X3 LWS2011 Main Report Copy

LouthLouth WetlandWetland IdentificationIdentification SurveySurvey 20112011

PartPart 1:1: MainMain ReportReport

Report pepared for Louth County Council & The Heritage Council

An Action of the County Louth Heritage Plan

by Peter Foss, Patrick Crushell, Barry O’Loughlin & Faith Wilson on behalf of Wetland Surveys Ireland

www.wetlandsurveysireland.com

November 2011 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Authors: Foss, P.J., Crushell, P. & O’Loughlin, B. & Wilson, F. (2011) Title: Louth Wetland Identification Survey. Part 1: Main Report. Report prepared for Louth County Council and The Heritage Council. pp. 101

See also: Foss, P.J., Crushell, P. & O’Loughlin, B. & Wilson, F. (2011) Title: Louth Wetland Identification Survey. Part 2: Site Reports (Sections A & B). Report prepared for Louth County Council and The Heritage Council. pp. 497.

An Action of the County Louth Heritage Plan

Wetland Surveys Ireland

Dr Peter Foss Dr Patrick Crushell 33 Bancroft Park Bell Height Tallaght Kenmare Dublin 24 Co Kerry e-mail: [email protected] [email protected]

All rights reserved. No Part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of Louth County Council.

Views contained in this report do not necessarily reflect the views of Louth County Council or The Heritage Council.

Includes Ordnance Survey Ireland data reproduced under OSI Licence number 2011 / 30 / CCMA / Louth Local Authorities. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Ordnance Survey Ireland and Government of Ireland copyright. © Ordnance Survey Ireland, 2011.

Photographic Plate Credits

All photographs by Peter Foss, Patrick Crushell, Faith Wilson and Barry O’Loughlin 2011 unless otherwise stated. Copyright Louth County Council & The Heritage Council.

Report cover images: Top to Bottom: Louth Wetland Identification Survey sites - Rockmarshall, Whitestwon Coast, Wottonstown and Beaulieu.

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Contents 1 Acknowledgements ______5 2 Executive Summary ______6 3 Background______8 3.1 Project set-up ______8 4 Importance of Wetlands in County Louth______9 4.1 Definition ______9 4.2 Why conserve wetlands? ______10 4.3 Wetland values ______11 5 County Louth Wetlands ______13 5.1 County Louth an introduction______13 5.2 County Louth’s natural wealth ______13 5.2.1 Topography and landforms ______13 5.2.2 Geology ______17 5.2.3 Soils______19 5.2.4 Climate ______21 5.2.5 Ground and surface waters______21 5.3 Protection of Louth Wetlands ______23 5.4 Louth Freshwater Wetland types ______25 5.5 Wetland Habitats in County Louth – a brief description ______27 6 Materials & Methods______46 6.1 Louth Wetland Identification Survey - Site Selection ______46 6.2 Louth Wetland Identification Survey - Field Survey ______46 6.3 Consultation with Landowners______48 6.4 Habitat Classification______48 6.5 Site Conservation Assessment & Evaluation ______48 6.6 Louth Wetland Identification Survey database – structure and content______48 6.7 Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) – GIS dataset ______48 6.8 Constraints ______49 7 Results______50 7.1 Louth Wetland Identification Survey ______50 7.2 Wetland Types Recorded on Site Surveys ______50 7.3 Priority Habitats Recorded ______51 7.4 Floral Observations ______52 7.5 Faunal Observations ______52 7.6 Damage to County Louth wetlands ______52 7.7 Site Conservation Assessment ______55 7.8 Additional Wetlands in county Louth ______59 8 Louth Wetland Recommendations ______61

1 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______8.1 Distribution and Extent of the Louth Wetland Resource ______61 8.2 Site Designations ______61 8.3 Sites Boundary Review ______61 8.4 Planning Controls ______61 8.5 Ongoing Maintenance of the LWS site database and completion of wetland inventory 62 8.6 Ongoing Maintenance of the County Louth Wetland Map GIS Dataset______62 8.7 Further Survey & Assessment of Wetland Sites ______62 8.8 Management of Louth Wetland Sites______62 8.9 Enforcement of Fines for Illegal Dumping and Infill ______63 8.10 Control of Invasive Species in Wetlands______63 8.11 Local Authority Wetlands Policy ______63 8.12 Water Framework Directive______64 8.13 Public Information and Interpretation Measures ______64 9 Bibliography ______65 10 Appendices ______67

2 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Report Tables & Figures

Page List of Tables Number Table 4.1. Examples of the economic benefits that wetlands provide. 12 Table 5.1. Classification of Landscape Character Areas in county Louth by level of importance 14 (LCC 2010). Table 5.2. The 35 Level Three Fossitt (2000) wetland habitat types that were to be included in the 26 Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011. Table 7.1. The main wetland habitats actually recorded in the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 50 2011. Table 7.2. Wetland sites surveyed in 2011, which contain examples of habitats, listed under 52 Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive. Table 7.3. Natura 2000 Impacts and Activities which are likely to have a negative effect on 53 wetlands, and the wetland type most likely to be affected by these activities. Table 7.4. The impacts and activities threatening (or which have already degraded) sites surveyed 54 as part of the LWS 2011. Table 7.5. Conservation Assessment and ranking of sites surveyed in County Louth during the 58 2011 LWS.

List of Figures Figure 5.1. Landscape character areas in County Louth. 15 Figure 5.2. Relief and drainage map of County Louth showing elevation in metres above 16 Ordnance Datum. Figure 5.3. The solid geology map of County Louth showing the main rock types occurring in the 18 county. Figure 5.4. Sub-soil (parent material) map of County Louth. 20 Figure 5.5. Catchment Map of County Louth. 22 Figure 6.1. The location of sites surveyed during the 2011 Louth Wetland Identification Survey 47 Figure 7.1. Map showing the distribution of sites according to conservation value. 57

List of Appendices

Louth Wetland Identification Survey - Part 1: Main Report Appendix 1. List of sites surveyed in detail as part of the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 68-81 Appendix 2. Data fields in the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 Databases 82-93 Appendix 3. Survey card used on the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 94 Appendix 4. National Roads Authority (2009) Site Evaluation Criteria 96 Appendix 5. Detailed location maps of sites surveyed as part of the Louth Wetland Identification 97 Survey 2011 Survey Database overlain on OS Discovery Series maps

Louth Wetland Identification Survey - Part 2: Site Reports Appendix 6. Individual site survey reports from the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011. 106 See separate volumes - Sections A & B, pages 1-244 and 245-497 respectively.

3 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011

The project involved undertaking a field survey of 108 potential freshwater wetlands in County Louth, to identify the specific wetland and ecological interest (if any), and to report on threats and damaging activities. These sites had previously been identified in the Potential Wetland Map GIS dataset prepared in 2009, although detailed environmental information was lacking for most of the sites. The sites selected were believed to contain a range of freshwater wetlands. This report presents the results of the 2011 field survey and includes detailed site descriptions and habitat maps for the wetlands. This list of sites does not, however, represent a full inventory of freshwater wetlands in Louth and recommendations are made for the achievement of such a comprehensive inventory.

4 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

1 Acknowledgements

The County Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) project 2011 was made possible through the financial support of Louth County Council and The Heritage Council. The project is an action of the County Louth Heritage Plan 2007-2011.

Many thanks to: Brendan McSherry, Heritage Officer, County Louth for help and advice during the 2011 survey and comments on the final report.

Helen Divilly, IT Project Leader of Louth County Council for help with mapping issues.

All landowners who facilitated access to their land during this survey, and provided much useful information on the wetlands both in their ownership and more general area.

5 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

2 Executive Summary

1. The aim of the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 (LWS) was to undertake a field survey of 108 potential wetland sites identified as part of the previous Potential Wetland Map GIS dataset prepared in 2009 (Brophy 2009) for which little or no habitat or ecological information was available.

2. The 108 potential wetland sites selected for survey are listed in Appendix 1. The total area covered by the sites surveyed in 2011 was 966 ha (based on the extent of the original site polygons).

3. Wetland habitats on sites surveyed were classified and mapped according to the Guide to Habitats published by The Heritage Council (Fossitt 2000). Non-wetland habitats both within the wetland site boundary and those occurring outside were also recorded.

4. The Louth Wetland Identification study, 2011, focused on determining whether the following 35 freshwater and brackish water wetland types (18 of which are listed in Annex 1 of the EU Habitats Directive, with a further nine listed as priority habitats) exist on the 108 target sites in county Louth.

Fossitt Level 3 Fossitt Level 3 Habitat Code and Name Habitat Code and Name FL1 Dystrophic lakes * HH3 Wet heath * FL2 Acid oligotrophic lakes * PB1 Raised bogs * & ** FL3 Limestone/marl lakes * PB2 Upland blanket bog ** FL4 Mesotrophic lakes PB3 Lowland blanket bog * & ** FL5 Eutrophic lakes * PB4 Cutover bog * FL6 Turloughs ** PB5 Eroding blanket bog FL7 Reservoirs PF1 Rich fen and flush * & ** FL8 Other artificial lakes and ponds PF2 Poor fen and flush FW1 Eroding/upland rivers * PF3 Transition mire and quaking bog * FW2 Depositing/lowland rivers * WN4 Wet pedunculate oak-ash woodland ** FW3 Canals WN5 Riparian woodland FW4 Drainage ditches WN6 Wet willow-alder-ash woodland FP1 Calcareous springs ** WN7 Bog woodland ** FP2 Non-Calcareous springs WS1 Scrub * FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps CW1 Lagoons and saline lakes ** FS2 Tall herb swamps * CW2 Tidal rivers * GS4 Wet grassland * CD5 Dune slacks * GM1 Marsh * * May correspond with EU Habitats Directive listed Annex 1 habitat; ** May correspond with EU Habitats Directive Priority habitat.

5. Threats and damage to the surveyed sites were recorded and an estimate of the severity of damage was made.

6. The information collected from the 2011 survey was used to populate the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 (LWS) GIS dataset and the Louth Wetland Identification Survey database, in which individual site records were created for each of the sites surveyed.

7. Habitat maps were prepared for a total of 108 sites which were surveyed and found to contain wetland habitats (see Appendix 6).

6 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______8. The Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 (LWS) recorded the following freshwater wetland habitat types in the numbers and areas below on the 108 sites surveyed.

Area (ha) / Length (km) of Number of sites recorded in each wetland habitat Fossitt Habitat Code & Name LWS Database* recorded in GIS dataset**

LWS GIS FL1 Dystrophic lakes 3 0.2 FL2 Acid oligotrophic lakes - - FL3 Limestone/marl lakes - - FL4 Mesotrophic lakes 10 12 FL5 Eutrophic lakes 5 4.4 FL6 Turloughs - - FL7 Reservoirs 1 0.8 FL8 Other artificial lakes and ponds 2 1.3 FW1 Eroding/upland rivers 1 0.9 km FW2 Depositing/lowland rivers 6 8.9 km FW3 Canals - - FW4 Drainage ditches 55 54.7 km FP1 Calcareous springs 2 - FP2 Non-Calcareous springs - - FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps 48 165.2 FS2 Tall herb swamps - - GS4 Wet grassland 25 68.8 GM1 Marsh 14 31.9 HH3 Wet heath 4 5.1 PB1 Raised bogs - - PB2 Upland blanket bog - - PB3 Lowland blanket bog - - PB4 Cutover bog 8 112.3 PB5 Eroding blanket bog - - PF1 Rich fen and flush 7 7.6 PF2 Poor fen and flush 6 0.02 PF3 Transition mire and quaking bog 31 119.9 WN4 Wet pedunculate oak-ash woodland - - WN5 Riparian woodland - - WN6 Wet willow-alder-ash woodland 14 23.4 WN7 Bog woodland 6 96.8 WS1 Scrub 73 113.4 CW1 Lagoons and saline lakes 1 0.8 CW2 Tidal rivers - - CD5 Dune slacks - - Notes: *Number of sites surveyed was extracted from LWS Site database. **Area (ha) extracted from LWS GIS dataset. In the case of mosaic habitats, the area was applied to the dominant habitat.

9. During the course of the survey, and as part of the background research on sites, additional sites not listed in the original Potential Wetland Map GIS dataset (Brophy 2009) were noted. These sites are not included within the Louth Wetland Map GIS data produced from this survey. These sites will require future survey to determine their wetland interest.

7 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

3 Background

In 2009 the NPWS provided Louth County Council with a GIS dataset of potential wetlands in the county (Brophy 2009). In 2011 the County Council and The Heritage Council funded a survey of these sites to ascertain whether they were in fact wetlands and to identify the specific habitats present on each site.

The aim of the current Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 (LWS) project was to examine the 108 potential wetlands in 2011, so that detailed descriptions, habitat maps and other ecological information could be recorded. Following the survey, the sites were to be ranked in terms of their conservation/ecological importance to assist Louth County Council in its obligations to protect the most important wetlands within the county and to inform future conservation policies in relation to wetlands in county Louth.

All survey data recorded during the project are held in the newly created LWS site database, and in a LWS Geographic Information System (GIS) dataset which should help guide spatial planning and development management by Louth County Council.

3.1 Project set-up

This LWS project was undertaken over a six month period from the start of May 2011.

The following is a summary of the main elements which formed the basis of the project, details of which are provided in the Materials and Methods section which follows.

Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) project summary:

• 108 sites were selected for survey as part of the LWS 2011. These sites were selected by Brophy (2009) as sites likely to contain wetland areas (see Appendix 1).

• Following a review of the sites proposed for survey, field maps were prepared and a wetland survey recording card was designed (see Appendix 3).

• A LWS site database, to hold survey information on sites examined, was created (see Appendices 2). Once survey information was inputted to the LWS survey database, a complete site report could be produced from data held within the database (see Appendix 2). The LWS database also holds secondary information on some of the sites previously reported in literature.

• The field survey was undertaken in August 2011 by a team of four wetland ecologists. In total 108 sites were surveyed and habitat maps and site descriptions were prepared (see Appendix 1 & 6). Following the site survey a conservation evaluation of the sites was undertaken and they were ranked in terms of their local, national or international conservation value.

• Following the field survey, survey data were used to populate the LWS site database. Habitat maps were drawn and survey data transferred too the LWS GIS dataset.

• The final LWS report was then prepared. It includes individual site reports that contain: site descriptions; flora and fauna lists; habitat maps; conservation evaluation; and conservation recommendations for each site surveyed.

8 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

4 Importance of Wetlands in County Louth

4.1 Definition

Wetland is a collective term for ecosystems (habitats and their associated species) whose formation has been dominated by water and whose processes and characteristics are largely controlled by water. A wetland is a place that has been wet enough for a long enough time to develop specially adapted vegetation and other organisms (Maltby 1986).

Wetlands occur where the water table is at or near the surface of the land, or where the land is covered by a layer of shallow water, for some or all of the year.

The 1971 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance defines wetlands as:

“areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meters”.

In addition, for the purpose of protecting coherent sites, Article 2.1 of the Ramsar Convention, to which Ireland is a signatory, provides that wetland sites:

“may incorporate riparian and coastal zones adjacent to the wetlands, and islands or bodies of marine water deeper than six meters at low tide lying within the wetlands”.

Five major wetland types are generally recognized: • marine (coastal wetlands including coastal lagoons, rocky shores, and coral reefs); • estuarine (including deltas, tidal marshes, and mangrove swamps); • lacustrine (wetlands associated with lakes); • riverine (wetlands along rivers and streams); and • palustrine (meaning “marshy” – wet grassland, marshes, swamps and bogs).

In addition to naturally occurring wetlands produced as a result of natural environmental processes, there are artificial wetlands such as fish ponds, farm ponds, irrigated agricultural land, reservoirs, gravel pits, sewage treatment facilities and drainage ditches.

Even in certain, so called “natural” wetland systems, human-kind has played a major role in wetland formation since pre-historic times. In Ireland, forest clearance in the uplands helped trigger soil and vegetation changes, which altered the hydrology and led in some places to bog formation. And today, since some of these bogs have been harvested for fuel and their peat deposits removed, the flooding of the abandoned peat diggings has created new shallow lakes, with marginal fens and marsh areas.

In contrast to some other habitat types (e.g. woodlands), wetlands are therefore often young and dynamic ecosystems, changing in a relatively short period of time as vegetation changes, sediments are laid down, and local hydrological conditions are altered.

One other concept that should be borne in mind when considering wetlands is that a specific wetland area is often composed of many different habitat types, which form a mosaic. For example, a cutover bog wetland, may in fact comprise small areas of regenerating fen and bog communities, pools, drainage ditches, and even deeper water pools or small lakes.

On a global scale wetlands occur everywhere, from the tundra to the tropics. How much of the earth’s surface is presently composed of wetlands is not known exactly. The UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre has suggested an estimate of about 570 million hectares (5.7 million km2) of wetland – roughly 6% of the Earth’s land surface – of which 2% are lakes, 30% bogs, 26% fens, 20% swamps, and 15% floodplains.

The LWS project focused on 108 potential freshwater wetlands within the county, of both natural and artificial origin, with the additional inclusion of coastal lagoons which may have a variable degree of both salt and freshwater influence.

9 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______4.2 Why conserve wetlands?

As with many other natural environments humanity has generally looked on wetlands as an economic resource to be used for short term economic gain, and has often not recognised the long term benefits (both economic and non-economic) of functioning wetlands (Anonymous 2008d). Three examples of such damaging actions in Ireland include:

• the national and local drainage schemes, or the embankment of rivers which can result in catastrophic floods during high rainfall periods when the drained land results in rapid surface water run-off; • past afforestation schemes on bogs, which often did not produce the timber crop envisaged at the start of the afforestation project; • overgrazing of blanket bog which continues to have a detrimental effect on the national peatland resource.

Functional wetlands are among the world’s most productive environments. They are cradles of biological diversity, providing the water and primary productivity upon which countless species of plants and animals depend for survival. They support high concentrations and diversity of birds, mammals, reptiles, amphibians, fish and especially invertebrates. Wetlands are also important storehouses of plant genetic material diversity.

The multiple roles of wetland ecosystems and their value to humanity have been increasingly understood and documented in recent years, as in the Irish Government report on the Economic & Social Aspects of Biodiversity (Anonymous 2008). Internationally, this has led to large expenditures to restore the lost or degraded hydrological and biological functions of wetlands. But it is not enough – the race is on to improve practices on a significant global scale as the world’s leaders try to cope with the accelerating water crisis and the effects of climate change. And this at a time when the world’s population is likely to increase by 70 million every year for the next 20 years (Anonymous 2008d).

Global freshwater consumption rose six fold between 1900 and 1995 – more than double the rate of population growth. One third of the world’s population today lives in countries already experiencing moderate to high water stress. By 2025, two out of every three people on Earth may well face life in water stressed conditions.

The ability of wetlands to adapt to changing conditions, and to accelerating rates of change, will be crucial to human communities and wildlife everywhere as the full impact of climate change on our environment is felt. Small wonder that there is a worldwide focus on wetlands and their services to us.

In addition, wetlands are important, and sometimes essential, for the health, welfare and safety of people who live in or near them. They are amongst the world’s most productive environments and provide a wide array of benefits (Ramsar website) as outlined in section 4.3 below.

10 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

4.3 Wetland values

Wetlands range from ponds to rivers, reedbeds to bogs, and are home to a large diversity of plants and animals. However, they are not just important for biodiversity.

Wetlands provide many economic benefits including:

• Wetlands improve water quality by removing and sequestering pollutants and sediments in the water.

• Wetlands are of high importance to fisheries. Over two thirds of the world’s fish harvest is linked to the health of coastal and inland wetland areas.

• Wetlands may be of high importance to agriculture and timber production, through the maintenance of water tables and nutrient retention in floodplains.

• Wetlands store floodwaters, acting like natural sponges and slowing down the force of flood and storm waters as they travel downstream. Far from posing a flood threat, wetlands should be viewed as buffers, to protect areas where people live (Anonymous 2008d).

• Wetlands may provide important energy resources, such as peat and plant matter.

• Wetlands may be of value to transport, recreation and tourism.

• Wetlands offer habitats for wildlife. Many migratory birds and other wildlife depend on the ecological setting of wetlands for their survival.

• Wetlands support biodiversity. The variety of living organisms found in wetlands contributes to the health of our planet and makes our own lives possible by ensuring our food supply, regulating the atmosphere and providing raw materials for industry and medicine.

• Wetlands provide valuable open space and create wonderful recreational opportunities. Hiking, fishing, boating and bird watching are just a few of the activities people can enjoy in wetland areas. The scenic vistas of wetlands make them an ideal area for nature photographers or painters.

• Wetlands are vital in preventing further climate change by acting as a store of carbon. Until recently this has not been fully appreciated, and in Ireland it has still not been adequately communicated to the general public. For example, peatlands are known to store 20-30% of the world’s soil carbon, exceeding by three times the amounts stored in tropical rainforests (Bragg and Lindsay 2003).

