Offsite offset habitat in ground. They will fly across accordance with the roads on traditional routes. recommendations of Hestercombe House SAC Lesser horseshoe bats are Appropriate Assessment. disrupted from flying along The offsite offset habitat hedgerows by artificial light should be functional prior to levels above 0.5 Lux. It was the commencement of any also found that continued development. disruption increased the effect, i.e. lesser horseshoe The development form and layout bats do not become should provide: habituated to the presence • A neighbourhood that attracts a of artificial lighting and wide range of people; would therefore permanently • An accessible, compact local disrupt their behaviour. centre with a mix of uses and facilities that can be accessed easily and safely on foot; • A positive relationship between the local centre, Priorswood roundabout and the Crown Medical Centre to create an attractive gateway to the neighbourhood; • A permeable street network which accommodates pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles, provides good access to Yallands Hill/ Priorswood Road and the public transport corridor and integrates with the existing street network in Priorswood; • Well designed public open spaces (including semi-natural spaces) which are enclosed and overlooked by new development; • A positive relationship between new housing and existing communities; • A well defined green edge to the urban area that protects views from Hestercombe House and the Quantock Hills.

- 72 ­ Strategic Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Policy Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SS3 Within the area identified a new None likely None The location is unlikely to Wellington compact urban extension to the have any effects on SAC Longforth north of Wellington will be delivered sites Strategic Site including: Allocation Delivery of around 900 dwellings;

A new local centre with associated social infrastructure;

11 hectares of employment land

Land released from relocation of two large employers

Phased and coordinated approach;

Contributions to railway station;

Infrastructure in line with CP7;

Northern Relief Road

Local bus loop

A green wedge of 18 hectares

The development form and layout for Longforth should provide; • A new neighbourhood that reflects the existing landscape character and the opportunities and constraints provided by natural features to create new neighbourhoods that are distinctive and memorable places; • Easy access to the town centre and connected street network; • Well designed public open spaces which are enclosed and overlooked by new development, create a green necklace around the town, and promote a positive relationship between new housing and existing communities.

- 73 ­ Strategic Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Policy Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SS4 Within the area identified at a new None likely None The location is unlikely to Wellington compact urban extension to the have any direct effects on Cades / east of Wellington will be delivered SAC sites Jurston including: Strategic Site Delivery of around 920 dwellings; Allocation Local centre;

Phased approach;

Contributions to railway station;

Infrastructure in line with CP7;

New north south link between A38 and Taunton Road;

Bus loop

Green wedge of 30 hectares

The development form and layout for Cades should provide; • A new neighbourhood that reflects the existing landscape character and the opportunities and constraints provided by natural features to create new neighbourhoods that are distinctive and memorable places; • Easy access to the town centre and connected street network; • Well designed public open spaces which are enclosed and overlooked by new development, create a green necklace around the town, and promote a positive relationship between new housing and existing communities.

SS5 A site of 8.67 hectares at Chelston None likely None The location is unlikely to Wellington – is allocated for (Use Classes have any effects on SAC Strategic B1,b,c, B2 and B8) employment sites Employment purposes. Subdivision of the site Site for more than one single use occupier will not be accepted

- 74 ­ Strategic Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Policy Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SS6 Staplegrove is a broad location for Potential loss of habitat, Hestercombe Policy is non locational and Staplegrove a mixed use urban extension for reduction in prey House SAC previous Appropriate Broad development after 2016 for availability from street Assessment ahs shown that Location for between 500 and 1,500 dwellings. lighting and perhaps there are potential impacts Growth A masterplan will be prepared to severance of flight lines. on Hestercombe House co-ordinate development to provide SAC (Somerset County the necessary physical, social and Council, 2009) green infrastructure. A piecemeal approach to development in this However, test of the policy area before a masterplan has been mentions the requirements agreed will not be permitted. for lesser horseshoe bats and development affecting Hestercombe House SAC. Development would be subject to Habitats Regulations Assessment at the SPD stage and at the project level.

SS7 Comeytrowe / Trull is a broad None likely None The location is unlikely to Comeytrowe / location for a mixed use strategic have any direct effects on Trull Broad urban extension for development SAC sites Location for after 2016 for between 1,000 and Growth 2,000 dwellings up to 2027. A Masterplan will be prepared to identify the full long term potential for development in this south west sector of Taunton and the infrastructure required to provide a sustainable new community. The masterplan will phase and co­ ordinate development to provide the necessary physical, social and green infrastructure. A piecemeal approach to development in this area before a comprehensive masterplan has been agreed will not be permitted.

- 75 ­ Strategic Brief Description Potential Impact on Natura 2000 Comment Policy Natura 2000 Sites sites Potentially Affected SS8 Taunton Over the period towards a Plan Potential loss of habitat, Hestercombe Policy is non locational and – Broad review in 2016 the Borough reduction in prey House SAC ‘overriding environmental Location for Council will work positively availability from street constraints’ is not specific or Strategic with the Business Community and lighting and perhaps defined Employment other stakeholders to establish an severance of flight lines evidenced need for an additional The area north of the A3259 strategic employment site to meet at Monkton Heathfield Taunton’s future medium to longer around the northern urban term growth requirements. If a edge of Taunton is need is proven, any such site must constrained by the presence be: of flight lines and feeding a. of a scale to secure strong areas used by lesser inward investment, raising the skills horseshoe bats from the base and profile of the Hestercombe House SAC. town; Radio tracking was carried b. well located in relation to the in 2005, 2007 and 2008 national route network; (Somerset County Council, c. targeted towards Class B (non 2009) office) use in order to complement rather than compete Night and satellite roosts with town centre office provide roosts away from opportunities; the main roost where lesser d. having no overriding horses bats will rest, feed environmental or physical and groom. These therefore constraints restricting development; perform a vital function in e. capable of delivery within agreed maintaining a population. timescales Loss is likely to lead to an area of foraging becoming out of reach or increased individual energy budgets26 .

- 76 ­ 8. Analysis of Effects on Natura 2000 Sites

Introduction 8.1 This section looks at the likely direct, indirect or secondary impacts of policy options, identified as potentially having a significant effect in Chapter 7, on the favourable condition of designated sites, alone or in-combination with other relevant plans.

8.2 A ‘significant effect’ is one that adversely affects a Natura 2000 site’s integrity with regard to the objectives and targets for which a site is designated by Natural England.

8.3 The determination of favourable condition is separate from the judgement of effect upon integrity. For example, there may be a time lag between a plan being implemented and a consequent adverse effect upon integrity becoming manifest in the condition assessment. In such cases, a plan may have an adverse effect upon integrity even though the site remains in favourable condition.

8.4 In addition, and in order to secure the long term presence and stability of Natura 2000 sites and the network, climate change should be a key consideration in the application of Habitat Regulations Assessment. Consideration should be given as to whether the plan inhibits in any way the potential of species to adapt to climate change.

Policies Requiring Further Screening 8.5 The policies that are considered for further assessment, highlighted in orange in Table 16 and 17, are listed in the following table. This is followed by more detailed consideration in the assessment Tables 19 to 23 subsequently in this Chapter. Only those features identified in the table are carried forward.

Table 18: Summary of Policies Requiring Further Assessment Policy Issue Natura 2000 Features Policy Assessed in: Sites Potentially Potentially Affected Affected CP1 – Climate Mortality from Exmoor and Barbastelle Bat Table 19 – Impacts as a result Change wind turbines Quantock Oak of wind turbine development Woodlands SAC

Habitat loss, Hestercombe Lesser severance or House SAC Horseshoe Bat degradation

CP2 - Economy Habitat loss, Hestercombe Lesser Table 20 – Impacts as result of severance or House SAC Horseshoe Bat built development degradation

Quants SAC Marsh Fritillary Butterfly

- 77 ­ Policy Issue Natura 2000 Features Policy Assessed in: Sites Potentially Potentially Affected Affected CP8 ­ Habitat loss, Hestercombe Lesser Table 23 – Impacts as result of Environment severance or House SAC Horseshoe Bat built development degradation (Strategic Sites)

SP1 – Habitat loss, Hestercombe Lesser Table 20 – Impacts as result of Sustainable severance or House SAC Horseshoe Bat built development Development degradation Locations

Recreational Exmoor Heaths Northern Atlantic Table 21 – Impacts from disturbance SAC wet heaths with increased recreational use and Erica tetralix visitor pressure (Cross-leaved heath)

European dry heaths

Blanket bogs

Exmoor & Old sessile oak Quantocks Oak woods with Ilex Woodlands (holly) and SAC Blechnum (fern) in the British Isles

Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa (alder) and Fraxinus excelsior (ash)

Barbastelle Bat

Mendip Semi-natural dry Limestone grasslands and Grasslands scrubland facies SAC on calcareous substrates

North Somerset Semi-natural dry and Mendip grasslands and Bats SAC scrubland facies on calcareous substrates

Air pollution Exmoor Heaths Blanket bog Table 22 – Impacts as a result SAC of air pollution Fens

- 78 ­ Policy Issue Natura 2000 Features Policy Assessed in: Sites Potentially Potentially Affected Affected Mendip Semi-natural dry Limestone grasslands and Grasslands scrubland facies SAC on calcareous substrates

SP2 - Realising Habitat loss, Hestercombe Lesser Table 20 – Impacts as result of the vision for severance or House SAC Horseshoe Bat built development Taunton degradation

Recreational Exmoor Heaths Northern Atlantic Table 21 – Impacts from disturbance SAC wet heaths with increased recreational use and Erica tetralix visitor pressure (Cross-leaved heath)

European dry heaths Vegetated sea cliffs of the Atlantic and Baltic coasts

Old sessile oak woods with Ilex (holly) and Blechnum (fern) in the British Isles

Exmoor & Old sessile oak Quantocks Oak woods with Ilex Woodlands (holly) and SAC Blechnum (fern) in the British Isles

Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa (alder) and Fraxinus excelsior (ash)

Barbastelle Bat

Bechstein’s Bat

Otter

Mendip Semi-natural dry Limestone grasslands and Grasslands scrubland facies SAC on calcareous substrates

- 79 ­ Policy Issue Natura 2000 Features Policy Assessed in: Sites Potentially Potentially Affected Affected European dry heaths North Somerset Semi-natural dry and Mendip grasslands and Bats SAC scrubland facies Mendip on calcareous Limestone substrates Grasslands Tilio-Acerion SAC forest of slopes, screes and ravines

Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies on calcareous substrates

Air pollution Mendip Semi-natural dry Table 22 – Impacts as a result Limestone grasslands and of air pollution Grasslands scrubland facies SAC on calcareous substrates

European dry heaths

North Somerset Semi-natural dry and Mendip grasslands and Bats SAC scrubland facies on calcareous substrates

Tilio-Acerion forest of slopes, screes and ravines

SP3 - Realising Recreational Exmoor Heaths Northern Atlantic Table 21 – Impacts from the vision for disturbance SAC wet heaths with increased recreational use and Wellington Erica tetralix visitor pressure (Cross-leaved heath)

European dry heaths

Vegetated sea cliffs of the Atlantic and Baltic coasts

- 80 ­ Policy Issue Natura 2000 Features Policy Assessed in: Sites Potentially Potentially Affected Affected Old sessile oak woods with Ilex (holly) and Blechnum (fern) in the British Isles

Exmoor & Old sessile oak Quantocks Oak woods with Ilex Woodlands (holly) and SAC Blechnum (fern) in the British Isles

Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa (alder) and Fraxinus excelsior (ash)

Barbastelle Bat

Bechstein’s Bat

Otter

Mendip Semi-natural dry Limestone grasslands and Grasslands scrubland facies SAC on calcareous substrates

European dry heaths North Somerset Semi-natural dry and Mendip grasslands and Bats SAC scrubland facies on calcareous substrates

Tilio-Acerion forest of slopes, screes and ravines

Air pollution Mendip Semi-natural dry Table 22 – Impacts as a result Limestone grasslands and of air pollution Grasslands scrubland facies SAC on calcareous substrates

European dry heaths

- 81 ­ Policy Issue Natura 2000 Features Policy Assessed in: Sites Potentially Potentially Affected Affected North Somerset Semi-natural dry and Mendip grasslands and Bats SAC scrubland facies on calcareous substrates