In addition, wetlands have special attributes as part of the cultural heritage of humanity: they are related to religious and cosmological beliefs, constitute a source of aesthetic inspiration, provide wildlife sanctuaries, and form the basis of important local traditions.

These functions, values and attributes can only be maintained if the ecological processes of wetlands are allowed to continue functioning. Unfortunately, and in spite of important progress made in recent decades, wetlands continue to be among the world’s most threatened ecosystems, owing mainly to ongoing drainage, conversion, pollution and over-exploitation of their resources.

Putting an economic value on something as abstract as the ecological services of a wetland is a difficult idea for most people, but is becoming a more accepted economic tool. More commonly, the open market puts monetary values on society's goods and services. In the case of wetlands, there is no direct market for services such as clean water, maintenance of biodiversity, and flood control. There is, however, a growing recognition that such natural benefits do have real economic value and that these values need to be included in decision-making processes (see Table 4.1).

In a recent report by the Biodiversity Unit of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Anonymous 2008d) the biodiversity value of wetlands in Ireland was estimated to be worth €385 million per year to the Irish economy. In addition a further proportion of the €330 million assigned by

11 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______this study to the economic value of the nature and eco-tourism value of all Irish habitats can be assigned to wetlands.

One other stark fact to emerge from this report was that “it is clear that the benefits of biodiversity far exceed the costs of the current levels of biodiversity protection” in Ireland, an indication that we still do not value the functions and services provided by wetlands or biodiversity in general to our well-being as a society.

Numerous other reports exist in the literature that give clear examples of the economic value of wetlands. The UK Environment Agency has a wealth of literature showing the value of intact, functioning wetlands in the control and alleviation of flooding episodes (Anonymous 2008d). In addition a number of reports exist which show that intact wetland systems provide excellent value for money in the provision of water services when compared to the costs that would accrue if these services had to be supplied by artificial systems. An illustration is the example from the USA where the State of New York purchased a watershed area at a cost of 1.5 billion dollars, rather than spend 3 to 8 billion dollars it estimated it would cost for artificial waste water treatment facilities to do the same job (Anonymous 2008d).

Unfortunately, to date, society has generally only realized the benefit of wetland services after they have disappeared or been seriously degraded. Problems with flooding, lost recreational opportunities, reduced fish populations and more costly water treatment are examples of costs understood only after a wetland ecosystem has been degraded or destroyed.

The idea behind putting an economic value on some of these wetland benefits before ecosystem-altering decisions are made is to recognize these potential costs up front and thereby put wetland-related decisions on a more economically sound footing.

Table 4.1. Examples of the economic benefits that wetlands provide.

NON-USE USE BENEFITS BENEFITS Direct Use Existence Indirect Use Benefits Option Benefits Benefits Benefits recreation nutrient retention potential future uses (as per direct biodiversity - boating and indirect uses) - birding water filtration culture - wildlife future value of information, e.g., viewing flood control pharmaceuticals, education heritage - walking - angling shoreline protection archaeology

trapping- groundwater recharge non-use hunting external ecosystem bequest value commercial support harvest - nuts micro-climate stabilization - berries - grains erosion control - fisheries - peat associated expenditures, - forestry e.g., travel, guides, gear, etc.

(Modified from Barbier et al. 1997)

12 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

5 County Louth Wetlands

5.1 County Louth an introduction

County Louth is strategically located midway between the two largest population centres on the island of Ireland, Belfast and Dublin. Louth is Ireland's smallest county with a land area of 82,000 hectares (LCC 2009).

County Louth is one of 12 counties in the province of Leinster. It is bordered by four counties, Monaghan to the west, Meath to the south-west and Armagh and Down to the north-east (across Carlingford Lough). County Louth is bordered by the Irish Sea to the east.

Some of the adjacent counties contain major population centres which are in close proximity to Louth. They include Navan in County Meath and Newry, Craigavon and Banbridge in counties Down and Armagh.

The county’s coastline stretches some 61 km from the River Boyne in the south of the county to Carlingford Lough in the north. The breadth of the county is on average only 20 kilometres.

County Louth has a strong settlement structure dominated by the presence of the two largest provincial towns (excluding cities) in the State, Drogheda and Dundalk. These two towns with populations of 28,973 (Drogheda) and 29,037 (Dundalk) account for over 50% of the total population of the county. When the urban environs of both towns are included within the census figures, the proportion of urban dwellers rises even further (LCC 2009).

Elsewhere in the County, there is an even spread of population across a range of towns, villages and open countryside. The other urban centres of significance within the County include the towns of Ardee, Dunleer and Carlingford (LCC 2009). ). The economy of the county, once predominantly industrial, has now evolved into a high tech, knowledge based economy.

In contrast to much of the State, Louth is a predominantly urbanised county, however, away from the major towns the county contains a wide variety of landscapes from the hill and mountain areas of Faughart and Cooley in the north to the relatively low lying agricultural areas which dominate the mid and south of the county.

The county is blessed with a wealth of natural and manmade features including mountain trails, beaches, nature walks, heritage sites and numerous protected structures.

5.2 County Louth’s natural wealth

County Louth has a rich natural heritage, particularly in relation to its wide range of natural and semi-natural habitats, including wetland, woodland, hedgerow, lake, river and upland habitats, that support a wide range of plant and animal species (Louth County Council 2008 & 2010).

In county Louth there are currently 24 proposed Natural Heritage Areas (pNHAs); five Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and four Special Protection Areas (SPAs) comprising mainly coastal and freshwater wetland habitats, such as lakes, rivers, marshes, fens, bogs and woodland (LCC 2008). These are recognised by Louth County Council as important conservation areas, and are included in the County Development Plan and the Biodiversity Action Plan for Louth (Louth County Council 2008 & 2010). The largest single non-coastal wetland site in county Louth is Carlingford Mountain SAC. This site consists, in the main of upland blanket bog and wet heath.

Some of these listed sites, but not all, were surveyed as part of the 2011 LWS.

5.2.1 Topography and landforms

The county can be divided into a number of topographic regions (see Figure 5.1 & 5.2 below).

In 2002, a landscape character assessment was completed for the entire county outside the major towns 13 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______(LCC 2010). This assessment was prepared in accordance with the Government’s Draft Guidelines for Landscape and Landscape Assessment (2000). Nine landscape character areas were identified in County Louth. They represent geographical areas with a particular landscape type or types, and are listed in Table 5.1 and illustrated in Figure 5.1 below.

Table 5.1. Landscape Area Classification for the region identified in county Louth (LCC 2010).

International Carlingford Lough and Mountains including West Feede Uplands National Boyne and Mattock Valley Regional Dundalk Bay Coast, Dunany to Boyne Estuary Coast, Uplands of Collon and Monasterboice

Local Cooley Lowlands and Coastal Area Lower Faughart. Castletown and Flurry River Basins, Louth Drumlin and Lake Areas Muirhevna Plain

Carlingford Peninsula or Cooley Mountains Zone: The mountains that occupy the Carlingford or Cooley peninsula are often called the Cooley Mountains. They are located in the north of the county. The highest peaks are Carlingford Mountain at 588 m followed by Clermont Carn at in height. They are composed of both extrusive and intrusive igneous and partly- metamorphosed sedimentary rocks.

The Cooley Mountains are a very popular destination for hill walkers. The famous Táin Way, which is a national walking route, covers 40 km of The Cooley Mountains. This includes forest tracks, mountain paths and country roads. It also includes a selection of walks visiting the Windy Gap and Barnavave.

Coastal Zone: The coastal zone in the east of the county, which is demarcated on the west by the Belfast - Dublin railway line, consists of low tidal ground, much of which has been colonised by salt marsh species. It includes the Dundalk Bay Coast and Dunany to Boyne Estuary Coast Landscape Character Areas shown in Figure 5.1 below. Its geological interest is its Quaternary raised beaches (Fahy 1972).

Drumlin Zone: The north-west landscape (Louth Drumlin & Lakes areas in Figure 5.1 below) of the county is dominated by drumlin hills, formed during the last glaciation of Ireland, which are rich in calcium carbonate and which enclose small inter drumlin hollow water bodies and raised bogs (Fahy 1972).

Central Zone: The central landscape (Muirhevna Plain area in Figure 5.1 below) of the county is dominated by low-lying land with deep drift cover which makes it ideal for intensive agricultural use, in particular arable crops (Fahy 1972).

Collon Uplands Zone: The southern landscape (Uplands of Collon and Monasterboice area in Figure 5.1 below) of the county is an upland region which extends into county Meath. To the south of the River Dee the terrain changes and deep drift is replaced by a shallow drift cover on high ground.

14 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Figure 5.1. Landscape character areas in County Louth.

(Source: Landscape Character Assessment 2002, Louth County Council © Louth County Council)

15 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Figure 5.2. Relief and drainage map of County Louth of showing elevation, the river system, and the location of the LWS 2011 sites.

Reproduced under OSI Licence number 2011 / 30 / CCMA / Louth Local Authorities. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Ordnance Survey Ireland and Government of Ireland copyright. © Ordnance Survey Ireland, 2011.

16 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______5.2.2 Geology

In geological terms Louth is a county of dramatic contrasts within short distances.

The underlying geology of Louth is mainly comprises sandy and shaley rocks (Figure 5.3). These were deposited during the Silurian Period and are part of the Longford-Down massif. The bedrock of other areas of Louth consists of Carboniferous limestone, which continues to extend into the midlands (Fahy 1972).

Almost the entire area between Dundalk Bay and Carlingford Lough is covered with mountains. The Cooley Peninsula acts as a de facto extension of the Mourne Mountains to the northeast in County Down and of the Ring of Gullion in south Armagh and is composed primarily, though not exclusively of granitic rocks. The highest mountain in the range is Carlingford Mountain at 589 m, followed by Clermont Carn at 510 m.

In southern Louth a low-lying ridge of hills, known as the Oriel Hills, stretch from the coastal village of Clogherhead west to Collon and across the county border into the heart of County Meath. The area of Louth that lies between the Oriel Hills to the south and the Cooley Peninsula to the north is very flat and is traditionally known as the Plain of Muirthemhne. This low-lying land is mainly used intensively for agriculture.

The rest of the county is predominantly low lying and flat chiefly characterized by shales and greywackes with the exception of the low lying hills north of Drogheda at in the Fieldstown area and in the vicinity of Collon.

The other noticeable geological and topographical features of the county occur north and west of Dundalk with the emergence of clay based Drumlin landscapes which are more characteristic of counties Monaghan and Down to the north and west. The drumlin belt forms much of the southern borderland of Ulster. These rounded hills and the wetlands between them made travel, especially in winter, extremely difficutl well into the modern period

17 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Figure 5.3. The solid geology of County Louth showing the main rock types occurring in the county, and the location of the LWS 2011 sites. Source: Geological Survey of Ireland 1:500000 bedrock map.

18 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______5.2.3 Soils

The soils of County Louth are surprisingly varied for such a relatively small area (LCC 2009). In the Cooley Lowlands and Coastal Areas the underlying limestone and glacial deposits have resulted in a rich soil cover of acid brown earths with some gleys and brown podzolics.

In nearby the Carlingford Lough and Mountains area, including West Feede Uplands, quite a variety of soils is found. In the higher areas of the peninsula there are Lithosols with blanket peat and peaty podzols. Lower down there is a variety of brown podzolics with gleys and peats. To the west there are acid brown earths with some gleys and podzols.

North and West of Dundalk lie the Lower Faughart, Castletown & Flurry River Basins. Here the soils are acid brown earths with a mix of gleys and brown podzolics. There are a few small areas of lowland peat bog. This mixture of soils is reflected in farming patterns through the county with a predominance of small holdings in the vicinity of the Cooley Peninsula characterized by animal husbandry whilst farms are generally much larger towards the mid and south of the County and tending towards arable farming, except in a few higher pockets north of Drogheda.

19 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Figure 5.4. Sub-soil (parent material) map of County Louth, and the location of the LWS 2011 sites. Source: Teagasc subsoil map (Meehan 2004).

Abbreviations to major deposits in Figure 5.3: KaRck, Karst Rock; TLs, Limestone Till; BktPt, Blanket Peat; FenPt, Fen Peat; Cut, Cutover Bog; TNSSs, Till derived from Namurian Sandstones and shales; TDSs, Till derived from Devonian Sandstone; TLPSsS, Till derived from Lower Palaeozoic Sandstones and Shapes; TDSs, Till derived from Devonian Sandstones and Shales.

20 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______5.2.4 Climate

Ireland has a temperate maritime climate, that’s best described as being mild, moist and changeable. Ireland’s weather is also characterized by the abundant rainfall the country receives, and the notable absence of temperature extremes.

Rainfall is considerably greater in the western part of the country than in the east, where Louth lies. Typically, May and June are Ireland’s sunniest months, averaging between 5 and 6½ hours of sunshine per day in most parts of the country. In contrast, December sunshine varies from 1 hour to 2 hours, with high cloud cover.

In comparison to climates typical of other countries in the same latitude, Ireland’s weather is considerably warmer. Summers in Ireland are generally cool and the winters mild, thanks to the country’s geographical position: lying in the North Atlantic Drift, the Gulf Stream warms Ireland all year.

Ireland’s inland areas are generally cooler in winter and warmer in summer in comparison to the coastal regions. Clones, in county Monaghan and Mullingar, county Westmeath both have the lowest annual mean daily average temperature, at 8.8°C. Mean daily winter temperatures vary from 4°C to 7°C, and mean daily summer temperatures vary from 14.5°C to 16°C.

County Louth receives between 800 and 1000 millimetres of rainfall in the year. The upland area in the north of the county on Carlingford Mountain, has rainfall levels which exceed 1,000 millimetres per year (RIA 1979). December and January are typically the wettest months of the year, and April the driest. The majority of county Louth averages 150 rain days per year, with the coastal zone recording fewer rain days (RIA 1979).

5.2.5 Ground and surface waters

County Louth straddles two River Basin Districts; the Neagh Bann and the Eastern River Basin District. However the bulk of County Louth lies within the Neagh Bann River Basin district and is administered as part of the NS Share River Basin District Project.

The surface water drainage pattern and river catchments are shown in Figure 5.2 and 5.5 respectively.

21 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Figure 5.5. Catchment Map of County Louth, and the location of the LWS 2011 sites. Source: after Ordnance Survey Ireland.

22 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______5.3 Protection of Louth Wetlands

Due to their recognised ecological importance, many wetland sites in county Louth are already given legislative protection under various site conservation designations. The main nature conservation designations that afford protection to wetland sites are summarised below.

NP – National Park National Parks are defined as areas where one or several ecosystems are not materially altered by human exploitation and occupation; where plant and animal species, geomorphological sites and habitats are of special scientific, educational and recreational interest or which contain a natural landscape of great beauty. It is the policy of the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, endorsed by successive governments, to abide by the criteria and standards for National Parks as set by the IUCN (www.NPWS.ie).

There is no National Park in county Louth.

NR - Nature Reserve Nature Reserves are areas set aside for their conservation value by the Minister for the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government. These sites are usually State owned, in cases where these areas are privately owned, land-owners enter into a management agreement with the National Parks and Wildlife Service (www.NPWS.ie).

There are no Nature Reserves designated in county Louth.

SAC – Special Area of Conservation Special Areas of Conservation have been selected from the prime examples of wildlife conservation areas in Ireland. The legal basis for their selection is the EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC of the 21st May 1992) (CEC 1979). SACs that are undergoing the formal designation process but have not finally been submitted to Europe are called cSACs which stands for “candidate Special Areas of Conservation”.

Actions that may affect the ecological integrity of sites are not to be permitted except in circumstances of overriding public interest or safety. Land-owners require permission from the Minister of the Environment to carry out certain ‘notifiable actions’ such as drainage or fertiliser application, depending on the habitats in question.

There are currently six sites designated as SACs in County Louth, including Carlingford Mountain, Carlingford Shore Dundalk Bay, Clogher Head, Boyne Coast and Estuary and River Boyne and River Blackwater. Only Carlingford Mountain contains significant freshwater wetland areas in the form of upland blanket bog and wet heath.

SPA - Special Protection Area Special Protection Areas for Birds are areas which have been designated to ensure the conservation of certain categories of birds. Ireland is required to conserve the habitats of two categories of wild birds under the European Birds Directive (Council Directive 79/409/EEC of the 2nd April 1979) (CEC 1979).

The NPWS is responsible for ensuring that such areas are protected from significant damage.

There are currently five sites designated as SPAs in County Louth, at Dundalk Bay, Carlingford Lough, Boyne Estuary, River Boyne and River Blackwater (September 2011) and Stabannan – Braganstown.

NHA – Natural Heritage Area The basic designation for wildlife conservation in Ireland is the Natural Heritage Area (NHA). This is an area considered important in a national context for the habitats present or which holds species of plants and animals whose habitat needs protection. Some of these sites are small, such as roosting areas for rare bats; others can be large, such as a blanket bog complex or a sand dune system.

To date in Ireland, only raised bogs (75 sites) and blanket bogs (73 sites) have been formally designated as Natural Heritage Areas covering an area of ca 60,000 ha (www.NPWS.ie). Under the Wildlife Amendment Act (2000), NHAs are legally protected from damage from the date they are formally proposed for designation. The protection afforded to Natural Heritage Areas is similar to that afforded to Special Areas of Conservation as described above.

There are currently no designated Natural Heritage Areas in county Louth. 23 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

pNHA - proposed Natural Heritage Areas Proposed Natural Heritage Areas (pNHA) were published on a non-statutory basis in 1995, but have not since been statutorily proposed or designated. These sites are of significance for wildlife and habitats. Some of the pNHAs are tiny, such as a roosting place for rare bats. Others are large - a woodland or a lake, for example.

Nationally pNHAs cover approximately 65,000 ha and NPWS has indicated that designation will proceed on a phased basis over the coming years (www.NPWS.ie). Prior to statutory designation, pNHAs are subject to limited protection being considered in afforestation grants, REPS and recognition by planning authorities. Policy CON 11 in the Louth County Development Plan 2009 – 2015 commits the council “To resist and development that would be harmful to [any pNHA] or that would result in a significant deterioration or habitats or disturbance of species”.

There are currently 24 sites designated as pNHAs in County Louth (LCC 2010). Ten of these sites contain freshwater wetlands.

[note that geological sites can also be proposed for designation as NHAs and/or as County Geological Sites (CGA). Thirty-four such sites have been identified in Louth, of which at least 18 are of national or higher importance. Some of these may also be wetland or other coastal sites however their real extents have not been defined to the council.] cNHA – candidate Natural Heritage Area Candidate Natural Heritage Area (cNHA) is the name given to wildlife sites that are proposed by NPWS and by third parties for consideration as NHAs. Included within this category are the pNHAs described above, together with newly discovered sites recommended for conservation by a variety of third parties but which have not been objectively surveyed by NPWS.

These sites are of significance for wildlife and habitats.

Prior to designation these sites may require further detailed survey and evaluation for their conservation value. If they are considered of national conservation value they may then enter the formal NHA designation process. The cNHA sites have no legal protection until they are taken up into the formal NHA designation process, unless they are also former pNHA (see above).

LWS Sites Following the completion of the LWS 2011 it is recommended that 23 sites which were not previously included on sites of conservation value within the county, should be submitted as cNHA to the National Parks and Wildlife Service for conservation designation. These include sites ranked as C+ Rating: County conservation value or above. See Appendix 1 and the results section for further details.

24 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

5.4 Louth Freshwater Wetland types

The LWS set out to map the distribution and extent of wetland habitats within 108 potential freshwater wetlands (Brophy 2009). Habitats were identified and mapped according to the Heritage Council Guide to Habitats in Ireland (Fossitt 2000).

The Heritage Council Guide to Habitats in Ireland sets out a standard hierarchical scheme for the identification of habitats in Ireland. The guide is a practical tool to allow identification and recording of habitat types.

Table 5.2 adapted from Fossitt (2000) lists the main wetland habitat types being recorded and mapped as part of the LWS. The level 1 wetland habitat categories are divided to level 2 and subsequently level 3 as shown in Table 5.2. These levels provide progressively more detail of the specific wetland habitat(s) recognised.

The aim of the LWS was to categorise the wetlands surveyed in terms of the occurrence of the 35 level 3 wetland habitat types.

Louth contains a wide range of wetlands of high international and national importance (NRA 2009). Due to the varying topography, geology, hydrology, climate, coastline and soils present it has wetland habitats ranging from raised bogs (mostly cutover), upland blanket bogs, fens, marshes, coastal lagoons, large riverine systems, a variety of lakes, springs, wet woodlands and many more.

Brief descriptions and illustrations of each of the main freshwater wetland habitat types that occur in Louth are presented In the following section.