Tilio-Acerion forest of slopes, screes and ravines

SP4 - Realising Recreational Exmoor Heaths Northern Atlantic Table 21 – Impacts from the vision for the pressure SAC wet heaths with increased recreational use and Rural Areas Erica tetralix visitor pressure (Cross-leaved heath)

European dry heaths

Vegetated sea cliffs of the Atlantic and Baltic coasts

Old sessile oak woods with Ilex (holly) and Blechnum (fern) in the British Isles

Exmoor & Old sessile oak Quantocks Oak woods with Ilex Woodlands (holly) and SAC Blechnum (fern) in the British Isles

Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa (alder) and Fraxinus excelsior (ash)

Barbastelle Bat

Bechstein’s Bat

Otter

Mendip Semi-natural dry Limestone grasslands and Grasslands scrubland facies SAC on calcareous substrates

- 82 ­ Policy Issue Natura 2000 Features Policy Assessed in: Sites Potentially Potentially Affected Affected European dry heaths

North Somerset Semi-natural dry and Mendip grasslands and Bats SAC scrubland facies on calcareous substrates

Tilio-Acerion forest of slopes, screes and ravines

Air pollution Mendip Semi-natural dry Table 22 – Impacts as a result Limestone grasslands and of air pollution Grasslands scrubland facies SAC on calcareous substrates

European dry heaths

North Somerset Semi-natural dry and Mendip grasslands and Bats SAC scrubland facies on calcareous substrates

Tilio-Acerion forest of slopes, screes and ravines

DM6 – Use of Bat mortality Exmoor & Barbastelle Bat Table 19 – Impacts as a result Resources and Quantocks Oak of wind turbine development Sustainable Woodlands Design SAC

Habitat loss, Hestercombe Lesser severance or House SAC Horseshoe Bat degradation

SS1- Monkton Habitat loss, Hestercombe Lesser Table 23 – Impacts as result of Heathfield severance or House SAC Horseshoe Bat built development Strategic Site degradation Allocation Appendix 1 sets out the amount of offset planting required for the revised allocations using the methodology set out in the Appropriate Assessment for Hestercombe House SAC (Somerset County Council,

- 83 ­ Policy Issue Natura 2000 Features Policy Assessed in: Sites Potentially Potentially Affected Affected SS2 - 2009) Priorswood / Nerrols Strategic Site Allocation

SS8 Taunton – Habitat loss, Hestercombe Lesser Table 23 – Impacts as result of Broad Location severance or House SAC Horseshoe Bat built development for Strategic degradation Employment

Analysis 8.6 The following tables of analyses potential impacts on Natura 2000 sites and have been additionally informed by the HRA report, through a literature search and in consultation with stakeholders. The Precautionary Principle is used so that where an affect is uncertain it is assumed to be adverse.

8.7 Note: The assessment does not take into account counter-acting or preventative measures by way of mitigation at this stage. These are shown in Table 24 in the following section.

- 84 ­ Table 19 (Wind Turbines) CP1 – Climate Change / DM6 – Use of Resources and Sustainable Design

European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible Likely significant effect Other plans or Likely Overall likely site name feature Target impacts alone? projects in - significant significant effect combination effect in - conclusion combination? Exmoor & Barbastelle Rare in Britain. Population Quantocks Oak Bat The British pre- maintenance Wind Turbine Yes – barbastelle bats are Somerset Wind Yes Potential significant considered to be of Energy Initiative effect – Risk of Woodlands breeding Mortality SAC population was ‘medium risk’ to mortality mortality to bats if estimated at Mortality from from wind turbine incorrectly located 5000 in 1995. direct collision development. Barbastelle The worldwide and / or air roosts are located in old IUCN status pressure mature trees; typically (2001) for effects. A roosts are in woodland, barbastelle bats Canadian particularly unmanaged is Vulnerable. study woods. Roost sites are The barbastelle (Baerwald et changed frequently, is a UK al, 2008) it was sometimes every day. Biodiversity found that 90% They are known to cross Action Plan of the 75 bat open areas in commuting species, which fatalities (Boye & Dietz, 2005; means that it is a examined were Zeale 2009) However, a conservation killed by burst recently discovered roost priority on both a blood vessels in Somerset was in a local and in the lungs. single damaged tree in the national scale. middle of a field with no connectivity (pers. obs.) Wind turbine columns may represent large trees to barbastelle bats and hence a potential hazard. This may be especially so where turbines are located close to hedge lines and woodland.

- 85 ­ Table 19 (Wind Turbines) CP1 – Climate Change / DM6 – Use of Resources and Sustainable Design European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible Likely significant effect Other plans or Likely Overall likely site name feature Target impacts alone? projects in - significant significant effect combination effect in - conclusion combination? The lesser Maintenance Hestercombe Lesser horseshoe bat is of population Wind Turbine Uncertain – lesser Somerset Wind Uncertain – Potential significant House SAC Horseshoe a widespread horseshoe bats are Energy Initiative There are effect – Risk of loss Bat Habitat loss, unlikely to suffer mortality potentially or degradation of but rare species fragmentation in central and as the species is closely cumulative habitat to bats if and associated with habitat effects from incorrectly located southern degradation Individual Europe. It has features (e.g. Motte & developments other suffered Libois, 2002). However, north of Taunton development widespread construction associated allocated in Core within the EZI of population with development of sites Strategy Hestercombe declines, may result in House SAC especially in the fragmentation in flight more northern lines from access roads, parts of its habitat loss from range. The UK supporting infrastructure supports one of such as roads and the largest degradation of habitat populations of supporting prey species this species in (e.g. Rodrigues et al, western Europe. 2008). Impacts are likely to be of minor or moderate Hestercombe significance depending on House is a locational relationship to representative the roost site. roost in the south west. Monitoring has shown that the population has declined by 25% from the mid 1990s and the trend is continuing from monitoring in 2010

- 86 ­ Table 20 (Built development CP2 Economy/ SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP4 - Realising the vision for the Rural and Infrastructure) Areas / European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible Likely significant effect Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target impacts alone? or projects significant significant effect in - effect in - conclusion combination combination? The lesser Maintenance Habitat loss, Yes – lesser horseshoe bats Hestercombe Lesser horseshoe bat is a of population fragmentation are closely associated with Individual Uncertain – Potential House SAC Horseshoe widespread but and degradation habitat features (e.g. Motte developments There are significant effect – Bat rare species in due to non & Libois, 2002). However, north of potentially Risk of loss or Taunton cumulative degradation of central and locational as locations are not southern Europe. development specified development of allocated in pressure from habitat to bats It has suffered Built sites may result in Core Strategy other allocated widespread Development fragmentation in flight lines, development population including: habitat loss and degradation within the EZI of declines, of habitat supporting prey Hestercombe especially in the CP2 - Monkton species. Lesser horseshoe House SAC more northern Heathfield and bats are also disrupted from although parts of its range. on site flying along hedgerows by measures for The UK supports expansion of artificial light levels above offsetting habitat one of the largest institutions 0.5 Lux. It was also found loss should populations of this that continued disruption ensure that species in western SP1 - increased the effect, i.e. there is no Europe. development at lesser horseshoe bats do significant effect Taunton not become habituated to in the longer Hestercombe the presence of artificial term (see House is a SP2 - Monkton lighting and would therefore Somerset representative Heathfield park be permanently disrupted in County Council, roost in the south and ride their behaviour. (Stone et al, 2009) west. 2009) Monitoring has Cycle routes shown that the The development of a park population is SP4 – and ride site at Monkton continuing to development in Heathfield and cycle routes decline from the rural area between the town and mid 1990s to adjoining settlements (SP2) present in the north of the town could result in large areas of habitat loss to lesser horseshoe bats through fragmentation, direct habitat loss and displacement, and also from lighting.

- 87 ­ Table 20 (Built development CP2 Economy/ SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP4 - Realising the vision for the Rural and Infrastructure) Areas / European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible Likely significant effect Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target impacts alone? or projects significant significant effect in - effect in - conclusion combination combination? Now mainly Maintenance Habitat loss, No – depends on location of Quants SAC Marsh confined to of population fragmentation development in relation to None None likely No significant Fritillary western and and degradation dispersal routes between effect likely Butterfly northern parts of due to non individual populations within the UK. It has locational 2 kilometres of Quants become extinct development SAC. However, it is over a large part of Built considered that the scale of its former range, Development development is unlikely to having declined by including: be significant about 60% since records began. CP2 - on site The species expansion of continues to be institutions vulnerable in many parts of its range. SP4 – development in The site supports rural area a medium-sized but strong marsh fritillary population in a neutral grassland/fen mosaic. It is strategically placed close to other smaller sub- populations, with which it forms a metapopulation, and may exchange individuals with the large population at Southey Moor (outside the SAC series).

- 88 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion Exmoor North Atlantic Northern Atlantic wet Maintain area Habitat degradation No – the site is Sedgemoor, Uncertain – Core Heaths SAC wet heaths heaths with Erica and quality of Habitat deterioration remote from West Strategies Potential with Erica tetralix are restricted habitat and loss from Taunton Deane. Somerset and concerned also significant effect– tetralix to the Atlantic fringe trampling, (dwarf Exmoor National other DPD have to Habitat of Europe between shrubs reduced by Park visitor surveys from outside of accommodate deterioration and Norway and 50% cover with less indicate about 11% Somerset increased loss due to a Normandy. A high than 200 – 400 of visitors from geographic housing numbers, combination of proportion of the EU passages/year; Taunton. Other area (see which could result increased leisure resource occurs in nitrogen enrichment places in Taunton Exmoor visitor in increased use and tourist the UK. They occur from dog fouling can Deane would surveys) recreational use visits walking or throughout the UK change heath to increase this of the SAC. cycling. but are highly grassland. Wet heath percentage. Rights of Way localised in parts of plants are more However, pressure Management southern and central sensitive [Penny is unlikely to be Plan England, such as on Anderson Associates, significant from Exmoor. 2009] Taunton Deane alone and the habitat is unlikely to be subject to large visitor numbers

- 89 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion European dry European dry heaths Maintain area Habitat degradation No – the site is Sedgemoor, Uncertain – Core heaths are found in every and quality of Habitat deterioration remote from West Strategies Potential EU Member State habitat and loss from Taunton Deane Somerset and concerned also significant effect– except for Greece, trampling, (dwarf although there may other DPD have to Habitat but are only shrubs reduced by be some access from outside of accommodate deterioration and extensive in the 50% cover with less recreationally to Somerset increased loss due to a western oceanic than 200 – 400 tourist ‘hot spots’. geographic housing numbers, combination of fringes of Europe. A passages/year; dry area (see which could result increased leisure high proportion of the heath plants are more A survey produced Exmoor visitor in increased use and tourist EU resource of vulnerable when by on recreational surveys) recreational use visits walking or European dry heaths older or wet; nitrogen use of Exmoor’s of the SAC. cycling. occurs in the UK. enrichment from dog Moorlands reported Rights of Way They are more fouling can change the moors were Management localised in lowland heath to grassland underused with the Plan areas, especially in [Penny Anderson exception of south and central Associates, 2009] Dunkery Beacon, England, where they which was ‘being have declined in hammered’ extent due to afforestation, agricultural improvement and other land use change

- 90 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion Vegetated Vegetated sea cliffs Maintain area Habitat degradation No Sedgemoor, No – Core No significant sea cliffs of occur discontinuously and quality of None likely – the cliffs West Strategies effect likely the Atlantic along the west-facing habitat are unlikely to be Somerset and concerned also and Baltic coasts of Europe. visited except along other DPD have to coasts The UK supports a designated footpaths from outside of accommodate significant proportion by visitors from Somerset increased of EU sea cliff Taunton Deane. The geographic housing numbers, vegetation. South West Coast area (see which could result path is managed. Exmoor visitor in increased Main impacts are surveys) recreational use likely to be on the cliff of the SAC. tops or at the base Rights of Way However, it is not Management considered that a Plan significant effect would not occur for the reasons given