In addition to the general habitat descriptions this summary introduction to habitats includes some additional information on the wildlife value of these habitats. An indication is also provided of the main threats faced nationally by the more ‘natural’ of these habitats deemed to be of high conservation importance, which is based on the NPWS report entitled ‘The Status of EU Protected Habitats and Species in Ireland’ (Anonymous 2008d).

For a more detailed description of the wetland habitat types, the main floral species that occur in them, and the detailed relationship between schemes used in Fossitt (2000) and the EU Habitats Directive the reader is referred to the Heritage Council Guide to Habitats in Ireland (Fossitt 2000).

25 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Table 5.2. The 35 level three Fossitt (2000) wetland habitat types being recorded as part of the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011. Level 3 Fossitt habitats with a possible corresponding habitat under Annex 1 of the EU Habitats Directive are marked with an *, while priority habitats under the EU Habitats Directive are marked with **.

Fossitt Level 1 Fossitt Level 2 Fossitt Level 3 Habitat Code and Name Habitat Code and Name Habitat Code and Name F Freshwater FL Lakes and Ponds FL1 Dystrophic lakes * FL2 Acid oligotrophic lakes * FL3 Limestone/marl lakes FL4 Mesotrophic lakes FL5 Eutrophic lakes * FL6 Turloughs ** FL7 Reservoirs FL8 Other artificial lakes and ponds FW Watercourses FW1 Eroding/upland rivers * FW2 Depositing/lowland rivers * FW3 Canals FW4 Drainage ditches FP Springs FP1 Calcareous springs ** FP2 Non-Calcareous springs FS Swamps FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps FS2 Tall herb swamps * G Grassland and Marsh GS Semi-natural grassland GS4 Wet grassland * GM Freshwater marsh GM1 Marsh * H Heath & dense bracken HH Heath HH3 Wet heath * P Peatlands PB Bogs PB1 Raised bogs ** PB2 Upland blanket bog ** PB3 Lowland blanket bog ** PB4 Cutover bog * PB5 Eroding blanket bog PF Fens and Flushes PF1 Rich fen and flush ** PF2 Poor fen and flush PF3 Transition mire and quaking bog * W Woodland and scrub WN Semi-natural woodland WN4 Wet pedunculate oak-ash woodland ** WN5 Riparian woodland WN6 Wet willow-alder-ash woodland WN7 Bog woodland ** WS Scrub/transitional woodland WS1 Scrub * C Coastland CW Brackish waters CW1 Lagoons and saline lakes ** CW2 Tidal rivers * CD Sand dune systems CD5 Dune slacks *

26 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______5.5 Wetland Habitats in County Louth – a brief description FL1 - Dystrophic lakes

Natural dystrophic lakes are an Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Natural lakes and ponds that are highly acidic (pH range 3.5- 5.5), base-poor and low in nutrients, and where the water is brown in colour owing to inputs of humic and other acids from peat.

They are usually associated with blanket bogs, mainly the lowland type, raised bogs, cutover bogs and wet heathland areas and are characterised by peaty rather than rocky margins and substrata. The transition fr - Photograph: Rassan Bog, Co. Louth om bog to open water is often abrupt. These lakes are important habitats for insect life.

The principal threats to natural dystrophic lakes and ponds are peat cutting, overgrazing and afforestation of peatland habitats.

Relatively common in upland blanket bog areas throughout the county such as within the Carlingford Mountain NHA, or in cutover bog sites in the lowlands such as at Ardee Bog.

FL2 - Acid oligotrophic lakes

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Lakes and ponds that are low in nutrients, base-poor and acidic. Most acid oligotrophic lakes are associated with areas of acidic bedrock and many have rocky margins. The substrate in shallow water is either rock, organic lake sediment, or coarse mineral material (sand and gravel). Water is often brownish in colour as a result of inputs from peaty soils or bogs in the catchments. These lakes support communities of submerged and floating aquatic plants.

These lakes are important habitats for insect life.

The principal threats to acid oligotrophic lakes include nutrient enrichment arising from agricultural practices such as overgrazing and excessive fertilisation, as well as afforestation, and waste water from housing developments in rural areas. Lakes may also be negatively affected by the introduction of invasive alien species, and their utilization for an increasing number of sport and leisure activities.

This habitat type occurs in areas with a non-calcareous bedrock. Examples may occur in county Louth in the Carlingford Mountain NHA. Photograph: Blanket bog area, Co. Galway Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______FL 3- Limestone and marl lakes

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive. Hard water lakes and ponds of limestone areas that are base-rich and poor to moderately rich in nutrients (oligo- to mesotrophic).

The water is typically clear and the lake sediment usually has a high proportion of marl, a white clay precipitate of calcium carbonate. Marl-forming Stoneworts (Chara spp.) are often abundant and may form dense carpets in unpolluted waters. Various- leaved Pondweed (Potamogeton gramineus) is Photograph: Dummy’s Lough, Co. Monaghan Photograph: Dummy’s also characteristic. These lakes are frequently fringed by alkaline fen and flush vegetation. These lakes are important habitats for insect and birds.

Hard water lakes are often shallow and have a natural high capacity to buffer the effects of enrichment from phosphorus. However, build up of phosphorus in the sediment of these lakes can lead to rapid shifts in ecosystem quality. There is a continued threat from nutrient enrichment in these lowland lakes arising from intensification of agriculture and urban developments.

It is unclear whether this habitat type is found in County Louth.

FL4 - Mesotrophic lakes

Lakes and ponds that are moderately rich in nutrients, and where the water is sometimes discoloured by algae. Characteristic aquatic plants include White Water-lily (Nymphaea alba), Yellow Water-lily (Nuphar lutea), and a large number of Pondweeds, Stoneworts (Chara spp.) may also be present. The fringing and aquatic plant communities are typically more lush than those associated with oligotrophic lakes.

These lakes are important habitats for insect and birds. Photograph: Loughanmore Lough, Co. Louth

The principal threats to mesotrophic lakes include nutrient enrichment arising from agricultural practices such as overgrazing and excessive fertilisation, as well as afforestation, and waste water from housing developments in rural areas. Lakes may also be negatively affected by the introduction of invasive alien species, and their utilization for an increasing number of sport and leisure activities.

Many of the inter drumlin lakes in county Louth fit into this category, or lakes in gravel pits such as the one at Loughanmore shown above. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______FL5 - Eutrophic lakes

Natural Eutrophic lakes are an Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Eutrophic lakes and ponds that are high in nutrients and base-rich and the water is usually discoloured or turbid, often grey to green in colour, from the abundant algae and suspended matter present.

Some water bodies are naturally eutrophic but most Irish lakes are eutrophic as a result of enrichment and high levels of nutrients entering the water.

Characteristic aquatic plants of eutrophic lakes and ponds include

Photograph: Beaulieu, Co. Louth Duckweeds (Lemna spp.), Pondweeds (Potamogeton spp.) and Spiked Water- milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum). Submerged aquatics are usually rare or are restricted to shallow waters owing to poor light penetration. Reed beds on sheltered shores and dense stands of fringing vegetation are characteristic of eutrophic lakes and ponds.

The main threat to this lake type is further nutrient enrichment caused by human activities.

Many of the smaller lakes in county Louth are categorised as Eutrophic lakes due to pollution caused by human activities, including such sites as the lake at Beaulieu.

FL6 - Turloughs

Priority habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Turloughs are seasonal lakes that occupy basins or depressions in limestone areas, and where water levels fluctuate markedly during the year. They are virtually unique to Ireland and their greatest concentration is in counties Clare, Galway and Roscommon.

The general pattern is to flood in winter and dry out in summer, Photograph: Moylan Turlough, Co. Monaghan Photograph: Moylan Turlough, but there may be other sporadic rises in response to periods with high rainfall levels. Turloughs normally fill through underground passages and sinkholes in the limestone, but some also have inflowing rivers or streams. Some turlough basins retain standing water in channels, pools or small lakes when flooding subsides. All areas within the normal limit of flooding are considered as part of the turlough habitat. The presence of the distinctive dark moss, Cinclidotus fontinaloides, on stone walls or rocks can help to establish the flooding level within a turlough.

Soils of turlough basins can include marls, peat, clays or loams. Large boulders or exposures of bedrock may also be present.

Nutrient enrichment and inappropriate grazing regimes are the main threats to turlough habitats in Ireland.

It is unclear whether this habitat type is found in County Louth. To date this habitat type has not been reported from county Louth although it may occur in the limestone region in the north west of the county. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______FL7 - Reservoirs

Open water bodies that are used for the storage and supply of water. It includes natural lakes where water levels fluctuate significantly and unnaturally as a result of water abstraction, in addition to modified lakes with dams or retaining walls or banks or entirely artificial water bodies, some lined with concrete and that are used as reservoirs.

Redshank (Polygonum persicaria) is often common along the draw-down zone of reservoirs in lowland areas. Photograph: Bohernabreena reservoir, Co. Dublin Photograph: Bohernabreena reservoir,

FL8 - Other artificial lakes and ponds

Includes farm ponds, artificial or ornamental bodies of standing water that may be found in parks, demesnes, gardens or golf courses as well as flooded quarries, tailings ponds and water treatment plants (with open water). The nutrient status of these artificial water bodies is variable and may be high as in the case of hypertrophic lakes in urban parks.

These water bodies are often important habitats for invertebrates and amphibians as they represent a more ‘natural’

habitat within otherwise highly Photograph: Stehpenstown Pond, Louth. managed environments. They may also have a high educational value in urban areas as a first contact point for people with a wetland habitat and its wildlife.

The main threats faced by such habitats include water pollution, habitat destruction caused by changes in farming practice or abandonment and infill by encroaching vegetation.

An example of this habitat can be seen in county Louth at Stephenstown Pond. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______FW1 - Eroding/upland rivers

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Natural watercourses, or sections of these, that are actively eroding, unstable and where there is little or no deposition of fine sediment. Eroding conditions are typically associated with the upland parts of river systems where gradients are often steep, and water flow is fast and turbulent. For some rivers on the seaward side of coastal mountains, particularly in the west of Ireland, eroding conditions persist to sea level because of comparatively steep gradients over short distances, and high rainfall. Small sections of other lowland rivers may also be eroding where there are waterfalls, rapids or weirs. The beds of eroding/upland rivers are characterised by exposed bedrock and loose rock. Pebbles, gravel and coarse sand may accumulate in places, but finer sediments are rarely deposited. These rivers vary in size but are usually smaller and shallower than depositing/lowland rivers.

The unstable rocky channels of eroding/upland rivers usually support little vegetation cover. Submerged rocks and boulders may be colonised by aquatic mosses. Exposed rocks and wet shaded banks may also support extensive cover of lichens and liverworts. Higher plants are generally rare or absent except in places where fine sediments are trapped.

Pressures from eutrophication, overgrazing, excessive fertilisation, afforestation and the introduction of invasive alien species are the main threat to this habitat. Almost two thirds of the rivers assessed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are at risk of failing to meet their environmental objectives.

Many of the streams and rivers in the Louth uplands at on Carlingford Mountain fit this category. Photograph: Owenduff river tributary, Co. Mayo Photograph: Owenduff river tributary,

FW2 - Depositing/lowland rivers

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Watercourses, or sections of these, where fine sediments are deposited on the river bed. Depositing conditions are typical of lowland areas where gradients are low and water flow is slow and sluggish. These rivers vary in size but are usually larger and deeper than those above. In a natural state these rivers erode their banks and meander across floodplains. Plant and animal communities are influenced by numerous factors including substratum type, water force, nutrient status, water quality, channel size, water depth, human impact, disturbance and shade. Within a river channel there may be deep pools, backwaters, banks or mid- channel bars of gravel, sand or mud, in addition to vegetated islands and fringing reed beds. The substratum of depositing/lowland rivers comprises mainly fine alluvial or peaty sediments. Vegetation may include floating and submerged aquatics, with fringing emergents in shallow water or overgrowing the banks. Due to their location in lowland areas, where agricultural activities are prevalent and with increased population pressures, most of these rivers have been modified to some extent to control water flow, facilitate navigation or prevent flooding and erosion. Canalised or walled sections of rivers, dredged or deepened sections, and artificial earth banks may occur. These activities all alter the natural river bank and adjacent vegetation occurring along such rivers.

The principal threats to these rivers include nutrient enrichment arising from agricultural practices, human developments along river banks and the introduction of invasive alien species, and utilization for sport and leisure activities.

There are some examples of this habitat occurring in county Louth such as the Fane, Kilcurry and Boyne River systems. Photograph: Dromore River, Co. Monaghan Photograph: Dromore River, Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______FW3 - Canals

Canals are artificial linear bodies of water that were originally constructed for the purpose of navigation. They typically lack strong currents and any significant channel or bank erosion. This means that canals tend to have closer affinities with ponds than rivers. They are readily colonised by aquatic plants and frequently support floating, submerged or emergent vegetation.

Locks that are used to control water levels are considered as part of the canal habitat.

Canals are important habitats for fish, insect and bird life.

All canals require management

Photograph: Blennervile Canal, Co. Kerry and maintenance to keep them open and operational. Where canals are abandoned they rapidly become choked with aquatic vegetation.

FW4 - Drainage ditches

These are linear water bodies or wet channels that are entirely artificial in origin, and some sections of natural watercourses that have been excavated or modified to enhance drainage and control the flow of water. Drainage ditches may be intimately associated with a range of other wetland types, including wet grassland, and modified marsh, bog and fen habitats.

Drainage ditches are generally not used for navigation and are typically narrower than canals. Drainage ditches either contain water (flowing or stagnant) or are wet enough to support wetland

vegetation. Water levels are also likely to Photograph: Wottonstown, Co. Louth undergo seasonal fluctuations.

Drainage ditches must be maintained and cleared in order to keep them open. Those that are overgrown with vegetation are likely to be cleared intermittently.

Common habitat type throughout county Louth, examples of the habitat can be seen at most wetland sites such as Wottonstown shown above. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______FP1 - Calcareous springs

Priority habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Calcareous spring fens develop around permanent freshwater springs or areas of water seepage that are especially rich in calcium. The upwelling of water is often associated with an interface between permeable and impermeable rock or soil layers.

The water supply may be from upwelling groundwater sources, or from seepage sources or sometimes from geo-thermal sources. Petrifying springs may be closely associated with Photograph: Pollardstown Fen, Co. Kildare Alkaline fens but with less fluctuations in water. A key requirement is a steady flow of water, though this may dry up for short periods.

Springs are often very small features covering no more than some tens of metres. Petrifying springs occur on shallow peaty or skeletal mineral soils.

On contact with the atmosphere at the spring head, carbon dioxide is lost from the water or is depleted by photosynthetic activities of plants growing in the spring, which results in the precipitation of a calcium bicarbonate marl or tufa crust. The vegetation in such areas, and especially mosses may be coated in a thick crust of lime. Larger petrifying springs may form tufa cones that constitute a singular habitat.

Springs occur in lowland and upland areas, are often very limited in extent and may be associated with a variety of different habitats such as alkaline fen, woodland, heathland, grassland, limestone rich boulder clay or gravel deposits or on exposed rock.

Spring vegetation is characterized by an abundant or dominant moss cover and may or may not be peat-forming.

Calcareous spring fens are rare in Ireland.

As calcareous spring sites are often small in extent they are threatened by a range of land reclamation, turf cutting, and drainage activities, which can rapidly degrade their structure and function. Damage to this habitat type is likely to have increased in severity since the 1990’s due to these activities, which adversely impact on these small scale habitats.

It is unclear whether this habitat type is found in county Louth. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______FP2 - Non-Calcareous springs

Non-calcareous springs that are irrigated and kept permanently moist by acidic to neutral water that is base- poor and typically oligotrophic. They may be associated with skeletal mineral or peaty soils. Vegetation is typically dominated by mosses and a few higher plant species.

Non-Calcareous Springs occur in lowland and upland areas, are often very limited in extent and may be associated with a variety of different habitats such as woodland, heathland, grassland, bogs, wet clay banks or gravel deposits or on exposed bare rock.

As these spring sites are often small in extent they are threatened by a range of land reclamation, turf cutting, afforestation and drainage activities, which can rapidly degrade their structure and function. Damage to this habitat type is likely to have increased in severity since the 1990’s.

It is unclear whether this habitat type is found in county Louth. Photograph: Iron flush spring, Co. Mayo

FS1 - Reed and large sedge swamps

Swamps are commonly found around lakes, on slow flowing river banks and estuaries.

They are usually species-poor stands of vegetation that are dominated by Reeds and other large grasses or large, tussock-forming Sedges. Most reed and large sedge swamps are overwhelmingly dominated by one or a small number of species, as in the case of reed beds. Stands of vegetation can range from very dense to open.

Unlike tall-herb swamps below, Co. Louth Photograph: Newtowndarver, in reed and large sedge swamp the broad-leaved herb component is a minor element in the vegetation.

Swamps support a number of EU protected species including Otter, Sedge Warbler, Water Rail, Moorhen and other water fowl.

The principal threats to this habitat include nutrient enrichment and damage arising from agricultural practices (overgrazing, mowing and drainage), human developments around lakes and utilization of lakes for increased sport and leisure activities.

Examples of this habitat are common on lakes throughout county Louth, an example of the habitat can be seen at Newtowndarver. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______FS2 - Tall herb swamps

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Tall-herb swamps are comparatively species-rich stands of vegetation dominated by herbs that occur in wet areas where the water table is above the ground surface for most of the year, or where water levels fluctuate regularly as in the case of tidal sections of rivers. Tall herb swamps are not dominated by reeds.

Swamps support a number of EU protected species including Otter, Reed Warbler, Water Rail, Moorhen and other water fowl.

Reported in county Louth from the Boyne river valley. Photograph: Greaghglas Lough, Co. Monaghan GS4 - Wet grassland

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Rushy fields or wet grassland can be found on flat or sloping ground in upland and lowland areas. It occurs on wet or waterlogged mineral or organic soils that are poorly-drained or, in some cases, subjected to seasonal or periodic flooding. On sloping ground, wet grassland is mainly confined to clay-rich gleys and loams, or peaty soils that are wet but not waterlogged. Wet grassland occurs on areas of poorly-drained farmland that have not recently been

improved, seasonally flooded Photograph: Lisnalee, Co. Monaghan alluvial grasslands such as the River Shannon callows, and wet grasslands of turlough basins.

Agricultural intensification over the past century, drainage, increased fertilisation and more recently, abandonment of pastoral systems, which contributes to rank vegetation and scrub encroachment, all lead to the loss of some typical flora and to a reduction in the area of the habitat nationally.

Common throughout county Louth, where the habitat can be seen in inter drumlin hollows in the lowlands of the NW of the county. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______GM1 - Marsh

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Marsh is found on level ground near slow-flowing river banks, lake shores, and in other places where mineral or shallow peaty soils are waterlogged, and where the water table is close to ground level for most of the year.

Unlike swamps, standing water is not a characteristic feature except, perhaps, during very wet periods or in winter months. Marshes tend to be comparatively species-rich especially with herbs. It can be an ideal breeding ground for waders such as Snipe.

The main threats to this habitat include the spread of invasive species, arterial drainage and agricultural improvement Photograph: Tankardsrock, Co. Louth Photograph: Tankardsrock, at the edge of rivers and lakes.

Marsh has been reported widely from county Louth. The habitat occurs at Tankardsrock.

HH3 - Wet Heath

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Wet heaths include vegetation with at least 25% cover of dwarf shrubs such as Ling Heather, on peaty soils and shallow wet peats that typically have an average depth of 15-50 cm (where deeper peat deposits occur the habitat is usually classified as bog).

Wet heath can occur in upland and lowland areas and is widespread on the lower slopes of hills and mountains that are either too dry or too steep for deep peat accumulation. Wet heath can grade into, or form Ardee Bog, Co. Louth Photograph: intimate mosaics with upland blanket bog, or lowland blanket bog with minor changes in slope and topography.

Wet heath is typically dominated by Ling Heather (Calluna vulgaris) and Cross-leaved Heath (Erica tetralix), or by Purple Moor- grass (Molinia caerulea) and/or Sedges. Moss and Lichen cover may be high in areas of undamaged wet heath. Wet heaths and adjacent blanket bog areas support a number of EU protected species including Red Grouse, Curlew, Golden Plover and Hen Harrier.

Reclamation, afforestation and burning have resulted in extensive loss of wet heath. Overstocking of land with sheep has also degraded large areas of the habitat, especially in western regions, through overgrazing and trampling. This has depleted heather and other plant cover and allowed invasion by non-heath species, or exposure of peat to severe erosion. Although various schemes to initiate recovery of damaged habitat through more sustainable stocking rates have been in operation for a number of years, recovery has been slow.