- 91 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion Old sessile Within the EU, old Maintain area Habitat degradation No – site is remote Taunton No – Core No significant oak woods sessile oak woods and quality of Habitat deterioration from Taunton Deane Deane, West Strategies effect likely with Ilex and with holly Ilex habitat and loss from being south and Somerset and concerned also Blechnum in aquifolium and hard- trampling (passages south west of other DPD have to the British ferns Blechnum spp. as low as 40 -50/year Porlock with from outside of accommodate Isles are virtually confined can eliminate species woodlands on the Somerset increased to the UK and - species of low Quantocks and east geographic housing numbers, Ireland. Old sessile productivity, Exmoor being area (see which could result oak woods are especially ancient easier to access Exmoor visitor in increased widespread and woodland flora; surveys) recreational use locally extensive lichens and some of the SAC. throughout the mosses) [Penny Rights of Way However, these western part of the Anderson Associates, Management are unlikely to UK. 2009]; nitrogen Plan significantly enrichment from dog increase numbers fouling [Footprint to the North Ecology, 2009] Exmoor SSSI

- 92 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion Exmoor and Old sessile Within the EU, old Maintain area Habitat degradation Uncertain – Taunton Yes – Core Potential Quantock oak woods sessile oak woods and quality of Habitat deterioration England Day Visits Deane, West Strategies significant effect ­ Oakwoods with Ilex and with holly Ilex habitat and loss from Survey indicates Somerset and concerned also Habitat SAC Blechnum in aquifolium and hard- trampling (passages that people typically other DPD have to deterioration and the British ferns Blechnum spp. as low as 40 -50/year travel 18.1 km to from outside of accommodate loss due to Isles are virtually confined can eliminate species visit a woodland site Somerset increased increased leisure to the UK and - species of low for the day. geographic housing numbers, use from walkers, Ireland. Old sessile productivity, Exmoor National area (see which could result dogs, cyclists, oak woods are especially ancient Park visitor surveys Quantock and in increased horse riders and widespread and woodland flora; indicate about 11% Exmoor visitor recreational use possibly off road locally extensive lichens and some of visitors from surveys) of the SAC. vehicles arising throughout the mosses) [Penny Taunton. from increased western part of the Anderson Associates, Quantocks visitor Rights of Way population due to UK. 2009]; nitrogen surveys indicate Management proposed enrichment from dog that substantial Plan development. fouling [Footprint numbers are Ecology, 2009] Somerset residents including from There is some Taunton. It is not erosion and known what use fragmentation of Taunton Deane habitats, almost visitors would make entirely on RoW in of the SAC. the Quantocks - there is very little vehicle intrusion into the oak woods (pers. comm. Chris Edwards, Quantocks AONB manager).

- 93 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion Alluvial In general, these Maintain area forests with riverine and flush and quality of Alnus woods are habitat glutinosa and widespread in Fraxinus Europe, but excelsior especially in the (Alno- more intensively Padion, agricultural and long- Alnion settled lowlands they incanae, are much reduced in Salicion cover, often to just albae) narrow strips or lines of trees.

Clearance of riverine woodland has eliminated most true alluvial forests in the UK. Many surviving fragments, as elsewhere in Europe, are fragmentary and often of recent origin.

- 94 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion Barbastelle Rare in Britain. The Maintenance Disturbance Uncertain – the Sedgemoor, Uncertain – Core Potential Bat British pre-breeding of population Disturbance from Exmoor sites are West Strategies significant effect Barbastella population was human activity more remote from Somerset and concerned also – disturbance to barbastellus estimated at 5000 in including increased Taunton Deane’s other DPD have to barbastelle 1995. The worldwide noise levels urban centres and from outside of accommodate roosts from IUCN status (2001) Bechstein’s roost therefore less likely Somerset increased increased use of for barbastelle bats is sites are in Exmoor to be accessed. geographic housing numbers, Quantock’s oak Vulnerable. The component sites However, Taunton area (see which could result woodlands barbastelle is a UK whilst Barbastelle are and Deane Exmoor visitor in increased resulting from Biodiversity Action recorded on Exmoor residents are more surveys) recreational use increased Plan species, which in Horner Woods and likely to access the of the SAC. numbers of means that it is a are likely to be Quantocks where Rights of Way However, residents due to conservation priority present in the there are likely to be Management pressure is development in on both a local and Quantocks oak roosts of barbastelle Plan unlikely to be Taunton Deane. national scale. woodlands. bats following significant from recent surveys Sedgemoor Barbastelle bats are carried out by the Bechstein’s Bechstein’s bat disturbed at roost Somerset Bat group Bat Myotis Myotis bechsteinii is sites by human and Somerset bechsteinii one of the rarest bats presence in small Environmental in western Europe, number at 75 metres Records Centre but and is regarded as in woodland () . as yet have not endangered in been identified. several countries. A population decrease has been reported over most of its European range.

Bechstein’s bat is one of the UK’s rarest mammals, recorded from only a small number of sites in southern England and Wales. Very few maternity roosts are currently known

- 95 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion Otter Lutra Currently it has a Maintenance Disturbance No – otter breeding Sedgemoor, No – Core No significant lutra rather discontinuous of population Disturbance from sites are likely to be West Strategies effect likely distribution. Over human activity located in remote Somerset and concerned also most of continental including from dogs wooded tributaries other DPD have to western Europe the and increased noise within its range on from outside of accommodate species is scarce to levels. Exmoor and Somerset increased extinct. currently geographic housing numbers, However, otters are inaccessible to area (see which could result The otter is still not present in dogs. Elsewhere Exmoor visitor in increased scarce over much of Quantock component disturbance is likely surveys) recreational use England, where the site. to be temporary. of the SAC. highest Rights of Way However, concentrations are in Management pressure is the south-west. Plan unlikely to be However, recent significant from surveys suggest that Sedgemoor the otter population is recovering well and recolonising parts of its former range

- 96 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion Mendip Semi-natural The cover of lowland Maintain area Recreational No – need to review Sedgemoor, Yes – Core Potential Limestone dry calcareous grassland and quality of pressure visitor data held by Mendip and Strategies significant effect ­ Grasslands grasslands has suffered a sharp habitat Habitat deterioration Mendips AONB but other DPD concerned also Habitat SAC and decline in extent over and loss due to it is unlikely that from outside of have to deterioration and scrubland the last 50 years. increased leisure use visitors from Somerset accommodate loss due to facies: on The site is from walkers, dogs, Taunton Deane geographic increased increased leisure calcareous exceptional in that it cyclists, horse riders make up a area housing numbers, use from walkers, substrates supports a number of and possibly off road significant particularly which could result dogs, cyclists, (Festuco- rare and scarce vehicles arising from proportion of visitors neighbouring in increased and horse riders Brometalia) vascular plants increased population - The West Mendip North recreational use arising from typical of the oceanic due to proposed Way - running along Somerset of the SAC. increased southern temperate development. the north edge of population due to and Mediterranean the site and Rights of Way proposed elements of the Habitat deterioration footpaths through Management development in British flora. and loss from the site. Site is open Plan combination with trampling (common access and heavily development pasture herbs are used for informal elsewhere more resilient; recreation. This has impacts greater on been identified by steep slopes; Natural England as sensitive species an issue on the site disappear on and besides paths and extend up to 50 metres either side, 400 passages/year could result in 50% loss) nitrogen enrichment from dog fouling. [Penny Anderson Associates, 2009]

The habitat itself is also under threat from its lack of management, therefore, increasing the significance of small losses.

- 97 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion European dry European dry heaths Maintain area Habitat degradation See assessment for Sedgemoor, Yes – Core Potential heaths are found in every and quality of Habitat deterioration Semi-natural dry Mendip and Strategies significant effect ­ EU Member State habitat and loss due to grasslands and other DPD concerned also Habitat except for Greece, increased leisure use scrubland facies: on from outside of have to deterioration and but are only from walkers, dogs, calcareous Somerset accommodate loss due to extensive in the cyclists, horse riders substrates geographic increased increased leisure western oceanic and possibly off road (Festuco- area housing numbers, use from walkers, fringes of Europe. A vehicles arising from Brometalia). particularly which could result dogs, cyclists, high proportion of the increased population Footpaths runs neighbouring in increased and horse riders EU resource of due to proposed through areas of dry North recreational use arising from European dry heaths development. heath and have Somerset of the SAC. increased occurs in the UK. degraded the population due to They are more Habitat deterioration habitat either side. Rights of Way proposed localised in lowland and loss from Management development. in areas, especially in trampling, (dwarf Plan combination with south and central shrubs reduced by development England, where they 50% cover with less Policies D7, elsewhere have declined in than 200 – 400 D8 and D12 extent due to passages/year; dry could also afforestation, heath plants are more contribute to a agricultural vulnerable when potential improvement and older or wet; nitrogen impact other land use enrichment from dog change fouling can change heath to grassland [Penny Anderson Associates, 2009]

- 98 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion North Semi-natural Maintain area Habitat degradation No – need to review Sedgemoor, Yes – Core Potential Somerset dry and quality of Habitat deterioration visitor data held by Mendip and Strategies significant effect ­ and Mendip grasslands habitat and loss from Mendips AONB. A other DPD concerned also Habitat Bats SAC and trampling (common public right of way from outside of have to deterioration and scrubland pasture herbs are runs along the Somerset accommodate loss due to facies: on more resilient; length of the Velvet geographic increased increased leisure calcareous impacts greater on Bottom and along area housing numbers, use from walkers, substrates steep slopes; the West Mendip particularly which could result dogs, cyclists, (Festuco- sensitive species Way and other neighbouring in increased and horse riders Brometalia) disappear on and footpaths run along North recreational use arising from besides paths and the south of the Somerset of the SAC. increased extend up to 50 Gorge in the population due to metres either side, Cheddar Complex Rights of Way proposed 400 passages/year components and is Management development in could result in 50% heavily used for Plan combination with loss) nitrogen informal recreation. development enrichment from dog However, likely that elsewhere

- 99 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion fouling. [Penny visitors from Anderson Associates, Taunton Deane 2009] Possible make up a increased use of significant rights of way may proportion of visitors lead to ‘nibbling’ at edges of habitat. Also nibbling from provision of car parking and use of unofficial car parking spaces in Cheddar Gorge

- 100 ­ Table 21 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Recreational the Rural Areas pressure) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - significant effect significant combination in -combination? effect conclusion Tilio-Acerion Tilio-Acerion has its Maintain area Habitat degradation No – footpath Sedgemoor, No – for reasons No significant forest of centre of distribution and quality of Habitat deterioration access and Mendip and given alone impact likely slopes, in continental habitat and loss from topography makes it other DPD screes and Europe, but is trampling, etc; unlikely that from outside of ravines widespread from nitrogen enrichment significant erosion Somerset Scandinavia through from dog fouling or trampling would geographic to the Pyrenees and occur in wooded area into Italy. areas. Rights of Way Tilio-Acerion forests Management are not extensive in Plan the UK, although fragmentary stands are widespread. The UK stands of Tilio- Acerion forests closest in composition to the stands in mainland Europe tend to occur on the upland- lowland boundary in England and on the Welsh border.

- 101 ­ Table 22 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Air the Rural Areas Pollution) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely significant Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - effect in - significant combination combination? effect conclusion Exmoor Blanket In the EU, Blanket Maintain Air quality No – Air quality Sedgemoor, No for reasons given No significant Heaths SAC bogs bogs are found species Potentially will impacts would arise West alone effect likely primarily in the UK and diversity and affect sensitive directly from increased Somerset and Ireland. Blanket bogs abundance bryophytes and traffic levels or from other DPD are found in the north lichens development. The from outside of and west of the UK, sites are remote from Somerset extending from Taunton Deane, and geographic in the south to separated by the area Shetland in the north. Brendon Hills. Blanket Scirpus – Eriophorum bog does not occur mire predominates in within 200 metres of the west, particularly main access routes at lower altitude, while although the road Calluna – Eriophorum between Simonsbath mire is particularly and Porlock runs abundant in the east through an area of and at higher altitudes. blanket bog it is Erica – Sphagnum considered that not mire is widely but significant numbers of patchily distributed. vehicles originating from Taunton Deane

- 102 ­ Table 22 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Air the Rural Areas Pollution) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely significant Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - effect in - significant combination combination? effect conclusion Alkaline A significant proportion Maintain would use this road. fens of the Alkaline fens species Taunton Deane aims surviving in the EU are diversity and to reduce CO2 believed to occur in abundance emissions from the UK and Sweden. development – Policy Alkaline fen vegetation DM6 has declined dramatically in the EU generally in the past century. Alkaline fens occur over a widely scattered geographical range in the UK, but are unevenly and locally distributed. Alkaline fen vegetation has declined dramatically in the past century in the UK, and in many parts of the country only small, fragmentary stands survive.