Examples of this habitat often occur in a mosaic with Blanket Bog in the uplands of the county such as on Carlingford Mountain or on some of the cutover bog sites, such as Ardee Bog shown above. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______PB1 - Raised bogs

Priority habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Raised bogs are accumulations of deep acid peat (3-12 m) that originated in shallow lake basins or topographic depressions at the end of the last glaciation 10,000 years ago. The name is derived from the elevated surface, or dome, that develops as raised bogs grow upwards from the surface accumulating organic material; the domed effect is often exaggerated when the margins of a bog are damaged by turf cutting or drainage, and are drying out.

The surface of a relatively intact raised bog is typically wet, acid and deficient in plant nutrients (as bogs receive most of nutrients through rainfall), and supports specialised plant communities that are low in overall diversity. The vegetation is open and colourful Sphagnum mosses dominate the ground layer. Raised bogs are most abundant in the lowlands of central and mid-west Ireland.

Intact actively growing raised bog is extremely rare, having decreased in area by over 35% in the last 10 years. Ongoing deterioration of the hydrological conditions of raised bogs at current rates caused by peat cutting, drainage, forestry and burning severely threatens the viability of the habitat at most locations in Ireland.

Intact examples of this habitat no longer occur in county Louth where most of the raised bogs were cut in the past to win fuel. Photograph: Garriskil Bog, Co. Westmeath

PB2 - Upland blanket bog

Priority habitat under the EU Habitats Directive, provided that active peat accumulation is occurring within a site.

Upland blanket bog occurs on flat or gently sloping ground above 150 m and is widespread on hills and mountains throughout Ireland. The 150 m limit serves to distinguish upland from lowland blanket bog but is loosely applied. Peat depths vary and normally fall in the range of 1-2 m, but can be much deeper in pockets. Upland blanket bog can be extremely wet where it occurs on level terrain and may have surface drainage features that are typical of lowland blanket bog.

Blanket bog areas support a number of EU species including Irish Hare, Red Grouse, Curlew, Golden Plover and Hen Harrier.

Current pressures and threats include overstocking by grazing animals (especially sheep), peat erosion, drainage, burning and infrastructural developments (i.e. windfarms).

Good examples of this habitat occurs within the Carlingford Mountain NHA in the north eastern part of the county. Photograph: Carlingford Mountain, Co. Louth Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______PB3 - Lowland blanket bog

Priority habitat under the EU Habitats Directive, provided that active peat accumulation is occurring within a site. Depressions on peat substrates (found within blanket bog areas) are an Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Lowland blanket bog, also known as Atlantic or oceanic blanket bog, is more restricted in its distribution than the upland type and is largely confined to wetter regions along the western seaboard where the annual rainfall exceeds 1250 mm. Blanket formation started 4,000 years ago as the climate became wetter. Described as a climatic peat type, it occurs on flat or gently sloping ground below 150 m.

Photograph: Owenduff Bog, Co. Mayo Peat depths vary considerably (1.5-7 m) depending on the underlying topography, and are usually intermediate between those of raised bog and upland blanket bog. The vegetation of lowland blanket bog is typically 'grassy' in appearance. This habitat includes important breeding grounds for a number of EU Bird Directive species including Merlin, Golden Plover, Hen Harrier and Red Grouse.

Blanket bogs depend to a large degree on maintenance of surface water flow patterns at a landscape scale and hence are dependent on sensitive land management practices. Extensive areas have been destroyed or highly modified (chiefly through reclamation, peat extraction, conifer afforestation but also via erosion and even landslides triggered by human activity). Current pressures include overstocking with grazing animals, peat extraction, drainage, burning and infrastructural developments, and in the past unsuitable afforestation projects.

This habitat type has not been reported from county Louth.

PB4 - Cutover bog

Depressions on peat substrates (found within cutover bog areas) are an Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Cutover bog is a variable habitat, or complex of habitats, that can include mosaics of bare peat and re- vegetated areas with woodland, scrub, heath, fen and flush or grassland communities. It occurs where part or all of the original peat

has been removed through turf Ardee Bog, Co. Louth Photograph: cutting, by the traditional hand method or mechanically, for either domestic or commercial purposes.

The nature of the recolonising vegetation depends on numerous factors including the frequency and extent of disturbance, hydrology, the depth of peat remaining, and the nature and soil chemistry of the peat and the underlying rock or soil. Standing water is usually present in drains, pools or excavated hollows. Some large areas of cutover bog have been reclaimed as farmland or planted with trees, particularly conifers.

The full extent of the cutover may be difficult to establish as it frequently grades into other marginal habitats or farmland.

Common throughout the peatland / cutover raised bog habitats in Louth such as Ardee Bog (where peat extraction is still occurring) and Redbog (where old abandoned peat banks/faces can still be seen). Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______PB5 - Eroding blanket bog

This habitat occurs on blanket bogs (upland and lowland) where part of the original peat mass has been lost through erosion, and where sizeable areas of bare peat are exposed. Eroding blanket bog is most commonly associated with upland areas, and mountain peaks and ridges in particular. The causes of erosion are numerous; some erosion may have occurred as a natural process but, over the last two decades, overgrazing by livestock (particularly sheep) has been a major contributory factor.

Eroding blanket bog is often characterised by networks of channels and gullies that have cut down through the protective layer of vegetation to expose the underlying peat. As erosion continues, these channels widen, deepen and coalesce until eventually the rocky substratum is reached. Some small blocks of the original bog, known as peat haggs, may remain.

To be categorised as eroding blanket bog, a substantial proportion of the original bog surface should be missing and peat should have eroded below the rooting zone of the surface vegetation. In such situations, the process is likely to be irreversible, or recovery very slow, even if damaging activities cease. Eroding blanket bog also occurs on peatlands damaged by bog bursts when sizeable areas of bare peat are exposed.

In county Louth this habitat type may occur on Carlingford Mountain. Photograph: Kippure Bog, Co. Dublin Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

PF1 - Rich fen and flush

Alkaline (rich) fen is an Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive. Saw sedge (Cladium mariscus) fen, a particular type of rich fen, is a priority habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Rich fen and flush are peat forming wetlands that receive mineral nutrients from sources other than rainfall, usually groundwater or flowing surface waters that are at least mildly base-rich or calcareous, and are usually found over areas of limestone bedrock. The substratum is waterlogged peat and this usually has a high mineral content. Photograph: Schoenus fen, Ballagan and Whitestown, Co. Louth Fens differ from bogs because they are less acidic and have relatively higher mineral levels. They are therefore able to support a much more diverse plant and animal community.

They occur in a variety of situations including valleys or depressions, valley head fens, within transition mire and tall reed beds, on the landward side of hard-water oligotrophic lakeshore communities, calcium-rich flush areas in blanket bogs, dune slack areas, fens adjacent to raised and blanket bogs, in turlough sites, depressions in limestone pavement and wet hollows in machair, and spring fed habitats including cliffs, and even saltmarsh.

Alkaline fen may also occur as a secondary regenerating habitat on mined out bog sites which have been excavated to the fen peat layer.

Vegetation is typically dominated by Black Bog-rush (Schoenus nigricans) and/or small to medium Sedges (grass like plants). Rich fen and flush can be important for orchids. A well-developed layer of brown moss is also characteristic.

Rich fen are also important habitats insects and for a number of rare snail species.

Like most peatland types in Ireland, fens have declined in extent mostly as a result of activities such as peat mining, agricultural drainage, infilling, and fertiliser pollution and eutrophication. Only limited measures have been introduced to address these damaging activities, which are likely to have increased in severity since the 1990’s.

The habitat is rather rare in county Louth. An good example of the habitat occurs at Ballagan and Whitestown.

Photograph: Cladium fen area, Ballagan and Whitestown, Co. Louth Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______PF2 - Poor fen and flush

Poor fen and flushes include peat- forming communities that are fed by groundwater or flowing surface waters that are acid. In most cases the substratum is acid peat which has a higher nutrient status than that of surrounding acid bogs. The vegetation of poor fens and flushes is typically dominated by sedges and extensive carpets of mosses, in particular, Sphagnum moss.

Poor fens occur in a variety of situations including areas flushed by moving water in upland and lowland blanket bogs, flushed depressions in grassland areas, cutover bogs and wet heath areas.

Like most peatland types in Ireland, poor fens have declined in extent Photograph: Corrakit, Co. Louth mostly as a result of activities such as peat cutting and mining, afforestation, agricultural drainage, infilling, and fertiliser pollution and eutrophication.

Present throughout many of the regenerating cutover bog sites in county Louth, such as at Corrakit shown above.

PF3 - Transition mire & quaking bog

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive. Transition mires and quaking bogs are peat-forming communities developed at the surface of waters with little or moderate amounts of nutrients, with characteristics intermediate between rich (alkaline) and poor (acidic) fen types. For this reason, they are considered as a separate habitat but they may occur within, or on the fringes of other peat-forming systems.

They present a large and diverse range of plant communities. In large peaty systems, the most prominent communities are swaying swards, floating carpets or quaking mires formed by medium-sized or small Sedges, associated with Sphagnum or brown mosses. Photograph: Castlecarragh, Co. Louth Transition mires and quaking bogs are usually associated with the wettest parts of a bog or fen and can be found in wet hollows, infilling depressions, or at the transition to areas of open water. The vegetation frequently forms a floating mat or surface scraw over saturated, spongy or quaking peat. Standing water may occur in pools or along seepage zones. The vegetation typically comprises species that are characteristic of bog, fen and open water habitats.

In some cases the mire occupies a physically transitional location between bog and fen vegetation, for example on the margin of a raised bog, or may be associated with certain valley and basin mires.

Like most peatland types in Ireland, transition mire have declined in extent mostly as a result of activities such as peat cutting and mining, afforestation, agricultural drainage and reclamation, infilling, and fertiliser pollution from adjacent farmland.

Extensive areas of this habitat were recorded in county Louth from Castlecarragh, Carraghcloghan, Artoney, Drumgoolan and Hoarstone. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______WN4 - Wet pedunculate oak-ash woodland

Priority habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

This type of woodland is associated with areas that are flooded or waterlogged in winter but which dry out in summer. It occurs on periodically-flooded alluvial sites that are well above the limits of regular inundation, and on drumlins and other sites with heavy, poorly-drained clay soils that are subject to waterlogging.

The woodland is dominated by Pedunculate Oak (Quercus robur) and/or Ash (Fraxinus excelsior), with other common components including Alder (Alnus glutinosa), Willows (Salix spp.) can be locally abundant.

When flooding subsides in alluvial sites, exposed channels and depressions may remain wet or waterlogged.

The area of alluvial forests has declined in Ireland and this, taken together with their fragmented nature, abundance of alien invasive species and sub-optimal grazing regimes and drainage continues to threaten the habitat.

It is unclear whether this habitat type is found in County Louth.

Photograph: Brackloon wood, Co. Mayo

WN5 - Riparian woodland

Riparian woodlands are wet woodland habitats of river margins (gallery woodland) and low islands that are subject to frequent flooding, or where water levels fluctuate as a result of tidal movement (in the lower reaches of rivers).

Riparian woodland is dominated by stands of Willows that may include native and non-native species. Alder (Alnus glutinosa) is occasional. Stands of Reed Canary-grass (Phalaris arundinacea) are common. Indian Balsam (Impatiens glandulifera), an introduced

species, is locally abundant. Photograph: Muckroom wood, Co. Cork These woodlands often reveal an accumulation of river borne debris, including dead vegetation and plastic, when water levels are low. A fine coating of grey mud on vegetation and tree bases that are regularly submerged and emersed is also characteristic.

Their fragmented nature, abundance of alien invasive species and sub-optimal grazing regimes and drainage continues to threaten the habitat.

It is unclear whether this habitat type is found in County Louth. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______WN6 - Wet willow-alder-ash woodland Includes woodlands of permanently waterlogged sites that are dominated by willows (Salix spp.), Alder (Alnus glutinosa) or Ash (Fraxinus excelsior), or by various combinations of some or all of these trees. It includes woodlands of lake shores, stagnant waters and fens, known as carr, in addition to woodlands of spring-fed or flushed sites. Carr occurs on organic soils and fen peats that are subject to seasonal flooding but remain waterlogged even when flood waters recede. As the area of fen has declined so has the area of wet woodland, mostly as a result of activities such as peat cutting Photograph: Redbog, Co. Louth and mining, conifer afforestation, agricultural drainage and reclamation, infilling, and fertiliser pollution from adjacent farmland. Although drainage of fens may in some cases have led to a local short term increase in the cover of wet woodland in some areas. Likely to be the most common wet woodland type in county Louth, examples of the habitat can be seen at Stephenstown Pond, Newtowndarver and Redbog.

WN7 - Bog woodland

Priority habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Woodlands found on intact ombrotrophic bogs (raised or blanket), bog margins and cutover bog. Bog woodland typically occurs on deep acid peat that is relatively well-drained in the upper layers and is commonly associated with former turf cutting activity or drainageor where internal raised bog drainage patterns allow the development of woodland stands (i.e. soak systems on bogs). It may also occur in areas of cutover bog where most of the peat has been removed. Downy Birch (Betula pubescens) is the usual dominant and may form pure stands. Willows (Salix spp.) may also occur. Photograph: Ardee Bog, Co. Louth Photograph: A characteristic feature is the ground cover of Sphagnum moss species which often form deep carpets, usually with Polytrichum mosses and occasional Lichens.

Woodland of waterlogged acid peats in hollows or depressions in areas of upland woodland on siliceous rocks may also be included in this habitat category.

Bog woodlands are closely associated with raised bogs, occurring either on intact bogs, on cutaway or on transition mires (transition between fen and bog). They are found mostly in the central and north midlands. Their total area is uncertain.

They are threatened by drainage, peat cutting, burning and development; although in the long term it is believed that they will expand as cutaway re-floods.

A relatively common habitat in county Louth, on cutover bnog sites such as Redbog, Ardee Bog, Coole Bog and Stormanstown Bog. These bog woodlands on cutover bog do not conform to the EU priority habitat type. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______WS1 - Scrub

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Found on a variety of habitat types, scrub includes areas that are dominated by at least 50% cover of shrubs (e.g. Gorse), stunted trees or brambles. The canopy height is generally less than 5 m, or 4 m in the case of wetland areas.

Scrub frequently develops as a precursor to woodland and is often found in inaccessible locations, or on abandoned or marginal farmland. In the absence of grazing and mowing, scrub can expand to Photograph: Drumass, Co. Louth replace grassland or heath vegetation. Trees are included as components of scrub if their growth is stunted as a result of exposure, poor soils or waterlogging. If tall trees are present, these should have a scattered distribution and should not form a distinct canopy.

Examples of this habitat type can be seen on the edges / or invading the center of many of the wetland sites surveyed in Louth in 2011. CW 1 - Lagoons and saline lakes

Priority habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Coastal lagoons are enclosed bodies of standing brackish water that are wholly or partially separated from the sea by banks of sand, shingle or rock, or by land barriers of rock or peat. Tidal influence is much reduced by these physical barriers or is totally absent.

Salinity (the salt content of the water) is highly variable both within and between

different lagoonal systems. It Photograph: Shilties Lough, Co. Louth fluctuates on a daily and seasonal basis, depending on tides and inputs of freshwater or salt water following storms and, in some situations, may exhibit the full range from sea water to freshwater conditions. Water levels in lagoons generally undergo seasonal fluctuations (high in winter and low in summer) unless strictly controlled by pumping. Strong water currents are absent and this is a key feature which distinguishes lagoons from other marine water bodies.

In addition to typical sedimentary lagoons, this habitat may also occur where brackish waters has become impounded behind artificial barriers (usually as a result of construction), coastal lakes with natural outlets to the sea that experience some tidal exchange at high tide or during storm conditions, and other lakes that are isolated from the sea but which are slightly saline as a result of percolation of sea water or inputs from salt spray and storm waves or surges.

There is no evidence of any significant loss of coastal lagoon habitat range in the last 100 years. The most damaging activity has been the deliberate drainage of the largest lagoon (Tacumshin Lake, Co. Wexford) for agricultural reasons and a smaller lagoon (Shannon airport, Co. Clare) for safety reasons. Further loss of habitat has occurred as a result of natural silting-up. The quality of the habitat has been impacted by water pollution in the form of excessive nutrient enrichment mostly from agricultural sources, but also due to domestic effluents due to an increase in urbanization, commercial and industrial activities adjacent to lagoons.

The only example of this habitat seen during the 2011 LWS occurred at Shilties Lough on the Carlingford Peninsula. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______CD 5 - Dune slacks

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

Dune slacks are nutrient-enriched wet areas that occur in hollows or depressions either behind or between dune ridges, or in blow-outs in sand dunes. The water table is either at, or close to the surface for much of the year and dune slacks may or may not dry out in summer.

Vegetation typically comprises Creeping Willow (Salix repens), Common Reed (Phragmites australis), Sedges, Rushes and broadleaved wetland herbs. A range of orchids are common found. Dune slacks that remain permanently wet are characterised by Mare's-tail (Hippuris vulgaris) and Water Horsetail (Equisetum fluviatile).

This habitat is under serious threat from a range of impacts including overgrazing, undergrazing, over- stabilisation of dunes, water abstraction and drainage, golf course developments, forestry and coastal protection works.

It is unclear whether this habitat type is found in County Louth.

Photograph: Bull Island, Co. Dublin

CW2 - Tidal Rivers

Annex 1 habitat under the EU Habitats Directive.

This category should be used for the lower reaches of rivers or streams, and any artificial watercourses, that are tidal and where there are regular fluctuations in salinity and turbidity, and in the rate and direction of water flow.

The lower limit of a tidal river is defined as the point where the channel begins to widen as it enters the sea or estuary (the mouth of the river). The seaward extensions of tidal rivers should be considered under the appropriate marine littoral or sublittoral category on the basis of vertical zonation and substratum type.

Not recorded during the 2011 LWS on the sites scheduled for survey. Examples of the habitat type do ,however, occur where Photograph: River Lee, Tralee, Co. Kerry the larger lowland rivers enter the sea at Dundalk and Drogheda. Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

6 Materials & Methods

6.1 Louth Wetland Identification Survey - Site Selection

At the start of the project 108 sites were proposed for survey originating from the Potential Wetland Map (Brophy 2009), see Appendix 1. The location of the sites selected for survey within the county is shown in Figure 6.1 below and in more detail on the OS Discovery maps shown in Appendix 5.

6.2 Louth Wetland Identification Survey - Field Survey

Field surveys were undertaken during the period 22nd to 28th August 2011. During each site visit, the following was undertaken and noted: • The general ecological characteristics of the site • Site photographs were taken of notable features • Target notes of features of interest within the site were recorded • Habitats were identified within and immediately adjoining the wetland according to Fossitt (2000) • Notes were taken on the correspondence of any habitats to those listed under Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive • An assessment of threats/damaging activities occurring at the site • Species lists were compiled of both flora and fauna recorded

Site information was recorded using a standard field survey card designed for use during the LWS (see Appendix 3). The information recorded on these cards during the field survey was subsequently used to populate the LWS Site database and GIS.

Habitat information was marked up by hand on the aerial photographs or 6” maps for each of the sites surveyed in detail.

Plant identification followed Webb et al (1996), and species nomenclature follows Scannell & Synnott (1987). Searches for rare or protected species of plants (Curtis & Mc Gough 1988) was not the focus of this study but where these were observed note was taken for inclusion in the database.

Mammals observed were recorded using nomenclature in Sterry (2004) and birds were identified using Ferguson-Lee et al. (1983). Any reptiles, amphibians or (readily identifiable) invertebrates were also noted.

Information on threats and damage on the site, and the severity of this was also noted on the field card and the location marked on field maps.

Following the survey, sites were given an evaluation rating using the NRA ‘Guidelines for Assessment of Ecological Impacts of National Road Schemes’ as outlined in Appendix 4.

46 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Figure 6.1. The location of sites surveyed during the 2011 Louth Wetland Identification Survey. For detailed location maps of the sites see Appendix 5 in this report.

47 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______6.3 Consultation with Landowners

Where possible, landowners were identified by calling to the house nearest to the wetland, and permission was sought for access to the site. Discussions with landowners typically included an explanation of the project often followed by an informal conversation about the particular wetland site and its past and recent management. If landowners could not be identified land was surveyed from the nearest publicly accessible point. All identified landowners provided access to their lands. A letter outlining the purpose of the survey prepared by the Heritage Office of Louth County Council was shown to all landowners and displayed in survey vehicles.

6.4 Habitat Classification

The habitats within each wetland visited and those immediately adjacent to the site were classified according to Fossitt (2000) ‘A Guide to Habitats in Ireland’.