- 103 ­ Table 22 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Air the Rural Areas Pollution) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely significant Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - effect in - significant combination combination? effect conclusion Mendip Semi- The cover of lowland Maintain Air quality No ­ Sedgemoor, No – No significant Limestone natural dry calcareous grassland species Component 6 of It is considered that Mendip and Sites at Shute effect likely Grasslands grasslands has suffered a sharp diversity and the SSSI lies next nitrogen oxide other DPD Shelve are close to SAC and decline in extent over abundance to the A38. emissions from traffic from outside of Bristol Airport and scrubland the last 50 years. The Reference to the along the A38, Somerset the A38. Increased facies: on site is exceptional in Air Pollution generated in geographic flights from the calcareous that it supports a Information Sedgemoor as a result area. expanded Bristol substrates number of rare and System27 indicates of development, is airport and (Festuco- scarce vascular plants that nitrogen unlikely to significantly increased traffic from Brometalia) typical of the oceanic deposition is at contribute to increased the south may result southern temperate critical loading. nitrogen deposition. in increased air and Mediterranean NOx is well below pollution along the elements of the British critical level at The component sites A38 to access the flora. Shute Shelve of the Mendip airport and Bristol. However, over Limestone Grasslands time continued are lime-maple However, the A38 at exceedence of woodland ones which Shute Shelve is nitrogen do not support any likely to have had deposition would significant lichen much higher traffic in time cause communities; the levels in the past nitrogen oxides to grassland habitat is before the opening exceed critical more than 200 metres of the M5 loads as well in from the road. areas within 200 metres of main roads

- 104 ­ Table 22 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Air the Rural Areas Pollution) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely significant Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - effect in - significant combination combination? effect conclusion European European dry heaths Maintain Air quality No – Traffic generated Sedgemoor, No - the site lies No significant dry heaths are found in every EU species An area of dry by development in Mendip and more than 300 effect likely Member State except diversity and heath lays some Taunton and other DPD metres from the M5 for Greece, but are abundance 350 metres away elsewhere in the from outside of and in the zone only extensive in the from the M5 and Deane would add to Somerset where air quality western oceanic would be subject current traffic levels on geographic returns to fringes of Europe. A to deposition the M5. However, the area. background levels high proportion of the arising from traffic site lies more than 300 EU resource of using the metres from the M5 European dry heaths motorway. and in the zone where occurs in the UK. They air quality returns to are more localised in background levels lowland areas, especially in south and central England, where they have declined in extent due to afforestation, agricultural improvement and other land use change

- 105 ­ Table 22 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Air the Rural Areas Pollution) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely significant Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - effect in - significant combination combination? effect conclusion North Semi- The cover of lowland Maintain Air quality No – there would be Mendip, No – Core Strategies No significant Somerset natural dry calcareous grassland species The APIS data contributory emissions Sedgemoor concerned are likely effect likely. and Mendip grasslands has suffered a sharp diversity and shows that from vehicles on the and other DPD to have policy to Bats SAC and decline in extent over abundance nitrogen B3135 through from outside of encourage tourism However, under scrubland the last 50 years deposition at Cheddar Gorge, which Somerset and also to the Natural facies: on critical loading at runs through the geographic accommodate Environment and calcareous 22.3 kg N/ha/year. middle of the site. area increased housing Rural substrates The exceedence Population growth in numbers, which Communities Act (Festuco- range for Taunton Deane could could result in the District Brometalia) calcareous lead to increased use increased Council has a grassland is 7.3 to of the gorge for recreational use of responsibility for -2.7 kg N/ha/year recreation and hence the SAC leading to the conservation Nitrogen oxides vehicular access but access by car. of biodiversity, are well below would not be However, it is including exceeding critical considered significant unlikely that conservation of loads alone. However, there sensitive species in the rare lichen However, over are no sensitive the SAC citation Solorina saccata time continued species listed in the would be affected. exceedence of SAC citation the rare nitrogen lichen Solorina deposition would saccata is present in time cause close to the road near nitrogen oxides to the covered reservoir. exceed critical loads as well in areas within 200 metres of main roads

- 106 ­ Table 22 SP1 Sustainable Development Locations / SP2 - Realising the vision for Taunton / SP3 – Realising the vision for Wellington / SP4 - Realising the vision for (Air the Rural Areas Pollution) European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible impacts Likely significant Other plans Likely significant Overall likely site name feature Target effect alone? or projects in - effect in - significant combination combination? effect conclusion Tilio­ Tilio-Acerion has its Maintain Habitat No – there would be Mendip, No – Core Strategies No significant Acerion centre of distribution in species deterioration due contributory emissions Sedgemoor concerned are likely effect likely. forest of continental Europe, diversity and to decline in air from vehicles on the and other DPD to have policy to slopes, but is widespread from abundance quality B3135 through from outside of encourage tourism However, under screes and Scandinavia through The HRA of the Cheddar Gorge, which Somerset and also to the Natural ravines to the Pyrenees and draft RSS notes runs through the geographic accommodate Environment and into Italy. air pollution is middle of the site. area increased housing Rural above the critical Population growth in numbers, which Communities Act Tilio-Acerion forests load for ash Taunton Deane could could result in the District are not extensive in woodlands lead to increased use increased Council has a the UK, although of the gorge for recreational use of responsibility for fragmentary stands Nitrogen recreation and hence the SAC leading to the conservation are widespread. The deposition vehicular access but access by car. of biodiversity, UK stands of Tilio- exceeds critical would not be However, it is including Acerion forests loading at 43.1 kg considered significant unlikely that conservation of closest in composition N/ha/year. Critical alone. However, there sensitive species in the rare lichen to the stands in loads are are no sensitive the SAC citation Solorina saccata mainland Europe tend exceeded at species listed in the would be affected. to occur on the 28.1kg N/ha/year SAC citation the rare upland-lowland lichen Solorina boundary in England saccata is present and on the Welsh close to the road near border. the covered reservoir.

- 107 ­

Table 23 (Built development CP8 – Environment/ SS1 - Monkton Heathfield Strategic Site Allocation / SS2 - Priorswood / Nerrols Strategic Site Allocation / SS6 and Infrastructure) Staplegrove Broad Location for Growth / SS8 Taunton – Broad Location for Strategic Employment European Qualifying Sensitivity Conservation Possible Likely significant effect Other plans Likely Overall likely site name feature Target impacts alone? or projects significant significant effect in - effect in - conclusion combination combination? The lesser Maintenance Habitat loss, Yes – lesser horseshoe bats Hestercombe Lesser horseshoe bat is a of population fragmentation are closely associated with Individual Uncertain – Potential House SAC Horseshoe widespread but and degradation habitat features (e.g. Motte developments There are significant effect – Bat rare species in due to reliance & Libois, 2002). However, north of potentially Risk of loss or Taunton cumulative degradation of central and on out of date as locations are not southern Europe. site allocation specified development of allocated in pressure from habitat to bats It has suffered boundaries and sites may result in Core Strategy other allocated widespread non locational fragmentation in flight lines, development population development habitat loss and degradation within the EZI of declines, of habitat supporting prey Hestercombe especially in the species. Lesser horseshoe House SAC more northern bats are also disrupted from although parts of its range. flying along hedgerows by measures for The UK supports artificial light levels above offsetting habitat one of the largest 0.5 Lux. It was also found loss should populations of this that continued disruption ensure that species in western increased the effect, i.e. there is no Europe. lesser horseshoe bats do significant effect not become habituated to in the longer Hestercombe the presence of artificial term (see House is a lighting and would therefore Somerset representative be permanently disrupted in County Council, roost in the south their behaviour. (Stone et al, 2009) west. 2009) Monitoring has shown that the Policies CP8, SS1 and SS2 population is states that offset habitat will continuing to be created in accordance decline from the with the Hestercombe mid 1990s to House SAC Appropriate present Assessment. However, as site areas have been revised since the assessment. Policy SS8 is non locational and does not make mention of potential effects on Hestercombe House SAC

- 108 ­ Counter-acting Measures and Conclusions

8.8 This section analyses those policies where a significant effect has been potentially identified in the detailed screening tables above. The table below lists each policy, the potential impact arising from implementation of the policy and recommends counter-acting measures to negate the potential significant effect.

8.9 Policies where counter-acting measures, at this stage, do not negate the potential for a significant effect may require a Stage 2 ‘Appropriate Assessment’ if significant effects cannot be negated at this stage.

Table 24: Counter-acting Measures and Conclusions Policy Natura 2000 Feature Potential Issue Counter -acting Conclusion Measure CP1 Climate Exmoor and Barbastelle Mortality from Amending text in No significant effect Change Quantocks Bat wind turbines policy wording item if: Oak g. Woodlands Policy and SAC Additional supporting text statement in amended supporting text referring to potential effects on bats and referring to Policy Hestercombe Lesser Loss, CP8. House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation Bat or degradation ‘Bat Consultation of habitat Zones’ with mapping identifying areas used by SAC bats. This is covered in Policy CP8

CP2 Economy Hestercombe Lesser Loss, Extensions to No further action House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation institutions in the needed Bat or degradation countryside would of habitat be covered by the provisions of Policy DM2 which states that all must be compliant with the Habitats Regulations 2010 and any subsequent amendment

CP8 Environment Hestercombe Lesser Loss, Amend text to omit No significant effect House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation hectare requirement if: Bat or degradation under Hestercombe of habitat House Appropriate If supporting text Assessment amended

- 109 ­ Policy Natura 2000 Feature Potential Issue Counter -acting Conclusion Measure SP1 – Hestercombe Lesser Loss, ‘Bat Consultation No further action Sustainable House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation Zones’ with needed Development Bat or degradation mapping identifying Locations of habitat areas used by SAC bats. This is covered in Policy CP8

Exmoor Northern Recreational Exmoor National No further action Heaths SAC Atlantic wet disturbance Park Authority needed heaths manages the rights of way within the European dry National Park. This heaths is reinforced with a policy for the Old sessile development of oak woods natural areas in a

green infrastructure to Natural England’s Accessible Natural Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

Exmoor and Old sessile Recreational Exmoor National No further action Quantocks oak woods pressure Park Authority needed Oakwoods manages the rights SAC of way within the National Park. Alluvial Quantocks AONB forests with management plan common has policies to alder and ash monitor and close off areas where erosion is occurring Barbastelle from public access. Bats This is reinforced with a policy for the development of Bechstein’s natural areas in a Bats green infrastructure to Natural England’s Accessible Natural Otter Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

Mendip Semi natural Mendip Hills AONB Limestone dry grassland management plan Grasslands and has policies to SAC scrubland monitor and close off areas where erosion is occurring from public access. This is reinforced European dry with a policy for the heaths development of

- 110 ­ Policy Natura 2000 Feature Potential Issue Counter -acting Conclusion Measure North Semi natural natural areas in a Somerset and dry grassland green infrastructure Mendip Bats and to Natural England’s SAC scrubland Accessible Natural Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

SP2 – Realising Hestercombe Lesser Loss, ‘Bat Consultation No significant effect the vision for House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation Zones’ with if: Taunton Bat or degradation mapping identifying of habitat areas used by SAC Policy and bats. This is supporting text Park and ride covered in Policy amended Cycle ways CP8.

Policy SS1 states that the park and ride site at Monkton Heathfield will be located south of the A39 west of Walford Cross.

Additional statement in supporting text on cycling referring to potential effects on bats.

Exmoor Northern Recreational Exmoor National No further action Heaths SAC Atlantic wet disturbance Park Authority needed heaths manages the rights of way within the National Park. This European dry is reinforced with a heaths policy for the development of natural areas in a green infrastructure to Natural England’s Old sessile Accessible Natural oak woods Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

Exmoor and Old sessile Recreational Exmoor National No further action Quantocks oak woods disturbance Park Authority needed Oakwoods manages the rights SAC Alluvial of way within the forests with National Park. common Quantocks AONB alder and ash management plan has policies to Barbastelle monitor and close Bats off areas where erosion is occurring from public access.

- 111 ­ Policy Natura 2000 Feature Potential Issue Counter -acting Conclusion Measure Bechstein’s This is reinforced Bats with a policy for the development of natural areas in a Otter green infrastructure to Natural England’s Accessible Natural Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

Mendip Semi natural Mendip Hills AONB No further action Limestone dry grassland management plan needed Grasslands and has policies to SAC scrubland monitor and close off areas where European dry erosion is occurring heaths from public access. This is reinforced with a policy for the development of North Semi natural No further action natural areas in a Somerset and dry grassland needed green infrastructure Mendip Bats and to Natural England’s SAC scrubland Accessible Natural Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

SP3 – Realising Exmoor Northern Recreational Exmoor National No further action the vision for Heaths SAC Atlantic wet disturbance Park Authority needed Wellington heaths manages the rights of way within the European dry National Park. This heaths is reinforced with a policy for the development of Old sessile natural areas in a oak woods green infrastructure

to Natural England’s Accessible Natural Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

Exmoor and Old sessile Recreational Exmoor National No further action Quantocks oak woods disturbance Park Authority needed Oakwoods manages the rights SAC of way within the Alluvial National Park. forests with Quantocks AONB common management plan alder and ash has policies to monitor and close Barbastelle off areas where Bats erosion is occurring from public access. This is reinforced

- 112 ­ Policy Natura 2000 Feature Potential Issue Counter -acting Conclusion Measure Bechstein’s with a policy for the Bats development of natural areas in a green infrastructure Otter to Natural England’s Accessible Natural Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

Mendip Semi natural Mendip Hills AONB No further action Limestone dry grassland management plan needed Grasslands and has policies to SAC scrubland monitor and close off areas where erosion is occurring European dry from public access. heaths This is reinforced

with a policy for the development of natural areas in a No further action North Semi natural green infrastructure needed Somerset and dry grassland to Natural England’s Mendip Bats and Accessible Natural SAC scrubland Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

SP4 – Realising Hestercombe Lesser Loss, ‘Bat Consultation No further action the vision for the House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation Zones’ with needed Rural Areas Bat or degradation mapping identifying of habitat areas used by SAC bats. This is covered in Policy CP8.

Exmoor Northern Recreational Exmoor National No further action Heaths SAC Atlantic wet disturbance Park Authority needed heaths manages the rights of way within the National Park. This European dry is reinforced with a heaths policy for the development of natural areas in a green infrastructure to Natural England’s Old sessile Accessible Natural oak woods Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

Exmoor and Old sessile Recreational Exmoor National No further action Quantocks oak woods disturbance Park Authority needed Oakwoods manages the rights SAC Alluvial of way within the forests with National Park. common Quantocks AONB alder and ash management plan has policies to

- 113 ­ Policy Natura 2000 Feature Potential Issue Counter -acting Conclusion Measure Barbastelle monitor and close Bats off areas where erosion is occurring from public access. Bechstein’s This is reinforced Bats with a policy for the development of natural areas in a Otter green infrastructure to Natural England’s Accessible Natural Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

Mendip Semi natural Mendip Hills AONB No further action Limestone dry grassland management plan needed Grasslands and has policies to SAC scrubland monitor and close off areas where erosion is occurring European dry from public access. heaths This is reinforced

with a policy for the development of North Semi natural natural areas in a No further action Somerset and dry grassland green infrastructure needed Mendip Bats and to Natural England’s SAC scrubland Accessible Natural Green Space Standard in Policy CP8

DM6 – Use of Exmoor and Barbastelle Mortality from Amending text in No significant effect Resources and Quantocks Bat wind turbines policy wording item if: Sustainable Oak e. Off site Design Woodlands generation. Policy text SAC amended

Hestercombe Lesser Loss, ‘Bat Consultation No further action House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation Zones’ with needed Bat or degradation mapping identifying of habitat areas used by SAC bats. This is covered in Policy CP8.

SS1- Monkton Hestercombe Lesser Loss, Additional No significant effect Heathfield House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation statement in if: Strategic Site Bat or degradation supporting text Allocation of habitat Additional Appendix 1 sets out statement in the likely amount of supporting text offsite offset habitat creation required to develop the site

- 114 ­ Policy Natura 2000 Feature Potential Issue Counter -acting Conclusion Measure SS2 - Priorswood Hestercombe Lesser Loss, Additional No significant effect / Nerrols House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation statement in if: Strategic Site Bat or degradation supporting text Allocation of habitat Additional Appendix 1 sets out statement in the likely amount of supporting text offsite offset habitat creation required to develop the site

SS8 Taunton – Hestercombe Lesser Loss, ‘Bat Consultation No further action Broad Location for House SAC Horseshoe fragmentation Zones’ with needed Strategic Bat or degradation mapping identifying Employment of habitat areas used by SAC bats. This is covered in Policy CP8.

- 115 ­ 9. Recommendations

Introduction

9.1 This section outlines what further action is required to ensure that the Taunton Deane Borough Council’s Core Strategy is compliant with the requirements of the Habitats Regulations at its Regulation 27 Stage. It first summarises amendments and /or changes to policy to the draft Core Strategy, and secondly, identifies what issues arising form the Core Strategy assessment where a further stage 2 (Appropriate Assessment) of the HRA process would be required.

Recommended Policy Amendments and Additions

9.2 It is recommended that the following policy amendments and/or additions be made to the draft Regulation 27 stage Core Strategy. Adoption of these measures should eliminate the need to make any further assessment necessary in the HRA process and would ensure that the plan is compliant with the requirements of the Habitats Regulations with regard to Natura 2000 sites except where the need for an Appropriate Assessment is stated in Table 24 above.

CP1 Climate Change 9.3 Policy item ‘g. impact on the community, economy, nature conservation or historic interests do not outweigh the economic and wider environmental benefits of the proposal’ should add the wording, ‘…it is compliant with the Habitats Regulations 2010 and any subsequent amendment, and.’

9.4 The supporting text of the policy should mention after the final paragraph that there are potentially adverse impacts of wind turbine development on bats from collision and barotrauma resulting in mortality and make reference to the text on bat populations and the Bat Consultation Zone in CP8. Mention in the text of this policy could also refer to that Taunton Deane Borough Council is located in southern England; has large areas below 200metres OD; and has widespread occurrences of bats species, such as noctule bats, and is therefore, according to criteria produced by Natural England (Matthews et al, 2009; Mitchell-Jones & Carlin, 2009) and Catherine and Spray (2009), an area of ‘high risk’ to bats. Text should also mention that it essential that the right locations in the Borough are chosen for allocating wind turbine developments.

CP8 Environment 9.5 Amend supporting text to policy in Local Policy Context under the heading Hestercombe House Appropriate Assessment (AA) by omitting second paragraph third sentence setting out hectares of offsite offset planting as this data is now out

- 116 ­ of date. This sentence should be replaced by the statement, ‘The amount of offset offsite planting required for each affected allocation site will be updated with the most recent available data in any allocations SPD and subsequently in a Habitats Regulations Assessment at the time of the application.’

SP2 – Realising the vision for Taunton 9.5 The supporting text of the policy should mention after that cycle routes outside of development areas linking to adjoining settlements will need to be designed so that they are sensitive to the requirements of lesser horseshoe bats from the Hestercombe House SAC

DM6 – Use of Resources and Sustainable Design 9.6 The text of policy item e. ‘Off site generation (where a direct link is provided to the development)’ should be revised to state, ‘Off site generation (where a direct link is provided to the development and is also compliant with regard to the Habitats Regulations 2010 and subsequent amendments)’.

SS1- Monkton Heathfield Strategic Site Allocation 9.7 The supporting text of the policy should add at the end of paragraph commencing, ‘In allocating this site the impact on landscape and the ecological value…’ the following statement, ‘It should be noted that the area of offsite offset planting has changed since the Appropriate Assessment (Somerset County Council, 2009) and the area will be recalculated according to the revised allocation boundaries and the latest survey data acquired. It is also critical that if development takes place north of the A3259 before that south of the road to the east of Greenway that surveys for lesser horseshoe bats are also carried out south of the A3259 in order that any use of this area by the bats is determined to avoid the effects of isolation. Any use of the area south of the A3259 by lesser horseshoe bats is likely to increase the amount of offsite offset planting due to development north of the road, if developed prior to that of the allocated area south of the road, significantly.’

SS2 - Priorswood / Nerrols Strategic Site Allocation 9.8 The supporting text of the policy should add at the end of paragraph commencing, ‘In allocating this site the impact on landscape and the ecological value…’ the following statement, ‘It should be noted that the area of offsite offset planting has changed since the Appropriate Assessment (Somerset County Council, 2009) and the area will be recalculated according to the revised allocation boundaries and the latest survey data acquired

- 117 ­

Habitat Regulations Assessment Step 2 – Scoping and Further Information Gathering for Appropriate Assessment

9.7 It is considered that a Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment will not be required providing that the measures outlined above are adopted into the final Published Plan Core Strategy.

- 118 ­ 10. Conclusion

10.1 It is considered that provided the counter acting measures as set out in Chapter 9 are incorporated into the final Core Strategy that the plan is unlikely to have a significant effect on the conservation objectives of the Natura 2000 sites assessed.

- 119 ­ Bibliography

ADAS. 2009. Ecology Chapter: Environmental Statement for Proposed Housing at Maidenbrook Farm, Taunton. Exeter, Tarker Ltd.

ADAS. 2010. Updated Ecology Chapter: Environmental Statement for Proposed Housing at Maidenbrook Farm, Taunton. Exeter, Tarker Ltd.

Arlettaz, R., Godat, S. & Meyer, H. 2000. Competition for food by expanding pipistrelle bat populations (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) might contribute to the decline of lesser horseshoe bats (Rhinolophus hipposideros): in Biological Conservation 93 (2000) 55­ 60.

Baerwald, E. F., D'Amours, G. H., Klug, B. J. & Barclay, R. M. R. 2008. Barotrauma is a significant cause of bat fatalities at wind turbines: in Current Biology, 18, 16, R695­ R696, 26 August 2008

Bignall, K., Ashmore, M. & Power, S. 2004. The ecological effects of diffuse air pollution from road transport. English Nature Research Report No. 580. Peterborough: English Nature.

Bontadina, F., Schmied, S.F., Beck, A. & Arlettaz, R. 2008. Changes in prey abundance unlikely to explain the demography of a critically endangered Central European bat: in Journal of Applied Ecology, 2008, 45, 641–648

Boye, Dr. P. & Dietz, M. 2005. English Nature Research Reports Number 661: Development of good practice guidelines for woodland management for bats. Peterborough: English Nature.

Cathrine, C. & Spray, S. 2009. Bats and Onshore Wind Farms: Site-by-Site Assessment and Post- Construction Monitoring Protocols: in In Practice, June 2009

Department for Communities and Local Government. 2006. Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Appropriate Assessment Under The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 20006 – Guidance for Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents. DCLG, London

Dodd, A.M., Cleary, B. E., Dawkins, J. S., Byron, H. J., Palframan, L. J. & Williams, G. M. 2007. The Appropriate Assessment of Spatial Plans in England. Sandy: Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

Ecology Solutions Ltd. 2010. Birds Farm, Monkton Heathfield, Taunton, Somerset. Ecological Assessment.

Emery, M. 2008. Effect of Street Lighting on Bats. Urbis Lighting Ltd.