Guidance in determining whether or not a habitat type present within a wetland may correspond to an Annex I habitat type was sought from a variety of sources including: • Interpretation Manual of European Habitats (Ramao 1996), • Guidelines for a National Fen Survey of Ireland – Survey Manual (Foss & Crushell 2008a) • NPWS Study of the extent and conservation status of springs, fens and flushes in Ireland in 2007 (Foss 2007) • The Status of EU Protected Habitats and Species in Ireland (NPWS 2008) as well as Fossitt (2000).

6.5 Site Conservation Assessment & Evaluation

Each wetland surveyed in the field was assigned an evaluation rating by the project team who had visited the site (Peter Foss, Patrick Crushell, Barry O’Loughlin and Faith Wilson). This evaluation was based on the criteria outlined in Appendix 4.

6.6 Louth Wetland Identification Survey database – structure and content

A LWS Site database was created to hold survey data on sites from the present survey. The database was created using Filemaker Pro 11.0 software package which allows data export to Excel spreadsheets.

In summary the main LWS site database held information on site name and code, site provenance, size (area in ha or length in km), third party site name and site codes, national grid reference, site conservation designations, habitat information on the specific wetland vegetation type(s) present, information on rare species of note, and a list of published reports holding information on the site and the nature of same, and a site description where this could be imported from a digital third party source. The database also holds all information recorded on the LWS 2011 survey card (see Appendix 2 for details).

A bibliography database, holding a list of references relating to the GIS data sources, scientific reports and publications referring to wetlands in county Louth, make up the complete LWS site database. Each of these data sources or publications was given a unique code number which was recorded with the individual site records within the LWS site database.

Details of the data fields used to store survey data in the LWS database are described in Appendix 2.

6.7 Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) – GIS dataset

The LWS GIS dataset was created (using ArcView 10 GIS software package on a Windows Operating System) and used throughout the LWS for all site selection and mapping purposes. The GIS also contains most of the information on sites which was imported from the LWS site database (e.g. information on site location, site description, information on Annex 1 EU habitats and field survey target notes on items of interest on the site, and site conservation evaluation).

48 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

See Appendix 2 for further details on the structure and format of this LWS GIS dataset. The dataset was used to export all habitat maps. The GIS files produced during the LWS are included on the CD that accompanies this report.

6.8 Constraints

The presence of bulls, high barbed wire fencing, high water levels and wide deep drainage ditches hindered field work by preventing safe access to parts of some of the sites. Such areas were assessed using binoculars.

49 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

7 Results

7.1 Louth Wetland Identification Survey

Of the 108 sites initially selected for survey as part of the LWS 2011 (Appendix 1), all were visited during the field survey and described in detail, habitat maps were produced and conservation assessment was undertaken. The list of sites surveyed in 2011 is presented in Appendix 1. A map showing the location of the 108 sites surveyed is presented in Figure 6.1, and in more detail on the Discovery Maps in Appendix 5. A detailed report of each site (sorted according to site name) together with habitat maps, is presented in Part 2 of the final report of the project (see Appendix 6).

7.2 Wetland Types Recorded on Site Surveys

108 sites were surveyed as part of the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 (LWS). The habitats present (both wetland and non-wetland) within and surrounding each wetland site were recorded using Fossitt (2000) based on field survey observations. A summary of these wetland types, with examples of where they can be seen in county Louth is provided in Chapter 5, while detailed habitat descriptions with species likely to occur on them is given in Fossitt (2000). Summary findings of the LWS 2011 are presented in the following sections.

The main wetland habitat types observed and the number of sites these were recorded on during the 2011 survey are summarised in Table 7.1.

Table 7.1. The main wetland habitats recorded in the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011.

Area (ha) / Length (km) of Number of sites recorded in each wetland habitat Fossitt Habitat Code & Name LWS Database recorded in LWS GIS

dataset FL1 Dystrophic lakes 3 0.2 FL2 Acid oligotrophic lakes - - FL3 Limestone/marl lakes - - FL4 Mesotrophic lakes 10 12 FL5 Eutrophic lakes 5 4.4 FL6 Turloughs - - FL7 Reservoirs 1 0.8 FL8 Other artificial lakes and ponds 2 1.3 FW1 Eroding/upland rivers 1 0.9 km FW2 Depositing/lowland rivers 6 8.9 km FW3 Canals - - FW4 Drainage ditches 55 54.7 km FP1 Calcareous springs 2 - FP2 Non-Calcareous springs - - FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps 48 165.2 FS2 Tall herb swamps - - GS4 Wet grassland 25 68.8 GM1 Marsh 14 31.9 HH3 Wet heath 4 5.1 PB1 Raised bogs - - PB2 Upland blanket bog - - PB3 Lowland blanket bog - - PB4 Cutover bog 8 112.3

50 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

PB5 Eroding blanket bog - - PF1 Rich fen and flush 7 7.6 PF2 Poor fen and flush 6 0.02 PF3 Transition mire and quaking bog 31 119.9 WN4 Wet pedunculate oak-ash woodland - - WN5 Riparian woodland - - WN6 Wet willow-alder-ash woodland 14 23.4 WN7 Bog woodland 6 96.8 WS1 Scrub 73 113.4 CW1 Lagoons and saline lakes 1 0.8 CW2 Tidal rivers - - CD5 Dune slacks - -

The most commonly recorded wetland habitats on the LWS was scrub (WS1), which was found in 73 of the 108 sites surveyed (total area of 113 hectares). In many of the sites scrub is dominated by Willow and Alder and is a common feature within reedbeds, at the edges of many wetland sites, bogs and areas of poor fen. Gorse dominated scrub is also a feature on many of the drier areas of cutover bogs.

The next most common habitat type encountered was drainage ditches (FW4) which were recorded on 55 of the 108 sites surveyed (total length of 54.7 km).

Reed and large sedge swamps (FS1) were recorded at 48 of the 108 sites (total area of 165 hectares). This habitat type can form large uniform stands in low lying hollows or can form a marginal reed bed zone around smaller lakes and ponds.

Examples of transition mire (PF3) have developed at 31 of the 108 sites surveyed (total area of 120 hectares). Transition mire have sometimes developed on areas of old cutover bog, whereas on other sites large areas of former lakes are naturally infilling with a quaking mat of vegetation.

Eight cutover (raised) bog (PB4) sites were surveyed during the present survey. The EU Habitats Directive Annex I habitat “7150 Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion” was also present on some of these sites.

Wet willow-alder-ash woodland was recorded on 14 of the 108 sites surveyed. It is a common feature adjoining lakes and along watercourses but can also occur on the edge of marsh or transition mire areas.

Rich fen and flush (PF1) was found at seven of the 108 sites surveyed. The habitats on these sites all correspond to the Annex I habitat “7230 Alkaline fens” or “*Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae 7210” (an EU Priority Habitat).

Six sites were found to have examples of poor fen and flush (PF2).

The majority of lakes surveyed in 2011 (21 in total) are best described as mesotrophic lakes (FL4) (10 surveyed in total); dystrophic lakes (FL1) (three surveyed in total) are mostly associated with bog sites, while five eutrophic lakes (FL5) showing various levels of pollution and enrichment, were surveyed.

7.3 Priority Habitats Recorded

A number of sites contain examples of habitats which correspond to those listed under Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive; however many are small in extent. These include areas of transition mire, alkaline fen, Cladium fen, wet heath, dystrophic lakes and pools, oligotrophic lakes, Rhynchospora depressions on peat substrates, and coastal lagoons. A summary of the number of sites with these habitats is presented in Table 7.2 below. Appendix 1 shows the specific sites on which these EU habitat types were recorded.

51 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Table 7.2. Wetland sites surveyed in 2011, which contain examples of habitats, listed under Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive. EU Priority Habitats are marked with a *

Annex 1 Habitat present Number of sites 7230 Alkaline fens 6 7210 *Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae 6 7140 Transition mires and quaking bogs 24 7150 Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion 3 1150 *Coastal lagoons 1

7.4 Floral Observations

Floral observations and records made on the sites surveyed were included in the LWS site database. For the sites surveyed the species recorded are presented in the individual site descriptions presented in Appendix 6.

Two new county records for flowering plants (based on current distribution maps available from the National Biodiversity Data Centre) were recorded during the LWS. At Rassan Bog (LWS Site 3), Sparganium natans (S. minimum), Least Bur-reed was recorded on an area of regenerating raised bog in a cutover bog pool. At Tullycahan (LWS site 77) Senecio viscosus, Sticky Groundsel was recorded at the edge of the site on a gravel area adjacent to a road.

7.5 Faunal Observations

Fauna associated with wetland habitats, that were observed during the field survey were recorded in the LWS site database. Species recorded on the sites are listed in the individual site reports presented in Appendix 6.

7.6 Damage to County Louth wetlands

The majority of, if not all, Irish wetland sites, and by extension those in county Louth, have been subject to some degree of human impact, damage or modification from their natural state in the past, and continue to be threatened and decline in abundance due to such activities (NPWS 2008; Foss & Crushell 2007; Foss 2007). A summary table of impacts and the wetland types most affected is presented in Table 7.3 below.

Wetlands, (bog, fen and marsh areas in particular) have historically been regarded as less productive than adjacent agricultural land and measures have been taken to ‘improve’ their quality for agriculture. The principal method of land improvement usually involved some form of drainage, infill or soil redistribution, burning or the addition of nutrients so as to facilitate the removal of peat, the planting of trees, or the creation of new grazing areas, pasture or arable farmland.

Historical evidence indicates that peatlands or bogs, and by extension fens and other associated wetlands, were increasingly utilised by the growing population throughout Ireland. The removal of peat by this growing population resulted in many worked out bogs, which when abandoned became ideal locations for the formation of secondary wetland habitats (fen, marsh and wet woodland inter alia).

A more recent trend has been the use of wetlands as areas to dispose of building rubble, rubbish and landfill materials (Foss & Crushell 2007; Anonymous 2009; Monaghan County Council 2006).

Reclamation and drainage works are ongoing agricultural management techniques which affect the hydrology of wetland habitats. But which are now subject to Environmental Aassessment under new legislation introduced in September 2011.

The 2008 NPWS report on the conservation status of EU Habitat Directive sites in Ireland (NPWS 2008), many of which are wetlands, found that the conservation status of these habitats is far from satisfactory. In fact the overall assessment for wetland habitat types listed under the EU Habitats Directive found that only

52 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______four habitats were in favourable conservation status, while seven were poor and 16 habitat types were deemed to have a bad conservation status overall.

Included in the latter bad conservation status category were habitats such as Oligotrophic and Hard water lakes, Blanket bogs, Wet heath, Transition mires, Alkaline fens and Alluvial wet woodland; while habitats defined as poorly conserved included Turloughs, Tall herb swamps, Marsh and Bog woodland. These habitats account for a significant part of the wetland habitat resource in county Louth.

Table 7.3. Natura 2000 Impacts and Activities which are likely to have a negative effect on wetlands, and the wetland type most likely to be affected by these activities.

Natura 2000 Impacts and Activities Category with Wetland habitat types most at threat or likely to be Impacts and brief description affected from Impacts and Activities Activities Main Code A Agriculture Fens, Marsh, Bog, Wet heath, Reed Swamp, Lake and Including cultivation, fertilisation, and Lake margins, Wet grassland, Wet woodland, Bog over grazing woodland, Turlough, Rivers B Sylviculture, forestry Fens, Marsh, Bog, Wet heath, Reed Swamp, Lake and Including fertilisation, planting and re- Lake margins, Wet grassland, Wet woodland, Bog planting, forestry practices woodland, Turlough, Rivers C Mining, extraction of materials and Bog, Dystrophic lake, Bog woodland energy production Including quarry activities, turbary and peat removal D Transportation and service corridors All wetland types Including road construction, power transmission E Urbanisation, residential and Fen, Bog, Marsh, Wet Grassland, Scrub commercial development Including Urban and industrial development, discharges and waste disposal F Biological resource use other than Lake, Fen, Marsh, River, Bog agriculture & forestry Including leisure fishing, hunting G Human intrusions and disturbances Bog, Fen, Marsh, Reed Swamp, Wet Grassland Including recreational facilities, outdoor leisure activities, littering, trampling overuse H Pollution Oligotrophic Lake, River, Marsh, Fen Including surface and groundwater water pollution, air pollution I Invasive, other problematic species Oligotrophic Lake, River, Marsh, Fen and genes Including invasive species, genetic pollution J Natural System modifications Fen, Marsh, Bog, Reed Swamp, Lake margins, Wet Including landfill, drainage, drain grassland, River maintenance, water abstraction, burning K Natural biotic and abiotic processes Fen, Marsh, Bog, Wet woodland (without catastrophes) Including organic material accumulation

During the course of the LWS, past and existing damage to wetlands were noted, and an overall assessment of the severity was undertaken where information was available. The scale for the severity of damage used was: Not serious; Serious; Very Serious and Unknown. Table 7.4 below provides a summary of the threats and damage observed, and the number of sites this was recorded from during the course of the LWS. The individual site reports presented in Appendix 6 describe all specific threats or damage and the severity of this on each of the wetland sites surveyed. In many cases more than one threat was recorded on an individual site.

It is likely that the information recorded on site activities, impacts and damage represents a minimum, and that additional sites have been negatively affected by human operations which have not been documented in the LWS database. The LWS site database does however provide a tool for recording such damage on sites

53 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______in the future, and provides an indication of the types of activities which have affected wetland habitats to date.

Table 7.4. The impacts and activities threatening or which have degraded sites surveyed as part of the LWS 2011.

Impacts and Activities Category Number of sites on which the activity was recorded during the LWS Drainage 70 Dumping - Rubbish 17 Dumping - Green waste 9 Infill - Rubble/Soil 43 Reclamation 18 Afforestation 5 Pollution 1 Enrichment 67 Invasive Species 7 Peat Cutting - active 1 Peat Cutting - historical 7 Grazing 18 Quarrying - gravel 2 No obvious threats 1

Data held within the LWS database indicate that just a single site in Louth was not or did not appear to be affected by human activity.

The remaining 107 wetland sites surveyed were being influenced by human impacts and activities (see Table 7.4). It was clear from the LWS project that extensive damage has been caused, and continues to be caused, to the Louth wetland resource by past and present drainage of wetlands, enrichment from surrounding farmland (especially silage production and arable crops) infilling of wetlands with building waste, construction of buildings, peat cutting of bog areas and inappropriate grazing.

If those sites identified as being of ecological importance during the LWS are to be conserved, management measures will be required to prevent further damaging activities and in some cases to restore damaged habitats.

54 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

7.7 Site Conservation Assessment

On completion of the LWS 2011 fieldwork, sites were reviewed and given a site conservation rating using the criteria presented in Appendix 4. The site conservation rating for sites surveyed is presented in Table 7.5 and illustrated in Figure 7.1.

Of the 108 sites surveyed in detail, thirty are deemed to be of county importance of greater. Just seven of these sites had previously been recognised as being of conservation interest being listed as proposed Natural Heritage Areas or Special Areas of Conservation by the National Parks and Wildlife Service (i.e. Corrakit (Windy Gap) - Carlingford Mountain SAC, Shelties Lough - Carlingford Shore SAC, Ardee Cutaway Bog pNHA, Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Loughs pNHA, Liscarragh Marsh pNHA). The remaining 23 sites identified as being of county importance of greater, represent a significant, previously unrecognised, conservation resource which should be listed for protection.

Note that this information is only representative of a limited selection of the wetland resource of County Louth – many additional sites, which may be of international, national or county interest undoubtedly occur but for which we currently have no data.

A Rated Sites (International Ecological Importance): Three sites (Corrakit (Windy Gap) - Carlingford Mountain SAC; Rockmarshall; Shilties Lough - Carlingford Shore SAC) have been rated as of international conservation importance (see Table 7.5).

These sites have been identified as containing habitats of conservation value that correspond to those listed on Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive. These include the following Annex I habitat types:

(7140) Transition mires and quaking bogs (1150) *Coastal lagoons (EU Priority Habitat)

B Rated Sites (National Ecological Importance): Eight sites (Ardee Cutaway Bog NHA; Carraghcloghan; Cortial Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Loughs NHA; Drumcah Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Lough NHA; Hoarstone; Liscarragh Marsh NHA; Mullatee; Toprass Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Lough NHA) have been rated as being of national conservation importance (see Table 7.5).

These sites have been identified as containing habitats of conservation value that may correspond to those listed on Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive. These include the following Annex I habitat types:

(7150) Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion (7210) *Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae (EU Priority Habitat) (7230) Alkaline fens (7140) Transition mires and quaking bogs

C+ Rated Sites (County Value): Nineteen sites (Artoney; Ballagan and Whitestown; Boycetown; Castlecarragh South; Corradoran Lough; Drumgoolan; Edentober; Lurgankeel; Maghareagh; Millgrange; Muchgrange; Rassan Bog; Rathcor Lough; Redbog; Rootate; Ross Lough; Stormanstown Bog; Tullakeel; Wottonstown) have been rated as of county conservation importance (see Table 7.5).

(7140) Transition mires and quaking bogs (7230) Alkaline fens (7210) *Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae (EU Priority

55 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Habitat) (7150) Depressions on peat substrates of the Rhynchosporion

C Rated Sites (High Value, Locally Important): Twenty seven sites have been rated as being of Local conservation value (high value) (see Table 7.5).

(7140) Transition mires and quaking bogs (7230) Alkaline fens (7210) *Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae (EU Priority Habitat)

The remaining sites have been given a lower conservation value based on the type and quality of habitat present (see Table 7.5).

The sites, as summarised in Table 7.5, are currently undesignated (with the exception of the seven sites designated as pNHA or SAC) and are also not listed as candidate Natural Heritage Areas in the NPWS sites database. It is recommended that those sites deemed to be of County value or greater (A, B and C+ importance) should as a priority be submitted to the National Parks and Wildlife Service for inclusion on their list of sites for consideration as NHAs. These sites should also be listed in future county development and biodiversity plans as sites of highest conservation value.

56 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Figure 7.1. Map showing the distribution of LWS 2011 sites according to conservation value.

57 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Table 7.5. Conservation Assessment and ranking of sites surveyed in County Louth during the 2011 LWS.

Ranking: A Rating: Internationally Important; B Rating: Nationally Important; C+ Rating: County Conservation value; C Rating: Local conservation value (high value); D Rating: Local conservation value (moderate value); E Rating: Local conservation value (low value)

Site Name Site Code Easting Northing Conservation ranking Centre Centre following survey

Corrakit (Windy Gap) - Carlingford Mountain SAC 18 313232 313307 A Rating Rockmarshall 23 311539 308383 A Rating Shilties Lough - Carlingford Shore SAC 25 319953 311146 A Rating Ardee Cutaway Bog NHA 95 293445 291425 B Rating Carraghcloghan 7 294397 308383 B Rating Cortial Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial 13 298473 307334 B Rating Loughs NHA Drumcah Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial 15 295757 306025 B Rating Lough NHA Hoarstone 74 294195 300481 B Rating Liscarragh Marsh NHA 32 318537.39 306105.85 B Rating 6 02 Mullatee 56 320949 309544 B Rating Toprass Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial 14 296823 306410 B Rating Lough NHA Artoney 62 294711 300955 C+ Rating Ballagan and Whitestown 47 323674 307214 C+ Rating Boycetown 107 313181 289342 C+ Rating Castlecarragh South 28 317011 305634 C+ Rating Corradoran Lough 66 288528 300201 C+ Rating Drumgoolan 64 294304 301094 C+ Rating Edentober 1 307569 319001 C+ Rating Lurgankeel 8 301298 313023 C+ Rating Maghareagh 9 296527 308559 C+ Rating Millgrange 54 321657 309657 C+ Rating Muchgrange 51 321559 308323 C+ Rating Rassan Bog 3 292517 312133 C+ Rating Rathcor Lough 40 319370 305349 C+ Rating Redbog 57 290554 303670 C+ Rating Rootate 60 291628 301789 C+ Rating Ross Lough 58 291747 303276 C+ Rating Stormanstown Bog 97 291335 292565 C+ Rating Tullakeel 98 289844 294491 C+ Rating Wottonstown 85 302658 296749 C+ Rating Ardpatrick 79 296241 300331 C Rating Ballynamagher 42 319648 306001 C Rating Ballynamony (Bradshaw) 44 320987 305849 C Rating Beaulieu 108 312461 276554 C Rating Carrickbaggot 103 310509 285380 C Rating Courtbane 4 293169 311871 C Rating Cunnicar 10 297493 309253 C Rating Dromiskin 90 306231 297736 C Rating Galtrimsland 37 319421 306342 C Rating Grange Pond 35 319406 307789 C Rating Greenore 53 322045 309445 C Rating Jenkinstown 21 310912 308830 C Rating Knockattin 81 301110 303043 C Rating Loughanmore Lake 27 314773 306276 C Rating Mapastown 93 298819 294766 C Rating Mullaghattin Quarry 33 318329 307489 C Rating Newrath 87 303580 297818 C Rating Newtown Monasterboice 99 305780 282045 C Rating Newtownbalregan 11 301172 308885 C Rating Newtowndarver 84 302368 298114 C Rating Richard Taaffes Holding 78 295769 300815 C Rating Stephenstown Pond NHA 82 301226 302615 C Rating Tankardsrock 12 301501 308181 C Rating Tinure 101 305180 283486 C Rating Treagh North 5 293630 310175 C Rating Tully (ED Killanny) 61 290658 301114 C Rating

58 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Whiterath 88 304437 298020 C Rating Ardtully Beg 39 319421 306441 D Rating Babeswood 86 302970 297319 D Rating Ballagan 48 323545 307924 D Rating Ballug 43 320194 305813 D Rating Ballynamagher West 38 319411 305870 D Rating Bellurgan 20 309990 308926 D Rating Briarhill 105 310803 286653 D Rating Coole Bog 96 291720 291816 D Rating Dromiskin West 89 304782 297852 D Rating Drumass 17 295101 307236 D Rating Dunmahon 83 302520 302309 D Rating Galtrimsland South 34 319316 306252 D Rating Greenlane 94 296649 293314 D Rating Kilcroney 80 297044 298689 D Rating Knockmor 75 295301 300428 D Rating Liberties of Carlingford 24 319275 311215 D Rating Millgrange South 52 320790 308702 D Rating Morganstown 104 309066 286740 D Rating Mullavally 76 296600 301670 D Rating Priest Town 100 305690 283433 D Rating Rathneestin 72 294057 298375 D Rating Reaghstown 68 290839 298428 D Rating Rosslough North 59 292056 303536 D Rating Thomastown (ED Tallanstown) 71 292366 298578 D Rating Treagh 6 293570 309690 D Rating Whitestown Coast 45 323358 306531 D Rating Ballynamony (Murphy) East 50 323089 308501 E Rating Bellurgan (Marsh Road) - Dundalk Bay SAC 19 308283 309696 E Rating Carrickcarnan 2 307015 318435 E Rating Castlecarragh 29 317323 305872 E Rating Drumgowna 65 292169 301278 E Rating Edenagrena 16 295992 307121 E Rating Galtrimsland Pond 36 319268 306522 E Rating Grattanstown 102 307612 287382 E Rating Labanstown 106 312534 287040 E Rating Nicholastown (ED Tallanstown) 69 291525 298342 E Rating Nicholastown South 70 291658 298077 E Rating Rampark Lake 26 313678 306564 E Rating Rathcor Lower 41 319780 305300 E Rating Rathcor South 31 318414 305246 E Rating Rathneestin North 73 293951 298549 E Rating Toomes 63 293755 302065 E Rating Tullycahan 77 295676 301674 E Rating Whitestown 46 323746 306901 E Rating Woodtown 91 300530 296072 E Rating Ballynamony (Murphy) 49 322881 308455 No Conservation Value Bellurgan East 22 311030 308468 No Conservation Value Derrycammagh 92 299955 295600 No Conservation Value Drumard 67 289783 299157 No Conservation Value Liberties of Carlingford East 55 319442 311401 No Conservation Value Rathcor Upper 30 318025 306032 No Conservation Value

7.8 Additional Wetlands in county Louth

During the course of the LWS 2011 108 potential wetlands (Brophy 2009) were surveyed and described. This list of sites does not, however, represent a full inventory of all freshwater wetlands in county Louth.

Additional sites, both those already recorded in the literature, and unknown but likely to occur in county Louth, exist, which will need to be surveyed, and incorporated into the existing wetland data set prepared as part of this project, if a complete wetland inventory for county Louth is to be created. This was not possible within the resource constraints of the present project. . It is recommended that this be carried out as a matter of urgency as in the absence of such an inventory it is not possible to assess the full extent or conservation status of the resource.

59 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Additional sites have been reported from the literature in both the Louth County Development Plan (LCC 2010) and the draft Biodiversity Action Plan for Louth (LCC 2008) and other resources (Foss 2007; Crushell 2000; Fahy 1972 inter alia). It is likely that a systematic review of all published literature, data sets and reports on county Louth, when cross referenced to the sites already surveyed, will yield additional wetland sites in the county.

Some of the additional sites include wetland areas recorded at Carlingford Mountain, Darver Castle Woods, Kildemock Marsh, Mellifont Abbey Woods, Reaghstown Marsh, Rathescar Wood, Mount Mathews inter alia.

During the course of the present survey several wetlands were also identified within the county which were not on the 2011 survey list.

In addition a visual inspection of potential wetland areas across the county from aerial photographs, cross referenced to the sub-soils map produced by the EPA Soil and Subsoil Mapping Project (Teagasc, Kinsealy, 1998-2006), and to known areas liable to flood, will also yield additional sites.

A brief examination of the sub-soils data set, looking at the soil categories Blanket Peat, Fen Peat, Cut Peat and Alluvial Soil indicates that 939 ‘wetland-indicating subsoil’ polygons, with a total area of 8,912 ha, exist within Louth. Although some of these areas will have been examined during the course of the 2011 survey, with only 966 ha of wetland in fact surveyed in 2011, a significant and unknown area of wetland may still await investigation, description and assessment.

60 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

8 Louth Wetland Recommendations

8.1 Distribution and Extent of the Louth Wetland Resource

It is recommended that the countywide survey of wetlands in Louth continues and builds on the baseline information gathered on the 108 wetland sites examined as part of the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011. Additional sites exist which require survey or are likely to be discovered as part of systematic aerial photographic or soil follow-on survey of possible wetland locations in the county (see section 7.8 above).

Initially a desktop study should be undertaken with the objective of identifying all ‘potential’ wetlands within the county.

Where a field survey is proposed it is recommended that the following information is gathered for each site surveyed: • A detailed site description highlighting the wetland habitat types (classified according to Fossitt Level III) present on each site should be provided; • Mapping of general site boundaries to ensure conservation of a hydrologically intact unit; • Recording of threats to the conservation and future protection of the site; to include restoration suggestions and management priorities and needs; • Faunal observations made should be recorded; • A botanical list of the species present should be recorded; • Evaluation of each site on a national scale and ranking of each site in terms of its suitability and priority for designation within the NHA and/or SAC process.

8.2 Site Designations

It is recommended that all wetland sites, which have been identified in this survey, and rated as either A, B or C+ (of international, national or county importance) are forwarded to the National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) for inclusion on their list of sites for survey and designation.

These sites should be listed as candidate Natural Heritage Areas and objectively assessed by NPWS for designation as Natural Heritage Areas. Such recommendations for assessment should be made on a regular basis as further information on the wetland resource of county Louth becomes known.

8.3 Sites Boundary Review

During the course of the LWS 2011, existing site boundaries were largely retained. It is recommended that boundaries should be re-drawn using base mapping at an appropriate scale. Ecological advice should inform the revised boundaries, to ensure that the entire area of ecological interest (and hydrological unit) is included.

8.4 Planning Controls

Sites which are listed as being of county importance (C+) or of higher value, local importance (C) and of moderate value, local importance (D) should be highlighted and included in any recommendations made under the County Biodiversity Action Plan or included in local area plans, county development plans or other planning strategies. Again, such recommendations for recognition and listing of sites should be made on a regular basis as further information on the wetland resource of county Louth becomes known.

It is recommended that council staff should be aware of a variety of issues regarding wetlands when assessing development proposals and planning applications. These include:

• The need for an appropriate buffer zone surrounding wetland sites. This is often already provided in REPS plans, where, for example, landowners are required to leave a buffer zone around a wetland when spreading slurry

61 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______• The importance of hydrology in how wetland sites function and how indirect impacts on a wetland system can be caused by activities occurring at some distance from the wetland • The damaging cumulative effect of seemingly isolated losses of wetland habitats across the county on the overall county resource • The loss of wetland habitats as a result of fragmentation of sites and impacts on wetland hydrology • The ecological value of wetland habitats adjacent to, and fringing lakes and ponds • The ecological value of large areas of reed and tall sedge swamps, rivers and river flood plains in controlling and reducing the impacts of flooding events • The wetland fauna, some of which are listed on Annex II of the Habitats Directive found in the county’s wetlands and the potential impacts on these species as well as their habitats • The limited coverage provided in the initial NPWS NHA survey – this was never a comprehensive survey of the entire county – many sites of high nature conservation value remain undesignated • The potential value of wetland sites which are outside statutorily-designated areas and the need for adoption of a precautionary approach when assessing applications that may impact on same • The role that the wetland resource plays in combating global warming. It is likely that the wetlands of County Louth act as a major sink of carbon.

8.5 Ongoing Maintenance of the LWS site database and completion of wetland inventory

Undoubtedly additional information exists on wetland sites listed in the LWS site database, and additional sites remain to be discovered and described.

Unfortunately it was not possible to include these data in the 2011 GIS dataset and database, due to resource constraints. It is recommended that these data are compiled within the database and that it is kept up to date, where possible by collating data from additional surveys, EIS documents, etc. This work needs to be done concurrently with ongoing maintenance of the LWS GIS dataset.

8.6 Ongoing Maintenance of the County Louth Wetland Map GIS Dataset

Coupled with ongoing updates of the LWS site database, it is recommended that a complete wetland map of the county should be attempted, drawing on data held within the various GIS resources that currently exist.

8.7 Further Survey & Assessment of Wetland Sites

A hydrological assessment of all sites which have been given a rating of A, B or C+ rating should be commissioned in order to assist in our understanding of how these wetlands function hydrologically. The National Fen Survey manual (Foss (2008)) also recommends that a hydro-chemical analysis is conducted.

In addition a number of sites examined in 2011 have been identified (see site reports in Appendix 6) which may contain important invertebrate assemblages. Surveys of these groups could be undertaken within the county to increase knowledge of the biodiversity value of these wetlands (e.g. Dragonfly & Damselfly survey; Marsh Fritillary survey inter alia).

More detailed botanical surveys of some of the sites examined during the LWS 2011 have also been recommended on sites listed as of A, B, or C+ conservation value (see site reports in Appendix 6).

8.8 Management of Louth Wetland Sites

Many of the landowners of wetland sites are likely to be members of the Rural Environmental Protection Scheme (REPS). Where landowners are not members of REPS they should be contacted to make sure that management is sensitive to the requirements of wetland areas, such as the need for an adequate buffer zone around the wetland.

62 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______REPS planners based in county Louth should be briefed on the value of wetland habitats and suitable management practices for these sites. Management of agricultural runoff and other measures to prevent water pollution should be discussed and agreed on. These measures will also assist the local authority in meeting its requirements under both the EU Nitrates Directive and the EU Water Framework Directive.

The Department of Agriculture should be informed that their regulations to remove non-agricultural land from area aid packages is prompting some farmers to reclaim wetlands to the detriment of Louth’s biodiversity.

For further information on best practice management guidelines for many of the wetland habitats listed, the reader is referred to “The Living Farmland – A Guide to Farming for Nature in Clare” (Anonymous 2008c) which provides practical advice on habitat maintenance and improvement for landowners and farmers. In addition, the NPWS website (www.npws.ie) provides a range of guidelines to help with the protection, management and wise use of conservation-worthy habitats and protected species, including information on the Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS), Farm Plan Schemes, Notifiable actions inter alia. Furthermore the Irish Peatland Conservation Council has published a Management Handbook for Peatland, which provides practical advice on habitat restoration (see www.ipcc.ie).

Restoration of threatened and degraded wetland habitats should be encouraged, such as of the highly modified bogs. Funding opportunities for such initiatives should be investigated and pursued.

Newly proposed regulations requiring certain agricultural activities to go through the EIA process is a positive development and should aid the protection of wetlands throughout the county and country.

8.9 Enforcement of Fines for Illegal Dumping and Infill

Infilling and reclamation of wetland is an ongoing threat to the wetland resource in county Louth. This practice should be dissuaded through both education on the value of wetlands and the enforcement of suitably deterring fines. Article 10(1)(y) of the EPA Guidance Manual Waste Facility Permit and Registration Regulations requires that an application for a waste facility permit or certificate of registration contain details of the biodiversity of the land and specifically details wetlands within same.

The protection of Louth’s diverse wetland resource depends on strict enforcement of national conservation legislation by the NPWS, and planning and waste laws by the County Council to ensure unauthorised damaging activities are prevented.

8.10 Control of Invasive Species in Wetlands

It is important that invasive species are controlled and eradicated within wetland sites as they have the potential to cause serious nuisance and can be very costly and difficult to remove once they become established. Typical species affecting wetlands include Rhododendron (Rhododendron ponticum), Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica) and Indian balsam (Impatiens glandulifera). It is recommended that all records of invasive species in County Louth are submitted to the Invasive Species Ireland database (http://www.invasivespeciesireland.com/sighting/) where advice on control and removal is also available.

8.11 Local Authority Wetlands Policy

A review of the statutory provisions that govern the management of wetlands in County Louth (such as the Habitats Directive, Wildlife Act, Water Framework Directive, Environmental Liability Directive, Nitrates Directive, Planning Act, etc.) should be conducted and the role of the Local Authority in this regard should be examined. This review could be done in collaboration with other Local Authorities.

Increased co-ordination between agencies in their policy and operative approaches to wetlands need to be strengthened.

63 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______8.12 Water Framework Directive

As a member of the European Union, Ireland must, as of the 22nd December 2000 implement the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). This directive provides a consolidated, strengthened framework for the protection and improvement of all of our waters - rivers, lakes, marine and groundwaters, and of our water- dependent habitats and species. The aim of the Water Framework Directive is to prevent any deterioration in the existing status of our waters, including the protection of good and high status where it exists, and to ensure that all waters are restored to at least good status by 2015.

The objectives of the WFD are: • to protect and enhance the status of aquatic ecosystems (and terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands directly dependent on aquatic ecosystems) • to promote sustainable water use based on long-term protection of available water resources • to provide for sufficient supply of good quality surface water and groundwater as needed for sustainable, balanced and equitable water use • to provide for enhanced protection and improvement of the aquatic environment by reducing / phasing out of discharges, emissions etc. • to contribute to mitigating the effects of floods and droughts • to protect territorial and marine waters • to establish a register of 'protected areas' e.g. areas designated for protection of habitats or species

Clearly the identification of wetland habitats in County Louth assists in fulfilling not only our obligations under the EU Habitats Directive and the National Biodiversity Plan but also in implementing the Water Framework Directive.

8.13 Public Information and Interpretation Measures

Public awareness about the importance of the wetlands in county Louth should be developed through a series of targeted measures. On-going public awareness campaigns should be undertaken to inform the people of Louth of the value of the county’s wetland resource and the valuable ecosystem services they provide.

These could include:

• Information aimed specifically at landowners and farmers to explain the value of wetlands on their land should be developed • Specific events county-wide as part of ‘National Heritage Week which takes place annually in September. Further details are available from http://www.heritageweek.ie/ • A series of school visits celebrating local wetlands – co-ordinated through the Heritage in Schools Scheme • Public display boards and signage at popular wetland sites should be developed to inform the public of their biodiversity value and the ecosystem services such wetlands play • A workshop on wetland management for landowners should be held • A colour leaflet should be produced to illustrate the beauty and importance of wetland within the County and their conservation importance. A similar leaflet was produced in County Monaghan (MCC 2008).

64 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

9 Bibliography

The bibliography list is presented in alphabetical order by author. Code number appearing on the LHS is reference/report code number in the LWM Bibliography Database.

12 An Foras Forbartha (1981) National Heritage Inventory. Areas of Scientific Interest in Ireland. An Foras Forbartha, Dublin, pp. 166. 597 Atherton, I., Bosanquet, S. & Lawley, M. (2010) Mosses and Liverworts of Britain and Ireland – a field guide. British Bryological Society, London. pp. 835 678 Baxter, S. (2010) A Geological Field Guide to Cooley, Gullion, Mourne & Slieve Croob. Louth County Council, pp. 96. 487 BirdWatch Ireland (2010) iWeBs Irish national site list 2010/11. On-line resource at http://www.birdwatchireland.ie/Ourwork/SurveysProjects/IrishWetlandBirdSurvey/IWeBScoverage/tabid/906/Def ault.aspx 612 Brophy, J. (2009) GIS of Potential Wetlands Identified in County Louth. Unpublished GIS, National Parks and Wildlife Service. 1 Crushell P. (2000) Irish Fen Inventory - A review of the status of fens in Ireland. Irish Peatland Conservation Council, Dublin, pp. 100. 106 Crushell P. (2002) SACs in Ireland - NGO review 2002. A report prepared for An Taisce, Birdwatch Ireland, Coastwatch Ireland, Irish Peatland Conservation Council and the Irish Wildlife Trust. Published by Irish Peatland Conservation Council, Dublin. 587 Fahy, E. (1972) A preliminary report on Areas of Scientific Interest in County Louth. Unpublished Report. An Foras Forbartha. 192 Ferguson-Lee, J., Willis, I & Sharrock, J.T.R. (1983) The Shell Guide to the Birds of Britain and Ireland. Michael Joseph Ltd., London 585 Foss, P., Crushell, P. & Wilson, F. (2011) Wetland Survey County Monaghan. Part 1. Report for Monaghan County Council & The Heritage Council. pp. xxx (in press) 596 Foss, P., Crushell, P., O’Loughlin, B. & Wilson, F. (2011) Louth Wetland Identification Survey. Report for Louth County Council & The Heritage Council. 155 Foss, P.J. (2007) National Parks & Wildlife Service Study of the Extent and Conservation Status of Springs, Fens and Flushes in Ireland 2007. Internal report for the National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Ireland. 586 Foss, P.J. (2010) Orchid Ireland Survey - selected site reports for fen locations in Counties Dublin, Meath, Westmeath, Kildare, Kilkenny, Kerry, Limerick, and Louth. Report for National Museums of Northern Ireland. 232 Foss, P.J. & Crushell, P. (2008a) Guidelines for a National Fen Survey of Ireland - Survey Manual. Report for the National Parks & Wildlife Service, Dublin. 267 Foss, P.J. & Crushell, P. (2008b) Monaghan Fen Survey II (Volumes 1-3). Report for Monaghan County Council and the National Parks & Wildlife Service, Dublin. 55 Foss, P.J. & O'Connell C.A. (eds.) (1996) The Irish Peatland Conservation Plan 2000. Irish Peatland Conservation Council, Dublin. 33 Fossitt, J. (2000) A Guide to Habitats in Ireland. The Heritage Council, Ireland. 680 LCC (2008) A Draft Biodiversity Action Plan for Louth 2008 - 2012 . Louth County Council & The Heritage Council. pp. 46. 682 LCC (2010) Tourism and Heritage Action Plan. Louth County Council. pp. 32. 589 Louth County Council (2009) Strategic Environmental Assessment. Louth County Draft Development Plan 2009-2015. Report for Louth County Council, pp. 195. 588 Louth County Council (2010) Louth County Development Plan 2009-2015. Louth County Council. 479 Malone, S. & O’Connell, C.A. (2009) Ireland’s Peatland Conservation Action Plan 2020 - Halting the loss of peatland biodiversity. Irish Peatland Conservation Council, Ireland. pp. 152. 677 Martin, B. (2009) An Ecological Report on Carlingford and Environs, County Louth, Ireland. Carlingford Tidy Towns Committee 434 Martin, J. (2006) Survey of rare/threatened and scarce vascular plants in County Louth. BEC Consultants, Internal Report for the NPWS. 590 Moore, D. & Wilson, F. (1999) National Shingle Beach Survey of Ireland 1999. Synoptic report. National Parks & Wildlife Service. pp. 51. 266 NPWS (2008) The Status of EU Protected Habitats and Species in Ireland. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Ireland. pp. 135. 611 NPWS (2009) National Parks and Wildlife Service Conservation Statement 2009: Carlingford Mountain cSAC (453) Co. Louth. National Parks and Wildlife Service. 508 NRA (2009) Guidelines for Assessment of Ecological Impacts of National Roads Schemes. National Road Authority. pp. 79. 21 Ó Críodáin, C. (1988) Parvocaricetea in Ireland. Ph.D. Thesis, National University of Ireland. 49 Ramao, C. (1996) Interpretation manual of European Union Habitats. Version EUR 15. European Commission, Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection, Brussels. 46 RIA (1979) The Atlas of Ireland. Royal Irish Academy, Dublin.