- 120 ­ Entec, 2010a. The Crown Estate, Nerrols, North East Taunton. Information to Inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment. October 2010. Leamington Spa: Entec UK Ltd

Entec, 2010b. The Crown Estate, Nerrols, North East Taunton. Ecological Baseline Report August 2010. Leamington Spa: Entec UK Ltd

Entwhistle, A. C., Harris, S., Hutson, A. M., Racey, P. A., Walsh, A., Gibson S. D., Hepburn, I. & Johnston, J. 2001. Habitat management for bats: A guide for land managers, landowners and their advisors. JNCC, Peterborough.

Fowles, A. P. 2003, amended 2004. Guidance Notes for the Definition and Mapping of Habitat Quality for Marsh Fritillaries (Natural Science Report No. 03/5/01). Cardiff: Countryside Council for Wales

Fowles, A. P. 2005. Habitat Quality Mapping for Marsh Fritillary Populations (Natural Science Report No. 05/5/1) Cardiff: Countryside Council for Wales

Frank, K. D. 1988. Impact of Outdoor Lighting on Moths: An Assessment. Journal of the Lepidopterist’s Society, 42(2), 1988, 63 – 93.

Hobson, R., Brown, N. & Warren, M. 2002. Conserving the Marsh Fritillary in Britain: in British Wildlife, 13, 405-411

Hoskin, R. & Tyldesley, D. 2006. How the scale of effects on internationally designated nature conservation sites in Britain has been considered in decision making: A review of authorative decisions. English Nature Research Report No. 704. Peterborough: English Nature.

Hötker, H., Thomsen, K-M. & Jeromin, H. 2006. Impacts on biodiversity of exploitation of renewable energy sources: the example of birds and bats. Norderstedt: Books on Demand GmbH

Huemer, Dr. P., Kühtreiber, H. & Tarman, Dr. G. 2010. Anlockwirkung moderner Leuchtmittel auf nachtaktive Insekten: Ergebnisse einer Feldstudie in Tirol. Innsbruck: Tiroler Landesumweltanwaltschaft & Tiroler Landesmuseen Betriebsgesellschaft mbH.

Jones, Dr. G. & Billington, G. 1999. Radio tracking study of greater horseshoe bats at Cheddar, North Somerset. Peterborough: English Nature.

Knight, T. & Jones, G. 2009. Importance of night roosts for bat conservation: roosting behaviour of the lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros: in Endang. Spec. Res. doi: 10.3354/esr00194

Land Use Consultants. 2006. Habitats Regulations Report of the Draft South West Regional Spatial Strategy: Screening Report. Taunton: South West Regional Assembly.

- 121 ­ Land Use Consultants. 2008. South West Regional Spatial Strategy Proposed Changes: Habitat Regulations Assessment Final Report. London: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

Liley, D. et al. 2005. English Nature Research Report 682: Visitor access patterns on the Thames Basin Heaths. Peterborough: English Nature,

Matthews, J., Mitchell-Jones, T. & Raynor, R. 2009. Natural England Technical Information Note TIN059 Bats and single large wind turbines: Joint Agencies interim guidance. Peterborough: Natural England.

Mitchell-Jones, T. 2004. Bat Mitigation Guidelines. Peterborough: Natural England.

Mitchell-Jones, T. & Carlin, C. 2009. Natural England Technical Information Note TIN051 Bats and onshore wind turbines: Interim guidance. Peterborough: Natural England.

Motte, G. & Libois, R. 2002. Conservation of the lesser horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus hipposideros Bechstein, 1800) (Mammalia: Chiroptera) in Belgium. A case study in feeding requirements: in Belg. J. Zool., 132 (1): 47-52.

Natural England. 2009. Green Infrastructure Guidance: Report NE176. Peterborough: Natural England. http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/35033

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. 2006. Planning for Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – A Guide to Good Practice. London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office

Outen, A. R. 2002. The ecological effects of road lighting: in Sherwood, B., Cutler D. & Burton J. (eds.) 2002. Wildlife and Roads: The Ecological Impact. London: Imperial College Press.

Puttick, R. 2004. Recreational Use of Exmoor’s Moorlands – a study for the Exmoor National Park Authority. Dulverton: Exmoor National Park Authority

Rodrigues, L., Bach, L., Duborg-Savage, M-J., Goodwin, J. & Harbusch. 2008. Guidelines for the consideration of bats in wind farm projects. EUROBATS Publication Series No. 3 (English Version). Bonn: UNEP / EUROBATS

Schtickzelle, N., Choutt, J., Goffart, P., Fichefet, V. & Baguette, M. 2005. Metapopulation dynamics and conservation of the marsh fritillary butterfly: Population viability analysis and management options for a critically endangered species in Western Europe: in Biological Consevation 126 (2005) 569-581

Scott Wilson, Levett-Therivel Sustainability Consultants, Treweek Environmental Consultants & Landuse Consultants. 2006. Appropriate Assessment of Plans. Scott

- 122 ­ Wilson, Levett-Therivel Sustainability Consultants, Treweek Environmental Consultants & Landuse Consultants

Somerset County Council. 2009. Somerset Econet project. Wellington: Somerset Environmental Records Centre.

South West Regional Assembly. 2006. The Draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West 2006 – 2026. Taunton: South West Regional Assembly.

Stone, E.L., Jones, G., & Harris, S. 2009. Street lighting disturbs commuting bats. Current Biology 19, 1123-1127.

Tarker Ltd. 2009. Environmental Statement for Proposed Housing at Maidenbrook Farm, Taunton. Exeter, Tarker Ltd.

Underhill-Day, J. C. 2005. A literature review of urban effects on lowland heaths and their wildlife. English Nature Research Report No. 623. Peterborough: English Nature.

Zeale, M. 2009. Barbastelles in the Landscape: Ecological Research and Conservation in Dartmoor National Park. Report for Dartmoor National Park/ SITA Trust.

- 123 ­ Appendix 1 – Recalculation of Offsite Offset Habitat Creation

Introduction A.1 This chapter sets out the likely amount of offsite offset habitat creation that will be required as a result of development at Monkton Heathfield and Nerrols to ensure that there would be no adverse effects on the population of lesser horseshoe bats at Hestercombe House SAC. This updates calculations given in the Appropriate Assessment for Hestercombe House SAC from potential effects of the Core Strategy Site Allocations (Somerset County Council, 2009).

A.2 As well as amendments and additions to site allocation areas as set out in the Published Plan Core Strategy further survey work has been carried out as a result of planning applications which has caused amendments to the ‘Combined’ and ‘Inferred’ Areas as set out in the Appropriate Assessment (Somerset County Council, 2009). In addition, changes in the way that offsets are calculated have been agreed with Natural England.

A.3 The allocation sites for which calculations of offset planting are carried out are:

• Nerrols / Priorswood (North) • Nerrols / Priorswood (South) • North of Anghill’s Farm • West of Greenway • Hartnell’s Farm • East of Proctors Farm

Calculation of Offsets Methodology A.4 This section summarises the methodology set out in the Appropriate Assessment (Somerset County Council, 2009) and details modifications to this. The amount of offset habitat planting required due to development in the zone of influence of Hestercombe Hose SAC was calculated on the basis of suitability and area (hectares). Suitability of habitat was measured through a Habitat Suitability Index for lesser horseshoe bats on a decimal scale of 0 to 1 against Habitat and Matrix Codes of the Integrated Habitat System (IHS) developed by Somerset Environmental Records Centre (SERC). The HSI scored habitat polygons are further adjusted by the use of ‘landscape modifiers’. Landscape modifiers consider the ‘available area’ and ‘core areas’, identified by the Minimum Convex Polygons (MCPs) described in the Appropriate Assessment report (Somerset County Council 2009); accessibility of foraging habitat by lesser horseshoe bats; the availability of supporting prey producing habitat. In addition, an ‘inferred area’ is considered. These are will be used to identify modifications to the HSI scores (‘landscape modifiers’).

A.5 In the Appropriate Assessment report (Somerset County Council, 2009) MCP

- 124 ­ were produced around all radio-tracking records from Hestercombe House to identify the ‘available area’ in the landscape likely to be used by lesser horseshoe bats. ‘Core areas’ are also identified from reported high levels of lesser horseshoe bat activity given in the radio tracking reports (Billington, 2005; Duvergé, 2009). These areas have been combined for the purposes of assessment to provide the landscape area where bat activity has been identified; the Combined Area.

A.6 In addition, an area outside the has been produced by buffering the combined available/core area by 350 metres to allow for bats foraging outside of the area defined by the radio tracking fixes. This buffer, the Inferred Area, is a precautionary approach to include bats not picked up through radio tracking. Note: only a small proportion of the colony’s bats were tagged in each of the surveys (4%-9%).

A.7 The landscape modifiers adjust the HSI scores through application of known landscape use by lesser horseshoe bats derived from radio tracking and field survey, as to whether the habitat is accessible. Habitats not adjacent to flight lines are also considered to support prey hunted by lesser horseshoe bats, as this is mobile. The procedure to identify flight lines is given in Appropriate Assessment report (Somerset County Council 2009).

A.8 Feeding habitats adjacent to flight lines are identified and scored at full HSI value. The flight lines are shown with the combined available and core areas. Flight lines form part of the ‘landscape modifiers’ to HSI scores.

A.9 Since the publication of the Appropriate Assessment report (Somerset County Council, 2009) the records of lesser horseshoe bats made during field surveys has been used to amend the ‘Combined’ and ‘Inferred’ areas. These include the record made during the Nerrols Farm survey (Entec, 2010b) and records from Maidenbrook Farm (ADAS, 2010), where fixes were picked up along the east- west hedgerow running across the site and at the Allen’s Brook culvert under the A3259. As it cannot be concluded that these bats do not originate from Hestercombe House it is assumed that they do using the precautionary approach. Field data from surveys (Ecosulis, 2006) was used in forming the combined and inferred areas for the Appropriate Assessment report.

A.10 As the new survey records are likely to be from only one bat and no other fixes are known the MCP for the combined area has been extended based on nearest neighbour bat fixes and the extent of flight lines that enable a lesser horseshoe bat to reach the point of recording. It is assumed that lesser horseshoe bats will use habitat features in commuting around the landscape.

A.11 Flight lines are also re-examined since the Appropriate Assessment report (Somerset County Council, 2009) where 2 metre high hedgerows not previously designated as flight lines but now considered likely to be used for access have

- 125 ­ been included along with short lengths of hedgerow recorded as being over 1 metre high. Where there are flight lines with no records they have not been included in the ‘Combined Area’. The revised Combined and Inferred Areas and Flight Lines are shown in Map 4.

Map 4: Revised Combined and Inferred Areas and Flight Lines

A12 A ‘landscape modifier’ is included for the presence of pipistrelle bats, which compete for the same resources as lesser horseshoe bats and are favoured by urban development (Arlettaz et al, 2000; Bontadina et al, 2008)

A.13 Another landscape modifier now considered in the calculation of offset habitat creation is the presence of existing streetlights along the border of a site proposed for development. As afore mentioned lesser horseshoe bat behaviour is aversely affected by artificial illumination of above 0.5 Lux and introduction causes this behavioural change to be permanent (Stone et al, 2009). Behind a street lamps light levels fall to 0.5 Lux at about 25 to 30 metres (Emery, 2008)

A.14 In addition to denying access street lighting will reduce the availability of prey available to lesser horseshoe bats and thereby the value of the habitat affected.

- 126 ­ Moths and other flying insects are attracted to streetlights, with high-pressure sodium and particularly mercury lamps attracting most insects (Outen, 2002). This includes insects that form part of the diet of lesser horseshoe bats. A study in Austria estimated that about 150 insects per street lamp per night were lost (Huemer et al, 2010).

A.15 At Maidenbrook Farm lesser horseshoe bat(s) were recorded foraging along a hedgerow across an open field from street lights behind a cycleway / footpath at a distance of about 110 to 120 metres. ADAS reported an abundance of invertebrates along the hedgerow in their survey of 2009. Frank (1988) reported moths only being attracted to 125W light source at less than 10 metres. Therefore, it is considered that a distance of 30 metres in open habitat and 15 metres in wooded habitat would be appropriate as a zone along the back of street lights where habitat value for lesser horseshoe bats should be reduced to 0.

A.16 In summary ‘landscape modifiers’ used to modify HSI scores are:

• Combined Area – an area determined by positive surveys for lesser horseshoe bats and formed using MCP and nearest neighbour parameters. This is based on radio tracking carried out in 2005, 2007 and 2008 plus data from field surveys. This will be updated as further data becomes available.

• Inferred Area – an area buffering the Combined Area to account for use outside the recorded area and habitat supporting prey species

• Flight Lines – habitat structure such as hedgerows which are used by lesser horseshoe bats to access feeding areas

• Artificial Lighting – existing areas which are artificially lit be street lights which would be inaccessible to lesser horseshoe bats and also denude surrounding areas of prey species.

• Pipistrelle Bats – areas where there is likely habitat use by pipistrelle bats based on records and site surveys.

A.17 As part of the on site mitigation it is necessary to create a 20 metre wide belt of woodland planting. This woodland planting is now considered to be part of the area of offset habitat creation required as it would provide lesser horseshoe bats with foraging opportunities and / or act as a flight line.

A.18 Any habitat creation outside the woodland buffer and within the site boundary is also considered as part of the offset requirement. The existing habitat is considered in calculating the value of the offset as it is for off site habitat creation (see Somerset County Council, 2009)

- 127 ­ Calculation of Offset Habitat Requirement

Nerrols / Priorswood (North) A.19 Figure 1 shows the field numbers within the site boundary and shows the amended combined area which now includes the whole site following surveys subsequent to the Habitats Regulations Assessment report for Hestercombe House SAC (September 2009) surveys have shown the presence of lesser horseshoe bats at Nerrol’s Farm (Entec, 2010b) and further south at Maidenbrook (ADAS, 2009).

A.20 Buffer planting is included on the western boundary of the site to preserve the flight line to Lyngford House, which is a potential night roost. Lesser horseshoe bats were also recorded flying near the Health Centre in the 2005 radio tracking survey (Billington, 2005)

Figure 1: Nerrols (North) – Field Numbers and Buffer Planting

- 128 ­ Table 25: Calculation of Offset Habitat Area Required Field IHS HSI Hectares Landscape Habitat Units Minimum No. Codes Score Modifier(s) Hectares Total 1 GI0. (combined area with GM11. flight line). GL21 0.312 4.925 (pipistrelle) 1.69026 1 x1.1

2 GI0. (combined area with GM11. flight line). (no GL21 0.312 2.381 pipistrelle) 0.74287 1

GI0. (combined area with GM11. flight line). GL21 0.312 1.234 (pipistrelle) 0.42351 1 x1.1

3 GI0. (combined area with GM11. flight line). GL21 0.312 5.106 (pipistrelle) 1.75238 1 x1.1

Total 4.60902 Offset Ratio 2:1 9.21804 9.2

A.21 The amount of offset woodland habitat creation required for the development is 9.2 hectares. In order to find the area of the off site offset habitat planting further calculations are required. The figure includes for offset planting on site in the form of the woodland buffer.

A.22 The amount of woodland belt created as mitigation on site is included as it is considered that lesser horseshoe bats would make use of and be supported by the habitat. This belt runs around the boundaries of the site through fields 2, 1 and 3. A buffer has been included along the western edge of the site to enable access through the site to the potential night roost at Lyngfield House. It is also considered that the woodland belt would extend the combined area on sites encompassing some of this zone and no modifier is used for buffer planting in the present inferred area. The total area of the woodland belt is 2.33 hectares. The area it occupies has already been included as being ‘lost’ in the calculation in Table 25.

A.23 Of the woodland buffer 2.11 hectares lies within the pipistrelle zone and in proximity to the new urban area the figure needs to be amended by these factors. This figure is reduced by 1.1/1 to account for the presence of pipistrelle bats resulting in an amended area of 1.92 hectares. The total value of the woodland belt is therefore 2.14 hectares.

A.24 The total amount of offsite offset habitat creation area need for the development

- 129 ­ is 7.06 hectares. However, the value of the habitat lost to the creation of new habitat needs to be calculated. Ideally this would be arable land or land of low value to lesser horseshoe bats. The formula applied to compensate for the loss of value of the existing land is:

Area Equivalent of Habitat Units Needed to Offset from Development (Habitat Value of Woodland – Habitat Value of Offset Habitat Creation Site)

or

Area (1[value of woodland] – 0.15 [value of arable]) (Somerset County Council, 2009)

A.25 Assuming this will be planted on arable land the total area required would be a minimum of 8.3 hectares.

Nerrols / Riorswood (South) A.26 Figure 2 below numbers the field units within the site boundary and shows the amended combined and inferred areas and flight lines following surveys subsequent to the Habitats Regulations Assessment report for Hestercombe House SAC (September 2009) surveys have shown the presence of lesser horseshoe bats at Nerrol’s Farm (Entec, 2010b) and further south at Maidenbrook (ADAS, 2009).

A.27 It is uncertain where the host day roost is for the Maidenbrook Farm record. Therefore, it must be assumed, using the precautionary principle that the roost is at Hestercombe lacking evidence to the contrary. The combined and inferred areas have been adjusted accordingly. The factor for the presence of pipistrelle bats following surveys across the development site (Entec, 2010b) has also been adjusted in the calculation.

A.28 In addition Phase 1 surveys carried out by Entec (August, 2010) has shown differences in habitat types recorded by SERC for the Integrated Habitat Survey carried for the Habitats Regulations Assessment report for Hestercombe House SAC (September 2009). The habitat codes have also been amended accordingly.

A.29 Figure 2 shows the field numbers used in the calculation of offset habitat creation. For the purpose of calculation the development site boundary line is that defined by the buffer planting on site, although the application site boundary extends to the east of Fields 6 and 10 and to the north of Nerrols Farm where the creation of meadow grassland.

A.30 Table 25 shows the calculation of the number of Habitat Units required to develop the site. It is assumed that woodland habitat in Field 3 would be inaccessible to

- 130 ­ lesser horseshoe bats following development due to the presence of built development, street lights, open spaces and roads within the site. It is assumed that other habitat within the site boundary west of the buffer planting would also be unavailable. Note Field 1 is no longer within the development site area (see Somerset County Council, 2009). Fields 10 and 11 remain, with the former being built into the woodland buffer.

Figure 2: Nerrols – Field Numbers, Buffer Planting and Meadow Creation

A.31 The zone affected by street lighting is calculated for Fields 3, 6 and 7. A 15 metre buffer would result in a reduction 0.7465 hectares in the inferred area of Field 3. A 30 metre buffer is used for Fields 6 and 7 as this is bordered on the edge facing the road by thick hedgerow. This would result in a reduction in 0.09277 and 0.3330 hectares respectively both in the inferred area. The total areas for

- 131 ­ these fields are shown in brackets in Table 26.

Table 26: Calculation of Offset Habitat Area Required Field IHS HSI Hectares Landscape Habitat Units Minimum No. Codes Score Modifier(s) Hectares Total 2 CR2. (combined area with CL1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 1.273 0.21005 1.0 x 1.1

CR2. (inferred area with CL1 5.2555 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 0.43358 (6.002) 0.5 x 1.1

3 WB3. WF21. (combined area with WM1. 0.63 0.358 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.24809 WG4 1.0 x 1.1

WB3. WF21. (inferred area with WM1. 0.63 2.326 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.80596 WG4 0.5 x 1.1

4 GP0. OT0. (combined area with GM0. 0.25 0.0531 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.0146 GL2 1.0 x 1.1

GP0. OT0. (inferred area with GM0. 0.25 0.8159 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.11219 GL2 0.5 x 1.1

5 GP0. TS21. (inferred area with no BG1. 0.32175 0.009339 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.00008 GM11. 0.25 x 1.1 GL2

6 CR2. (combined area with CL1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 0.118 0.01947 1.0 x 1.1

CR2. (inferred area with CL1 4.06123 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 0.33505 (4.154) 0.5 x 1.1

7 GNZ. OT3. (inferred area with no 0.3388 GM4. 0.037 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.00345 (0.6718) GL1Z 0.25 x 1.1

- 132 ­ Field IHS HSI Hectares Landscape Habitat Units Minimum No. Codes Score Modifier(s) Hectares Total 8 CR2. (combined area with CL1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 1.954 0.32241 1.0 x 1.1

CR2. (inferred area with CL1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 1.203 0.09925 0.5 x 1.1

9 CR2. (combined area with CL1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 3.163 0.5219 1.0 x 1.1

Total 3.12608 Offset Ratio 2:1 6.25216 6.25

A.32 The amount of offset woodland habitat creation required for the development is 6.25 hectares. In order to find the area of the off site offset habitat planting further calculations are required. The figure includes for offset planting on site in the form of the woodland buffer and the creation of meadows.

A.33 The amount of woodland belt created as mitigation on site is considered. This runs through Fields 2, 5, 6 and 9. The total area of the woodland belt is 3.10 hectares. It is considered that the woodland belt would extend the combined area on sites encompassing some of this zone and no modifier is used for buffer planting in the present inferred area. The area it occupies has already been included as being ‘lost’ in the calculation in Table 26.

A.34 The woodland buffer lies entirely with the pipistrelle zone. Therefore the value is reduced by 1.1/1 to account for the presence of pipistrelle bats resulting in an amended area of 2.82 hectares.

A.35 However, the developer is proposing to create meadow grassland outside of the buffered planting (see Figure 2) along Maiden Brook and north of Nerrols Farm. This would have some benefit for lesser horseshoe bats compared to existing arable habitats and is isolated from the development by the woodland buffer planting. A further calculation is made to determine the benefits in terms of Habitats Units. This is then deducted from the offset habitat total. The created meadow has been coded as for the Lowland Meadows (GN1) category in the IHS for the purpose of the calculation (see Table 27, Somerset County Council, 2009)

- 133 ­ Table 27: Calculation of Offset Habitat Creation Value On Site Existing HSI Area Existing New HSI Area New Result Habitat Score Habitat Habitat Score Habitat Code Units Code Units East of Nerrols CR2. GN1. 0.15 2.073 0.31095 0.37 2.073 0.76701 0.46 Farm CL1 CL1

North of Nerrols CR2. GN1. 0.15 1.308 0.1962 0.37 1.308 0.48396 0.29 Farm CL1 CL1

Total 0.75

A.36 The adjusted total of offsite offset habitat creation required is 2.68 hectares [6.25 - 2.82 - 0.75]. However, the value of the habitat lost to the creation of new habitat needs to be calculated. Assuming arable land is used a minimum of 3.15 hectares of off site offset planting is required.

North of Anghill’s Farm A.37 This site has now been included in the assessment following the amendment of the combined and inferred areas and flight lines following surveys subsequent to the Habitats Regulations Assessment report for Hestercombe House SAC. Figure 3 below numbers the field units within the site boundary and shows the amended combined and inferred areas and flight lines.

A.38 Habitat surveys have been carried out in 2010 as part of the ecological assessment accompanying the planning application (Ecology Solutions Ltd, 2010). The fields were recorded as being semi improved but the management regime was not described. Therefore, as this is not at variance with the IHS coding carried out in 2006 this is used in the calculation.

A.39 The site lies within the ‘inferred area’ and no record was made of lesser horseshoe bat presence. Bat activity surveys took place in June, early August and early and late September both manually and with automated detectors (Anabat) through the night. However, it is considered that this does not rule out use of the site as lesser horseshoe bats were recorded using Allen’s Brook in May and October 2010 on consecutive nights (ADAS, 2010).