65 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______681 Roe, J. & Merne, O. (2006) The Ecology of Blackrock. An Ecological Survey of Blackrock, Co. Louth. Blackrock Tidy Towns Committee. pp. 85. 73 Scannell, M.J.P. & Synnott, D.M. (1987) Census catalogue of the flora of Ireland. The Stationery Office, Dublin. 584 Smith, G.F., O’Donoghue, P., O’Hora, K. & Delaney, E. (2011) Best Practice Guidance for Habitat Survey and Mapping. The Heritage Council, Kilkenny, pp. 133. 671 Sterry, P. (2004) Complete Irish Wildlife. Harper Collins Publishers, London, pp. 319. 551 Various (2010) Orchid Ireland Survey - selected site reports for fen locations in Counties Dublin, Meath, Westmeath, Kildare, Kilkenny, Kerry, Limerick, and Louth. National Museums of Northern Ireland. 74 Webb D.A., Parnell, J. & Doogue, D. (1996) An Irish Flora. Dundalgan Press Ltd., Dundalk.

66 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

10 Appendices

In the report appendices which follow, the PDF layouts (produced from Excel or Word files) have been formatted and reduced to allow printing of tables at A4 page size. The original Excel spreadsheets from which some of these PDFs were created are included on the CD ROM that accompanies this report.

List of Appendices Page

Louth Wetland Identification Survey - Part 1: Main Report Appendix 1. List of sites surveyed in detail as part of the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 68 Appendix 2. Data fields in the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 Databases 82 Appendix 3. Survey card used on the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 94 Appendix 4. National Roads Authority (2009) Site Evaluation Criteria 96 Appendix 5. Detailed location maps of sites surveyed as part of the Louth Wetland Identification 97 Survey 2011 Survey Database

67 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Appendix 1: Louth Wetland Identification Survey

List of Sites Surveyed in 2011

The list is sorted alphabetically by site name and formatted so as to print on A4 page.

Data presented for each site includes: Site code, Site name, Grid reference, main wetland habitat type recorded (Fossitt and EU Habitats Directive type), and conservation ranking following survey.

LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Ardee Cutaway Bog 95 293445 291425 PB4 Cutover bog (7150) B Rating: NHA WN7 Bog woodland Depressions Nationally WS1 Scrub on peat Important HD1 Dense bracken substrates of HH3 Wet heath BL3 Buildings and the Rhynch... artificial surfaces FL1 Dystrophic lakes FW4 Drainage ditches PF2 Poor fen and flush PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog WL1 Hedgerows HH1 Dry siliceous heath

Ardpatrick 79 296241 300331 PF3 Transition mire (7140) C Rating: Local & quaking bog Transition conservation WS1 Scrub mires and value (high WL1 Hedgerows quaking bogs value) Ardtully Beg 39 319421 306441 PF3 Transition mire D Rating: Local & quaking bog conservation WS1 Scrub value (moderate value) Artoney 62 294711 300955 GA1 Improved (7140) C+ Rating: agricultural Transition County grassland mires and Conservation GS4 Wet grassland quaking bogs valu e PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog

Babeswood 86 302970 297319 FW4 Drainage D Rating: Local ditches conservation GS2 Dry meadows value and grassy verges (moderate PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog value) WS1 Scrub

Ballagan 48 323545 307924 FW4 Drainage (7230) Alkaline D Rating: Local ditches fens conservation PF1 Rich fen and (7210) value flush Calcareous (moderate WL2 Treeline WS1 Scrub fens with value) Cladium mariscus and ...

68 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Ballagan and 47 323674 307214 FW4 Drainage (7230) Alkaline C+ Rating: Whitestown ditches fens County FS1 Reed and large (7210) Conservation sedge swamp Calcareous value PF1 Rich fen and flush fens with Cladium mariscus and ... Ballug 43 320194 305813 FW4 Drainage D Rating: Local ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value sedge swamps (moderate WS1 Scrub value) Ballynamagher 42 319648 306001 FL1 Dystrophic lakes C Rating: Local FW4 Drainage conservation ditches value (high FS1 Reed and large value) sedge swamps GM1 Marsh WS1 Scrub Ballynamagher 38 319411 305870 FS1 Reed and large D Rating: Local West sedge swamps conservation PF3 Transition mire value & quaking bog (moderate WS1 Scrub value) Ballynamony 44 320987 305849 FS1 Reed and large C Rating: Local (Bradshaw) sedge swamps conservation GS1 Dry calcareous value (high and neutral value) grassland GS4 Wet grassland PF1 Rich fen and flush WS1 Scrub ED3 Recolonising bare ground Ballynamony 49 322881 308455 FP Springs No (Murphy) FP1 Calcareous Conservation springs Value GS2 Dry meadows and grassy verges Ballynamony 50 323089 308501 FW4 Drainage E Rating: Local (Murphy) East ditches conservation FP1 Calcareous value (low springs value) FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps

Beaulieu 108 312461 276554 FL5 Eutrophic C Rating: Local lakes conservation FW2 value (high Depositing/lowland value) rivers FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps WD1 (Mixed) broadleaved woodland Bellurgan 20 309990 308926 FS1 Reed and large D Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation WS1 Scrub value (moderate value)

69 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Bellurgan (Marsh 19 308283 309696 FW2 E Rating: Local Road) - Dundalk Depositing/lowland conservation Bay SAC rivers value (low FW4 Drainage value) ditches FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps GA1 Improved agricultural grassland GS2 Dry meadows and grassy verges GS4 Wet grassland WS1 Scrub

Bellurgan East 22 311030 308468 FW4 Drainage No ditches Conservation GA1 Improved Value agricultural grassland GS4 Wet grassland WS1 Scrub WL1 Hedgerows BC3 Tilled land Boycetown 107 313181 289342 FL8 Other artificial C+ Rating: lakes and ponds County FS1 Reed and large Conservation sedge swamps value GS2 Dry meadows and grassy verges PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog WS1 Scrub ED3 Recolonising bare ground Briarhill 105 310803 286653 FW4 Drainage D Rating: Local ditches conservation GM1 Marsh value WS1 Scrub (moderate WL1 Hedgerows value) Carraghcloghan 7 294397 308383 FS1 Reed and large (7140) B Rating: sedge swamps Transition Nationally PF2 Poor fen and mires and Important flush quaking bogs PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland WS1 Scrub Carrickbaggot 103 310509 285380 FW4 Drainage (7140) C Rating: Local ditches Transition conservation GS4 Wet grassland mires and value (high PF3 Transition mire quaking bogs value) & quaking bog WD2 Mixed broadleaved/conifer woodland Carrickcarnan 2 307015 318435 FW2 E Rating: Local Depositing/lowland conservation rivers value (low FW4 Drainage value) ditches GS2 Dry meadows and grassy verges GS4 Wet grassland WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland WS1 Scrub

70 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Castlecarragh 29 317323 305872 FS1 Reed and large E Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation

GS4 Wet grassland value (low value) Castlecarragh 28 317011 305634 PF3 Transition mire (7140) C+ Rating: South & quaking bog Transition County WS1 Scrub mires and Conservation quaking bogs value Coole Bog 96 291720 291816 HD1 Dense bracken D Rating: Local PB4 Cutover bog conservation WN7 Bog woodland value WS1 Scrub (moderate value) Corradoran Lough 66 288528 300201 FW4 Drainage C+ Rating: ditches County GA1 Improved Conservation agricultural value grassland GS4 Wet grassland

WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland WS1 Scrub WL1 Hedgerows WL2 Treelines

Corrakit (Windy 18 313232 313307 GS4 Wet grassland A Rating: PB4 Cutover bog Gap) - Carlingford Internationally Mountain SAC PF2 Poor fen and Important flush Cortial Lough - 13 298473 307334 FL4 Mesotrophic (7140) B Rating: Drumcah, Toprass lakes Transition Nationally and Cortial Loughs FW4 Drainage mires and Important ditches NHA quaking bogs FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland WD1 (Mixed) broadleaved woodland WS1 Scrub Courtbane 4 293169 311871 GS2 Dry meadows (7140) C Rating: Local and grassy verges Transition conservation PF3 Transition mire mires and value (high & quaking bog quaking bogs value) WS1 Scrub ED2 Spoil and bare ground ED3 Recolonising bare ground Cunnicar 10 297493 309253 FL4 Mesotrophic (7140) C Rating: Local lakes Transition conservation FW4 Drainage mires and value (high ditches quaking bogs value) GS2 Dry meadows and grassy verges PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog WS1 Scrub WL1 Hedgerows

Derrycammagh 92 299955 295600 GS2 Dry meadows No and grassy verges Conservation WS1 Scrub Value FW4 Drainage

71 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site ditches

Dromiskin 90 306231 297736 FS1 Reed and large C Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation GA1 Improved value (high agricultural value) grassland WS1 Scrub PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog

Dromiskin West 89 304782 297852 FL4 Mesotrophic D Rating: Local lakes conservation FS1 Reed and large value sedge swamps (moderate WS1 Scrub value) Drumard 67 289783 299157 FW4 Drainage No ditches Conservation GS4 Wet grassland Value Drumass 17 295101 307236 FS1 Reed and large D Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation WS1 Scrub value (moderate value) Drumcah Lough - 15 295757 306025 FL4 Mesotrophic B Rating: Drumcah, Toprass lakes Nationally and Cortial Lough FS1 Reed and large Important NHA sedge swamps WS1 Scrub BL3 Buildings and artificial surfaces

Drumgoolan 64 294304 301094 FW4 Drainage (7140) C+ Rating: ditches Transition County PF3 Transition mire mires and Conservation & quaking bog quaking bogs value WS1 Scrub WL1 Hedgerows Drumgowna 65 292169 301278 FW4 Drainage E Rating: Local ditches conservation GS4 Wet grassland value (low GM1 Marsh value) ED3 Recolonising bare ground BL3 Buildings and artificial surfaces Dunmahon 83 302520 302309 FS1 Reed and large D Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation GA1 Improved value agricultural (moderate grassland GM1 Marsh value) WD1 (Mixed) broadleaved woodland Edenagrena 16 295992 307121 FW4 Drainage (7140) E Rating: Local ditches Transition conservation PF3 Transition mire mires and value (low & quaking bog quaking bogs value) WS1 Scrub Edentober 1 307569 319001 GS2 Dry meadows (7140) C+ Rating: and grassy verges Transition County ED3 Recolonising mires and Conservation bare ground quaking bogs value WS1 Scrub PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog

72 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Galtrimsland 37 319421 306342 PF3 Transition mire (7140) C Rating: Local & quaking bog Transition conservation mires and value (high quaking bogs value)

Galtrimsland Pond 36 319268 306522 FL5 Eutrophic lakes E Rating: Local conservation

value (low value) Galtrimsland South 34 319316 306252 FS1 Reed and large D Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation WS1 Scrub value WL1 Hedgerows (moderate value) Grange Pond 35 319406 307789 FW4 Drainage C Rating: Local ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value (high sedge swamps value) WS1 Scrub WL2 Treelines Grattanstown 102 307612 287382 FW4 Drainage E Rating: Local ditches conservation GS2 Dry meadows value (low and grassy verges value) WD1 (Mixed) broadleaved woodland WS1 Scrub WS2 Immature woodland WL2 Treelines Greenlane 94 296649 293314 FW2 D Rating: Local Depositing/lowland conservation rivers value FW4 Drainage (moderate ditches FS1 Reed and large value) sedge swamps WS1 Scrub Greenore 53 322045 309445 FW4 Drainage (7230) Alkaline C Rating: Local ditches fens conservation PF1 Rich fen and (7210) value (high flush Calcareous value) WS1 Scrub ED3 Recolonising fens with bare ground Cladium mariscus and ... Hoarstone 74 294195 300481 FW4 Drainage (7140) B Rating: ditches Transition Nationally PF3 Transition mire mires and Important & quaking bog quaking bogs WS1 Scrub

73 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Jenkinstown 21 310912 308830 PF3 Transition mire (7140) C Rating: Local & quaking bog Transition conservation WS1 Scrub mires and value (high ED2 Spoil and bare quaking bogs value) ground

Kilcroney 80 297044 298689 FL5 Eutrophic lakes D Rating: Local FS1 Reed and large conservation sedge swamps value (moderate value)

Knockattin 81 301110 303043 FL4 Mesotrophic C Rating: Local lakes conservation FS1 Reed and large value (high sedge swamps value) GM1 Marsh WD1 (Mixed) broadleaved woodland Knockmor 75 295301 300428 FW4 Drainage D Rating: Local ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value sedge swamps (moderate GA1 Improved agricultural value) grassland WS1 Scrub WL1 Hedgerows WL2 Treelines BC1 Arable crops Labanstown 106 312534 287040 FW4 Drainage E Rating: Local ditches conservation

GM1 Marsh value (low WL1 Hedgerows value) Liberties of 24 319275 311215 FL8 Other artificial D Rating: Local Carlingford lakes and ponds conservation FW4 Drainage value ditches (moderate GS4 Wet grassland WS1 Scrub value) Liberties of 55 319442 311401 GS2 Dry meadows No and grassy verges Carlingford East Conservation GS4 Wet grassland Value WL1 Hedgerows Liscarragh Marsh 32 318537.396 306105.8502 FL4 Mesotrophic B Rating: NHA lakes Nationally FS1 Reed and large Important sedge swamps WS1 Scrub WL1 Hedgerows

74 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Loughanmore Lake 27 314773 306276 FL4 Mesotrophic C Rating: Local lakes conservation GS2 Dry meadows value (high and grassy verges value) ED4 Active quarries and mines Lurgankeel 8 301298 313023 FS1 Reed and large C+ Rating: sedge swamps County WS1 Scrub Conservation ED3 Recolonising value bare ground Maghareagh 9 296527 308559 FS1 Reed and large (7140) C+ Rating: sedge swamps Transition County PF3 Transition mire mires and Conservation & quaking bog quaking bogs value WS1 Scrub Mapastown 93 298819 294766 FW4 Drainage C Rating: Local ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value (high sedge swamps value) WS1 Scrub Millgrange 54 321657 309657 FW4 Drainage (7230) Alkaline C+ Rating: ditches fens County PF1 Rich fen and (7210) Conservation flush Calcareous value WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland fens with WS1 Scrub Cladium ED3 Recolonising mariscus and bare ground ... Millgrange South 52 320790 308702 FS1 Reed and large D Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation PF3 Transition mire value & quaking bog (moderate WS1 Scrub ED3 Recolonising value) bare ground Morganstown 104 309066 286740 FS1 Reed and large D Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation GS2 Dry meadows value and grassy verges (moderate WS1 Scrub WL2 Treelines value) Muchgrange 51 321559 308323 FL7 Reservoirr (7230) Alkaline C+ Rating: FW4 Drainage fens County ditches (7210) Conservation FS1 Reed and large Calcareous value sedge swamps PF1 Rich fen and fens with flush Cladium WS1 Scrub mariscus and WL1 Hedgerows ... Mullaghattin Quarry 33 318329 307489 HD1 Dense bracken C Rating: Local PF2 Poor fen and conservation

flush value (high WS1 Scrub value) Mullatee 56 320949 309544 FW4 Drainage (7210) B Rating: ditches Calcareous Nationally FS1 Reed and large fens with Important sedge swamps Cladium PF1 Rich fen and flush mariscus and WN6 Wet willow- ... alder-ash woodland (7230) Alkaline WS1 Scrub fens Mullavally 76 296600 301670 FS1 Reed and large D Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation GS2 Dry meadows value 75 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site and grassy verges (moderate WD1 (Mixed) value) broadleaved woodland WS1 Scrub Newrath 87 303580 297818 FW2 C Rating: Local Depositing/lowland conservation rivers value (high FW4 Drainage value) ditches FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps Newtown 99 305780 282045 FW4 Drainage C Rating: Local Monasterboice ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value (high sedge swamps value) GS2 Dry meadows and grassy verges GS4 Wet grassland WS1 Scrub WL1 Hedgerows Newtownbalregan 11 301172 308885 FW4 Drainage C Rating: Local ditches conservation GA1 Improved value (high agricultural value) grassland GM1 Marsh WS1 Scrub WL1 Hedgerows WL2 Treelines Newtowndarver 84 302368 298114 FW4 Drainage C Rating: Local ditches conservation GS2 Dry meadows value (high and grassy verges value) WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland

ED2 Spoil and bare ground ED3 Recolonising bare ground BL3 Buildings and artificial surfaces Nicholastown (ED 69 291525 298342 GM1 Marsh E Rating: Local Tallanstown) GS4 Wet grassland conservation WS1 Scrub value (low FS1 Reed and large value) sedge swamps

Nicholastown 70 291658 298077 FW4 Drainage E Rating: Local South ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value (low sedge swamps value) WL2 Treelines

Priest Town 100 305690 283433 FW4 Drainage D Rating: Local ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value sedge swamps (moderate GS2 Dry meadows

and grassy verges value) GS4 Wet grassland GM1 Marsh ED3 Recolonising bare ground Rampark Lake 26 313678 306564 FL4 Mesotrophic E Rating: Local lakes conservation

GS2 Dry meadows value (low and grassy verges value)

76 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Rassan Bog 3 292517 312133 FL1 Dystrophic lakes (7140) C+ Rating: GA2 Amenity Transition County grassland (improved) mires and Conservation HH3 Wet heath quaking bogs value HD1 Dense bracken PB Bogs (7150) PB4 Cutover bog Depressions PF2 Poor fen and on peat flush substrates of WS1 Scrub the Rhynch... BC4 Flower beds and borders BL3 Buildings and artificial surfaces

Rathcor Lough 40 319370 305349 FL4 Mesotrophic C+ Rating: lakes County

Conservation value Rathcor Lower 41 319780 305300 GS4 Wet grassland E Rating: Local WS1 Scrub conservation

value (low value) Rathcor South 31 318414 305246 FS1 Reed and large E Rating: Local sedge swamps conservation

WS1 Scrub value (low value) Rathcor Upper 30 318025 306032 FS1 Reed and large No sedge swamps Conservation Value Rathneestin 72 294057 298375 FL5 Eutrophic lakes D Rating: Local FS1 Reed and large conservation sedge swamps value (moderate value) Rathneestin North 73 293951 298549 GM1 Marsh E Rating: Local WS1 Scrub conservation

value (low value) Reaghstown 68 290839 298428 FW2 D Rating: Local Depositing/lowland conservation rivers value FW4 Drainage (moderate ditches WN6 Wet willow- value) alder-ash woodland

77 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Redbog 57 290554.9738 303670.6647 PB4 Cutover bog (7150) C+ Rating: FW4 Drainage Depressions County ditches on peat Conservation GA1 Improved substrates of value agricultural grassland the Rhynch... GS4 Wet grassland (7140) GS2 Dry meadows Transition and grassy verges mires and HH3 Wet heath quaking bogs HD1 Dense bracken HH1 Dry siliceous heath PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland WN7 Bog woodland WS1 Scrub ED3 Recolonising bare ground PF2 Poor fen and flush Richard Taaffes 78 295769 300815 FW4 Drainage (7140) C Rating: Local Holding ditches Transition conservation GA1 Improved mires and value (high agricultural quaking bogs value) grassland GS2 Dry meadows and grassy verges GS4 Wet grassland PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog WS1 Scrub WL2 Treelines WL1 Hedgerows ED3 Recolonising bare ground Rockmarshall 23 311539 308383 FW1 Eroding/upland (7140) A Rating: rivers Transition Internationally GA1 Improved mires and Important agricultural quaking bogs grassland GS1 Dry calcareous and neutral grassland GS2 Dry meadows and grassy verges GS4 Wet grassland PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps Rootate 60 291628 301789 FW4 Drainage (7140) C+ Rating: ditches Transition County GM1 Marsh mires and Conservation PF3 Transition mire quaking bogs value & quaking bog WL1 Hedgerows Ross Lough 58 291747 303276 FW4 Drainage C+ Rating: ditches County FS1 Reed and large Conservation sedge swamps value WS1 Scrub ED3 Recolonising bare ground BL3 Buildings and artificial surfaces

78 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Rosslough North 59 292056 303536 FW4 Drainage D Rating: Local ditches conservation GS4 Wet grassland value WN7 Bog woodland (moderate WS1 Scrub value) Shilties Lough - 25 319953 311146 GS3 Dry-humid acid (1150) Coastal A Rating: Carlingford Shore grassland lagoons Internationally SAC C Coastland Important CW Brackish water CW2 Tidal rivers Stephenstown 82 301226 302615 FL5 Eutrophic lakes C Rating: Local Pond NHA FS1 Reed and large conservation sedge swamps value (high GA2 Amenity value) grassland (improved) WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland WS1 Scrub WL2 Treelines BC4 Flower beds and borders BL3 Buildings and artificial surfaces BL1 Stone walls and other stonework

Stormanstown Bog 97 291335 292565 FW4 Drainage C+ Rating: ditches County HD1 Dense bracken Conservation PB Bogs value PB4 Cutover bog WN7 Bog woodland WS1 Scrub WD4 Conifer plantation ED1 Exposed sand, gravel or till Tankardsrock 12 301501 308181 FW4 Drainage C Rating: Local ditches conservation