- 134 ­ Figure 3: North of Anghill Farm– Field Numbers and Buffer Planting

A.40 The matrix code GM14 that is not included in the Appropriate Assessment of Hestercombe House SAC report, Table 28 (Somerset County Council 2009) is scored at 1.1

Table 28: Calculation of Offset Habitat Area Required Field IHS HSI Hectares Landscape Habitat Units Minimum No. Codes Score Modifier(s) Hectares Total 1 GI0. (inferred area with GM14. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.22 1.903 0.23026 GL21 0.5 x 1.1

2 GI0. (inferred area with GM14. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.22 1.614 0.19529 GL21 0.5 x 1.1

- 135 ­ Field IHS HSI Hectares Landscape Habitat Units Minimum No. Codes Score Modifier(s) Hectares Total 3 GI0. (inferred area with GM14. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.22 0.02566 0.0031 GL21 0.5 x 1.1

4 GP0. (inferred area with BG1. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.225 0.3088 0.0382 GL2 0.5 x 1.1

5 GI0. (inferred area with GMZ. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.2 1.222 0.13442 GL2 0.5 x 1.1

Total 0.60127 Offset Ratio 2:1 1.20254 1.2

A.41 The amount of offset woodland habitat creation required for the development is 1.2 hectares. In order to find the area of the off site offset habitat planting further calculations are required. The figure includes for offset planting on site in the form of the woodland buffer.

A.42 The amount of woodland belt created as mitigation on site is included. This belt runs along the southern boundary of the site and is planned to lie outside the proposed link road between the A3259 and the A39. The total area of the woodland belt is 0.72 hectares. The area it occupies has not been included as being ‘lost’ in the calculation in Table 28.

A.43 The whole woodland buffer lies within the pipistrelle zone and the figure needs to be amended by these factors. This figure is reduced by 1.1/1 to account for the presence of pipistrelle bats resulting in an amended area of 0.65 hectares.

A.44 The adjusted total of offsite offset habitat creation required is 0.55 hectares. However, 2.65 hectares of land is available to the south of the woodland belt and it is considered if this habitat is enhanced then no further off site offset habitat creation would be required. Drawing Number 09001/001 accompanying the planning application shows the creation of attenuation ponds.

West of Greenway A.45 The allocation site boundary has been amended since the Habitats Regulations Assessment of Hestercombe House SAC (Somerset County Council, 2009). The Fields have been renumbered for the purposes of this assessment. The site is also affected by changes in the combined and inferred areas and flight lines since the report as afore mentioned. This is shown in Figure 4.

- 136 ­

Figure 4: West of Greenway – Field Numbers and Buffer Planting

A.46 The matrix code UA32 that is not included in the Appropriate Assessment of Hestercombe House SAC report, Table 28 (Somerset County Council 2009) is scored at 0.1

A.47 It is considered that the southern boundary of Fields 5, 7 and 11 would be affected by street lighting. A 30 metre buffer is used. This would result in a reduction in 0.05098, 0.3977 and 0.02232 hectares respectively in the inferred area. The total areas for these fields are shown in brackets in Table 29.

- 137 ­ Table 29: Calculation of Offset Habitat Area Required Field IHS HSI Hectares Landscape Habitat Units Minimum No. Codes Score Modifier(s) Hectares Total 1 GP0. (combined area with TS21. 0.20625 0.126 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.02859 GM2 1.0 x 1.1 GP0. (inferred area with TS21. 0.20625 2.376 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.26953 GM2 0.5 x 1.1 2 GP0. (inferred area with no GM0. 0.25 1.245 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.08559 GL2 0.25 x 1.1 3 GP0. (inferred area with no GM0. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.25 0.1706 0.01173 GL2 0.25 x 1.1

4 UR0. (inferred area with no UA32 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.01 0.1452 0.0004 0.25 x 1.1

5 GP0. (inferred area with GM22. 1.32802 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.25 0.1826 GL2 (1.379) 0.5 x 1.1

6 GP0. (inferred area with GM22. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.25 2.144 0.2948 GL2 0.5 x 1.1

7 GP0. (inferred area with GM12. 0.7623 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.275 0.1153 GL2 (1.16) 0.5 x 1.1

8 AS0. (inferred area with no AP1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.8 0.00424 0.00093 0.25 x 1.1

9 GP0. (inferred area with GM12. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.275 0.01137 0.00172 GL2 0.5 x 1.1

10 GP0. (inferred area with OT0. 0.03388 flight line). (pipistrelle) GM0. 0.25 0.00466 (0.0562) 0.5 x 1.1 GL2

11 GP0. (inferred area with OT0. flight line). (pipistrelle) GM0. 0.25 0.0562 0.00773 0.5 x 1.1 GL2

Total 1.00358 Offset Ratio 2:1 2.00716 2.01

- 138 ­ A.48 The amount of offset woodland habitat creation required for the development is 2.01 hectares. In order to find the area of the off site offset habitat planting further calculations are required. The figure includes for offset planting on site in the form of the woodland buffer.

A.49 The amount of woodland belt created as mitigation on site is included. This belt runs along the western and northern boundaries of the site. The total area of the woodland belt is 1.49 hectares. It is considered that the woodland belt would extend the combined area on sites encompassing some of this zone and no modifier is used for buffer planting in the present inferred area. The area it occupies has not been included as being ‘lost’ in the calculation in Table 29.

A.50 The whole woodland buffer lies within the pipistrelle zone and the figure needs to be amended by these factors. This figure is reduced by 1.1/1 to account for the presence of pipistrelle bats resulting in an amended area of 1.35 hectares.

A.51 The adjusted total of offsite offset habitat creation required is 0.66 hectares. Assuming this will be planted on arable land the total area required would be a minimum of 0.78 hectares

Hartnells Farm A.52 There is a slight adjustment is the site area compared with the site as previously assessed and a slight amendment to the Combined and Inferred Areas (Somerset County Council, 2009). Figure 5 shows the current allocation site.

A.53 Field 9 is no longer in the Inferred Area and now lies outside the area affected. However, Fields 10 and 11 are now included in the site area.

Table 30: Hartnells Farm - Calculation of Offset Habitat Areas Field IHS HSI Score Hectares Landscape Habitat Minimum No. Codes Modifier(s) Units Hectares Total 1 GP0. (inferred area with GMZ. no flight line). GL2 0.25 0.2271 (pipistrelle) 0.01561 0.25 x 1.1

2 CR1. (inferred area with CL1 flight line). 0.25 1.724 (pipistrelle) 0.23705 0.5 x 1.1

3 CR1. (inferred area with CL1 flight line). 0.25 2.257 (pipistrelle) 0.31034 0.5 x 1.1

- 139 ­ Field IHS HSI Score Hectares Landscape Habitat Minimum No. Codes Modifier(s) Units Hectares Total 4 GP0. BG1. (inferred area with TS0. flight line). 0.32175 3.076 0.54434 GM12. (pipistrelle) GL2Z 0.5 x 1.1

5 GP0. BG1. (inferred area with TS0. no flight line). 0.32175 0.031 0.00027 GM12. (pipistrelle) GL2Z 0.25 x 1.1

6 AS4. (inferred area with AO0. no flight line). AP1 0.8 0.0535 (pipistrelle) 0.01177 0.25 x 1.1

7 GP0. (inferred area with GM11. flight line). GL21 0.325 1.774 (pipistrelle) 0.31710 0.5 x 1.1

8 CR2. (inferred area with CL1 flight line). 0.15 2.596 (pipistrelle) 0.21417 0.5 x 1.1

10 CR31 (inferred area with flight line). 0.2 1.081 (pipistrelle) 0.11891 0.5 x 1.1

11 WB1. (inferred area with WF0. flight line). WM1 1 0.1435 (pipistrelle) 0.07893 0.5 x 1.1

Total Habitat Units 1.84849 Offset Ratio 2:1 3.69698 3.7

A.54 The habitat code CR31 (intensively managed orchards) that is not included in the Appropriate Assessment of Hestercombe House SAC report, Table 28 (Somerset County Council 2009) is scored at 0.2.

- 140 ­ Figure 5: Hartnells Farm – Field Numbers and Buffer Planting

A.55 The amount of offset woodland habitat creation required for the development is 3.7 hectares. In order to find the area of the off site offset habitat planting further calculations are required. The figure includes for offset planting on site in the form of the woodland buffer.

A.56 The amount of woodland belt created as mitigation on site is included. This belt runs along the western and northern boundaries of the site. The total area of the woodland belt is 1.27 hectares. It is considered that the woodland belt would extend the combined area on sites encompassing some of this zone and no modifier is used for buffer planting in the present inferred area. The area it occupies has not been included as being ‘lost’ in the calculation in Table 30.

A.57 The whole woodland buffer lies within the pipistrelle zone and the figure needs to be amended by these factors. This figure is reduced by 1.1/1 to account for the

- 141 ­ presence of pipistrelle bats resulting in an amended area of 1.15 hectares.

A.58 The adjusted total of offsite offset habitat creation required is 2.55 hectares. Assuming this will be planted on arable land the total area required would be a minimum of 3 hectares.

East of Proctors Farm A.59 This allocation was not considered in the Appropriate Assessment of Hestercombe House SAC (Somerset County Council, 2009). It consist of two areas separated by Doster’s Lane and is shown in Figure 6.

A.60 Field 3 has scattered trees (TS21) within the Combined Area only.

Figure 6: East of Procters Farm – Field Numbers and Buffer Planting

- 142 ­ Table 31: Calculation of Offset Habitat Area Required Field IHS HSI Hectares Landscape Habitat Units Minimum No. Codes Score Modifier(s) Hectares Total 1 GP0. (inferred area with no GM12. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.275 1.221 0.09234 GL2 0.25 x 1.1

GP0. (combined area with GM12. no flight line). GL2 0.275 2.028 (pipistrelle) 0.30674 0.5 x 1.1

2 GP0. GM0. (combined area with GL2 0.25 2.902 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.79805 1.0 x 1.1

3 GP0. (combined area with TS21. flight line). (pipistrelle) GM0. 0.275 3.165 0.95741 1.0 x 1.1 GL2

GP0. (inferred area with GM0. flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.25 1.815 0.24956 GL2 0.5 x 1.1

4 CR2. (combined area with CL1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 0.02805 0.00463 1.0 x 1.1

CR2. (inferred area with CL1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 4.713 0.38882 0.5 x 1.1

5 CR4. (combined area with CL1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 0.1527 0.0252 1.0 x 1.1

CR4. (inferred area with CL1 flight line). (pipistrelle) 0.15 0.4601 0.038 0.5 x 1.1

Total 2.86075 Offset Ratio 2:1 5.7215 5.72

A.61 The amount of offset woodland habitat creation required for the development is 5.72 hectares. In order to find the area of the off site offset habitat planting further calculations are required. The figure includes for offset planting on site in the form of the woodland buffer.

A.62 The amount of woodland belt created as mitigation on site runs along the western and northern boundaries of the site. The total area of the woodland belt

- 143 ­ is 3.57 hectares. It is considered that the woodland belt would extend the combined area on sites encompassing some of this zone and no modifier is used for buffer planting in the present inferred area. The area it occupies has not been included as being ‘lost’ in the calculation in Table 31.

A.63 The whole woodland buffer lies within the pipistrelle zone and the figure needs to be amended by these factors. This figure is reduced by 1.1/1 to account for the presence of pipistrelle bats resulting in an amended area of 3.25 hectares.

A.64 The adjusted total of offsite offset habitat creation required is 2.47 hectares. Assuming this will be planted on arable land the total area required would be a minimum of 2.9 hectares. (Note this figure is also dependent on allocations south of the A3259 being developed first. If this site were to come forward before that south of the road then surveys for lesser horseshoe bats must be carried out in areas yet to be developed to the south of the road and submitted within any planning application. The offset area may increase significantly if lesser horseshoe bats are found south of the A3259)

Summary of Offsite Offset Habitat Creation Required

A.65 The following table sets out the calculated totals of offsite offset habitat creation required for each allocated site. It allows for offset habitat creation on site in the form of the woodland buffer required for mitigating the effects of lighting on the behaviour of lesser horseshoe bats and their prey. Where other on site habitat creation is know it is included in the calculation.

Allocation Site Minimum Offsite Habitat Required (Hectares) Nerrols / Priorswood (North) 8.3

Nerrols / Priorswood (South) 3.15

North of Anghill’s Farm 0

West of Greenway 0.78

Hartnell’s Farm 3

East of Proctors Farm 2.9

Total Requirement 18.13

A.64 It should be noted that these figures are for guidance only and that may alter

- 144 ­ according to the submitted Masterplan for a site, the amount of extra on site accessible habitat creation and the habitat type where the offset woodland would be planted.

- 145 ­