GM1 Marsh value (high WS1 Scrub value) Thomastown (ED 71 292366 298578 GM1 Marsh D Rating: Local Tallanstown) conservation value (moderate value) Tinure 101 305180 283486 FW4 Drainage C Rating: Local ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value (high sedge swamps value) PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland WS1 Scrub WL2 Treelines ED3 Recolonising bare ground BL3 Buildings and artificial surfaces Toomes 63 293755 302065 GS2 Dry meadows E Rating: Local and grassy verges conservation GS4 Wet grassland value (low HD1 Dense bracken value) WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland

79 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site Toprass Lough - 14 296823 306410 FL4 Mesotrophic (7140) B Rating: Drumcah, Toprass lakes Transition Nationally and Cortial Lough FW4 Drainage mires and Important NHA ditches quaking bogs FS1 Reed and large sedge swamps PF3 Transition mire & quaking bog WS1 Scrub Treagh 6 293570 309690 GS2 Dry meadows D Rating: Local and grassy verges conservation GS4 Wet grassland value PB4 Cutover bog (moderate WL1 Hedgerows

WS1 Scrub value) ED2 Spoil and bare ground ED3 Recolonising bare ground Treagh North 5 293630 310175 HD1 Dense bracken (7140) C Rating: Local PF3 Transition mire Transition conservation & quaking bog mires and value (high WS1 Scrub quaking bogs value) Tullakeel 98 289844 294491 FW4 Drainage (7140) C+ Rating: ditches Transition County PF3 Transition mire mires and Conservation & quaking bog quaking bogs value WN6 Wet willow- alder-ash woodland

Tully (ED Killanny) 61 290658 301114 FW4 Drainage C Rating: Local ditches conservation GA2 Amenity value (high grassland (improved) value) GS4 Wet grassland HD1 Dense bracken WN7 Bog woodland

WS1 Scrub WL1 Hedgerows WL2 Treelines BC4 Flower beds and borders BL3 Buildings and artificial surfaces Tullycahan 77 295676 301674 FW4 Drainage E Rating: Local ditches conservation GS4 Wet grassland value (low GM1 Marsh value) WS1 Scrub ED2 Spoil and bare ground ED3 Recolonising bare ground BL3 Buildings and artificial surfaces Whiterath 88 304437 298020 FW4 Drainage C Rating: Local ditches conservation HH Heath value (high HH3 Wet heath value) PB4 Cutover bog WS1 Scrub ED3 Recolonising bare ground Whitestown 46 323746 306901 FW4 Drainage E Rating: Local ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value (low sedge swamps value) ED3 Recolonising

80 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Site Name LWS Easting Northing Summary of main Summary of Conservation Site Centre Centre habitat(s) of Habitats ranking Code interest present Directive following on site (Fossitt) Annex 1 survey Habitat(s) present on site bare ground

Whitestown Coast 45 323358 306531 FW4 Drainage D Rating: Local ditches conservation FS1 Reed and large value sedge swamps (moderate ED1 Exposed sand, gravel or till value) ED2 Spoil and bare ground BC3 Tilled land Woodtown 91 300530 296072 HD1 Dense bracken E Rating: Local WN6 Wet willow- conservation

alder-ash woodland value (low WS1 Scrub value) Wottonstown 85 302658 296749 FW4 Drainage (7140) C+ Rating: ditches Transition County PF3 Transition mire mires and Conservation & quaking bog quaking bogs value WD4 Conifer plantation WS1 Scrub

81 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Appendix 2: Key to data fields in the Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) database and GIS dataset

As part of the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 project (LWS) two main databases were created to hold site information.

1. Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) GIS Dataset

The Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) GIS Dataset (ArcView 10.0 GIS software package) was created to hold site related information on each polygon, point or linear feature mapped. The shapefiles created during the project were converted into MapInfo format for use by Louth County Council. Both ArcGIS and MapInfo versions of the final GIS files are included on the CD submitted with the final LWS report. A description of the various files that make up the GIS is presented below along with a description of the various data fields attached to each file.

2. Louth Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) Site Database

The Louth Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) Site Database (Filemaker Pro 11.0 software package), composed of two related data tables, held basic site information and existing published and background data on sites (in the LWM database) and 2011 site survey information (in the LWS database).

This overall LWS database is supported by a Bibliography database which holds information on third party reports and surveys consulted during the project. This database was also used to create the final report Bibliography.

An explanation of the data fields used in both the GIS database and Site database are provided below. Details of the data fields (name as it appears in operational mode within various database layouts; and in brackets field name within database) in the Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWM & LWS) databases are provided below.

1. LWS GIS dataset– files and associated data fields Five different GIS shapefiles (MapInfo Tab files) were created during the course of the LWS 2011 each containing a number of different attribute fields as described below.

1.1. LWS 2011 Site Locations This file shows point locations of all 108 LWS sites surveyed during 2011. The site locations originate from Brophy (2009). The various attribute fields associated with this file include:

OBJECT_ID Unique numeric identifier for each polygon in the dataset. Site_Name This contains the site name as recorded in the LWS site database. Site_Code The site code according to that recorded in the LWS site database. X_Coord Y coordinate (Northing) of the point location. Y_Coord X coordinate (Easting) of the point location. SiteDescri Site description written following the completion of LWS 2011 field survey. ConsEvalua Site conservation evaluation according to NRA (2009) guidelines. SurveyDate Date on which field survey was undertaken. PhotoRef Reference to the name of site photograph taken during field survey. These photos are included within a folder submitted with the LWS final report.

1.2. LWS 2011 Site Boundaries

This file shows the boundaries of all LWS sites surveyed during 2011, as originally drawn by Brophy (2009). The various attribute fields associated with this file are as follows:

OBJECT_ID Unique numeric identifier for each polygon in the dataset. Site_Name This contains the site name as recorded in the LWS site database.

82 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Site_Code The site code according to that recorded in the LWS site database. X_Coord Y coordinate (Northing) of the point location. Y_Coord X coordinate (Easting) of the point location. SiteDescri Site description written following the completion of LWS 2011 field survey. ConsEvalua Site conservation evaluation according to NRA (2009) guidelines. SurveyDate Date on which field survey was undertaken. PhotoRef Reference to the name of site photograph taken during field survey. These photos are included within a folder submitted with the LWS final report.

1.3. LWS 2011 Target Notes This file shows point locations of particular interest within each LWS site surveyed during 2011. The attributes of the point features include the note number (eg. N1, N2 N3 etc.), type or categiory of each note (e.g. damage, habitat etc), a brief descriptive note of the feature of interest and a photo reference where relevant.

The attribute fields associated with this file include:

OBJECT_ID Unique numeric identifier for each polygon in the dataset. SiteCode The site code according to that recorded in the LWS site database. NoteNumber This relates to the number of the note in relation to each site. NoteType Each not is assigned to a particular category of note depending on its subject. Categories include: habitat, boundary, survey, damage and management. NoteText A brief note describing the particular feature of interest. PhotoRef This may include a reference to the name of a photograph taken during field survey of the particular feature of interest. These photos are included within a photographic folder submitted with the LWS final report.

1.4. LWS 2011 Polygon Habitats

This file shows the distribution and extent of the habitats recorded during the LWS 2011. Guidance on the format and structure of the shapefile follows that recommended by Smith et al. (2011). The following attributes are associated with this shapefile:

OBJECT_ID Unique numeric identifier for each polyline in the dataset. FOSSITT_NA Full name and code of habitat according to Fossitt (2000). There is an additional category ‘unknown wetland type’, where it was possible to identify a wetland but not possible to assign it to a Fossitt category. FOSSITT_CD Alphanumeric code according to Fossitt (2000) to level 3. ANNEX_CODE Where applicable, EU Habitat Directive Annex I habitat code. SURVEY_MET An indication of field data quality or survey method. Coded according to Smith et al (2011)1. SURVEY_DAT Date of field survey as proposed for use by Smith et al (2011). AREA A calculation field which automatically calculates the area covered by the habitat polygon.

1GIS Data Quality (Survey Method) Data quality classification scheme as proposed in the Heritage Council’s 2011, Best Practice Guidance for Habitat Survey and Mapping (Smith et al. 2011).

S = Field data have been collected by walkover survey where the habitat has been walked through by the field ecologist, allowing relatively detailed inspection of habitat structure and species composition V = Data have been field validated where the habitat has been viewed in the field in less detail, such as a quick look over the hedge or inspection through binoculars from a distance DA = Habitat information is from a desktop source that provides recent (i.e. within 10-15 years), high quality data that permit a confident identification of habitat type and other data, such as a previous survey carried out as part of a research project or EcIA or information from a trusted third-party DB = Habitat information is from a desktop source that provides older (i.e. greater than 10-15 years old), high quality data that permit a confident identification of habitat type and other data DC = Habitat information is derived from desktop interpretation of aerial photography supplemented by additional data sources of good quality, such as those listed in Appendix C 83 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______DD = Habitat information is derived from desktop interpretation of aerial photography only.

1.5. LWS 2011 Linear Habitats

Linear habitats including rivers, drainage ditches, hedgerows and treelines. Guidance on the format and structure of the shapefile follows that recommended by Smith et al. (2011).

The following attribute fields are attached to the file:

2. LWM Site database

A series of database layouts, containing related site data, form the main structure and content of the LWM site database. These layouts were used when adding site related data to the database. These layouts (indicated by green buttons along the top of the LWM database window) and the site information they hold are:

Title layout: Opening title page layout of database displayed when FileMaker Pro application is launched, with title copyright statement and enter button.

Main Data Entry Layout: Layout containing basic site details including site names and codes (i.e. name and code; other names and codes used by third party groups for site), total site area, location data and information on site designations.

Habitat, Species & Threats Layout: Layout containing site details on the wetland habitat type(s) present; Biological interest and rare species data on sites and where this information has been published.

This layout additionally recorded information on site damaging operations recorded with an overall severity scale.

Habitat Area Layout: Layout containing site details on the extent of the different wetland habitat type(s) present on the site (recorded in ha or length (km) for linear features).

Site Description Layout: Layout containing site descriptions obtained from various third party sources (e.g. NPWS, IPCC etc.).

84 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

2.1. Data fields in the LWM Site database

Main Data Entry Layout

Site Code (Site Code) A unique site code created for the site as part of the LWS project as each data record was created. This field cannot be altered.

Site Name (Site Name) The name of the wetland site, based on the most widely used name for site proposed by third party sources and adopted for the LWS project. (see also Other Groups Site Name below).

Where a site record occurs as a subsite within a larger site complex, the specific subsite name is followed by the name of the main site preceded by a - (e.g. TOPRASS LOUGH - DRUMCAH, TOPRASS AND CORTIAL LOUGH NHA, here TpoprassLough, a subsite occurs within the DRUMCAH, TOPRASS AND CORTIAL LOUGH NHA, the main site).

Total Site Area (ha) from Literature (Total Site Area (ha) from Literature) The total site area in hectares as reported in Literature source.

Total Site Extent (ha) from GIS (Total Site Extent (ha) from GIS) The total site area in hectares as calculated from the GIS.

Total Site Length (km) from GIS (Total Site Length (km) from GIS) The total site length in km as calculated by the GIS for linear features such as rivers; ditches etc.

Easting Centre (Easting Centre) The grid reference of the E co-ordinate of the site is recorded, where this is given in the new format of a 6 digit number.

Northing Centre (Northing Centre) The grid reference of the N co-ordinate of the site is recorded, where this is given in the new format of a 6 digit number.

Grid Reference (Grid ref old) The grid reference of the site is recorded, where this is given in the old format of a letter followed by 4 or 6 digit number.

(It should be noted that this grid reference, based on information provided in published reports, should be interpreted with care, and in many cases may be found to be inaccurate. In relation to site location the Easting and Northing co-ordinates above are considered the more reliable when locating the site in question).

Ortho photo number (ortho photo number) Aerial photograph number of OSI ortho photo.

Six Inch map number (six inch map number) The number(s) of the Ordnance Survey six inch to one mile scale map(s) in which the site is located.

1:5000 map number (one to 5000 map number) The number(s) of the Ordnance Survey one to 5000 scale map(s) in which the site is located.

Discovery map number (discovery map number) The number(s) of the Ordnance survey 1:50,000 map(s) in which the site is located.

Site Source (site source) Details of who proposed the site as a site containing wetland types being recorded in LWM and where appropriate a reference to the study or report where the site was recorded.

Other Groups Site Code (Other Group Site Code) 85 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______The code number for the site used by third party groups (e.g. NPWS NHA code number inter alia).

Other Groups Site Name (Other Group Site Name) The name of the site used by third party groups in other studies or surveys, or where alternative spellings for a site name have been used (e.g. Brophy (2009) Louth site list showing original site names applied)

(When trying to locate a site within the database it is essential that this field is also searched in the case where the site cannot be found under the Site Name field above).

Site Designations (site designations) If the site has or was designated under one of the various conservation initiatives the appropriate designation was recorded, together with explanatory key.

Options: NHA - Natural Heritage Area with legal protection cNHA - candidate Natural Heritage Area no legal protection pNHA - proposed Natural Heritage Area as advertised in 1995 no legal protection SAC - Special Area for Conservation with legal protection cSAC - candidate Special Area for Conservation open to appeal/ transmitted to EU pcSAC - proposed candidate Special Area for Conservation open to appeal/ not yet transmitted to EU SPA - Special Protection Area cSPA - candidate Special Protection Area NP - National Park with legal protection WHS - World Heritage Site NNR - National Nature Reserve with legal protection BIO - Unesco Biosphere Reserve RAM - Ramsar Site ESA - Environmentally Sensitive Area EDS - Eurodiploma Site ASI - Area of Scientific Interest BGR - Berne Convention Biogenetic Reserve COR - Corine site WS - Wildfowl Sanctuary RFF - Refuge for Flora or Fauna CBA - Coillte Biodiversity Area CFP - Coillte Forest Park Undesignated site - no known designation

Townland Name(s) (Townland) The name of the townlands in which the GIS or site occurs. Obtained from the GIS.

(In the case of a main site (see definition below), all townland(s) recorded within the site polygon mapped are provided. For subsites only the townland directly at the grid reference point location is provided. Similar rules apply to information provided for site Solid Geology, Subsoil Type, River Catchment & Corine Landuse).

Solid Geology (Solid Geology) The solid geology underlying the site. Obtained from the GIS.

Subsoil Type (Subsoil Type) Subsoil (quaternary deposit) underlying the site. Obtained from the GIS.

Code Parent Material A Alluvium undifferentiated AcEsk Clayey esker sands and gravel BktPt Blanket peat Cut Cutover peat FenPt Fen peat GDCSs Sandstone sands and gravels (Devonian/Carboniferous) GLPSsS Sandstone and shale sands and gravels (Lower GLPSsS Sandstone and shale sands and gravels (Lower Palaeozoic) 86 Palaeozoic) Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______GLs Limestone sands and gravels (Carboniferous) KaRck Karstified limestone bedrock at surface L Lake sediments undifferentiated Made Made ground Rck Bedrock at surface TDCSs Sandstone till (Devonian/Carboniferous) TDCSsS Sandstone and shales till (Devonian/Carboniferous) TLs Limestone till (Carboniferous) Water Open water at the surface

River Catchment (River catchment Name) River catchment in which the site occurs. Obtained from the GIS.

Corine Landuse (Corine Landuse) Corine habitat type within site based on Corine GIS classification.

Polygon Source Comment (Polygon Source Comment) Source of the GIS polygon used to describe the site.

Options: NPWS Existing - shape file obtained from NPWS source; Wetland Survey new - polygon created as part of the current project; Other existing – shape file obtained from other third party study.

GIS Shapefile Data Reference (GIS shapefile data reference) Code number relating to the report or data source, which contained the GIS shapefile for the site in question.

Date of last field survey (Date of last survey) The year in which the last known field survey of the site was undertaken.

Site background/research/previous survey data (Site Background data) List of publications and reports holding habitat information on the site. The data source code used is presented in full in the Bibliography database.

Type of Information held on site in literature (Type of Information Source available on site) A list of information categories under which data has been recorded on the site in previous reports or data sources, including:

Vegetation Type - relevé data recorded from site Species Data - recorded for general and/or on rare species Habitat Data - habitat data in Fossitt format available for all or part of site Habitat Map - map data of variable quality available (may include GIS habitat map) Hydrochemical Data - water chemistry data available on site Site Size - from published source Ownership Data - owner information available on site Detailed Site Description - detailed description of available in published report Site Management - site management recommendations have been made in published report Conservation Designation - site conservation recommendations have been made in published report or site is a recognised conservation area iWeBS Site - site is listed as a location for bird recording as part of the Irish Wetlands Birds Survey Scheme Visitor & Recreation Facilities - wetland site with visitor and recreational facilities i.e. parking, walks and trails, picnic areas, seating, viewing platforms etc., other than angling facilities Angling Lake - lake or river is used or managed as a location for angling, with or without angling facilities

Wetland Area on Site (Wetland Areas on site)

87 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Check box system to record preliminary evaluation on whether a wetland type occurred on site, was likely to occur or was absent.

Comment Box (Comment box) (not exported to GIS site database) Text field to hold temporary comments on site, queries on site etc. Used during data compilation phase of the project.

Temporary flag record (Temporary flag record) (not exported to GIS site database) Check box allowing the temporary flagging of selected site records. Used during data compilation or data abstraction phase of the project.

Site Type (Site Type) (not exported to GIS site database) Check box allowing a site record to be characterised, i.e. whether the database record is for a discrete site or a subsite, a smaller part (e.g. lake) within a larger site complex. A subsite record was generally created where specific site data related to the subsite.

Species Data Layout

Annex Species Present - EU Birds or Habitats Directive (Annex Species Present EU Birds Habitats Directive) Yes/ No check box to indicate the occurrence of listed Annex species on the EU Birds or Habitats Directive.

Red Data Book Species Present (Red Data Book Species Present) Yes/ No check box to indicate the occurrence of listed Red Data book or Red Data list species on the site.

Rare/Noteworthy Species interest present on site (Site rare species present) A list of species categories (for both flora and fauna)of interest which occur on the site; including:

Botanical Zoological Zoological Invertebrates Vertebrates

Higher Plant Invertebrates Mollusc Birds Fern Invertebrates Insect Mammals Bryological Invertebrates Arachnid Bats Lichen Invertebrates Crustacean Amphibian Algae Fish

Rare/Noteworthy Species data source (Species data source) List of publications and reports holding species information on rare and threatened species on the site. Code used to identify report in related Bibliography database.

EU Habitats Directive Annex II Species (EU Habs Annex Species) List of species listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive.

EU Birds Directive Annex I Species (EU Birds Annex Species) List of selected bird species listed in Annex I of the Birds Directive and likely to be recorded on freshwater wetland habitats.

Irish Red and Rare Species or Important Species Assemblages (Irish Red n Rare Species) List of selected rare and important species groups or individual species likely to be recorded on freshwater wetland habitats.

Habitat Data Layout

Main Fossitt Habitat(s) Present (Main Fossitt habitat present)

88 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______A list of all Fossitt habitat types present within the site, based on the classification system of Fossitt was recorded (excluded Marine habitat types).

EU Habitats Directive Habitat(s) Present (EU habitats directive code) A list of all EU Habitats Directive habitat types present within the site, based on the classification system in Annex I of the Directive.

Habitat Area Layout

Habitat Area in ha fields (Fossitt code plus the word Area e.g. PF1 Area) A list of the extent of the Fossitt wetland habitat types occurring within the site, was recorded. Areas were calculated from the GIS and were entered against the appropriate habitat type.

Length present in km fields (Fossitt code plus the word Length e.g. FW2 Length) A list of the length of the linear wetland habitat types occurring within the site, was recorded. Lengths were calculated from the GIS and were entered against the appropriate habitat type.

Threats Data Layout

Overall severity of site damage (Severity of damage) Check box system allowing the severity of damage reported on the site to be catagorised. Scale recorded:

1 – Not Serious 2 – Serious 3 – Very Serious 4 - Unknown

Threats and Damage within Site (Threats damage within site basic list) List of damaging operations observed during the site visit.

Site Description Layout

Site Description and Source (Site description) (not exported to GIS site database) Text field to hold site description(s) and name of the third party source who provided site description e.g. NPWS, IPCC etc.

89 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

3. LWS Survey database

A series of database layouts, containing site survey information, form the main structure and content of the LWS database. These layouts were used when adding survey data to the individual site records. These layouts (indicated by green or pink buttons along the top of the LWS database window) and the site information they hold are:

Title Layout: Opening title page of the Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) displayed when FileMaker Pro application is launched, with database title, version number, logos, copyright statement, and a background notes and enter button.

Background Notes Layout: Layout containing basic user information on the operation of the LWS relational database.

Home Page Layout: Layout containing basic survey and site details. Blue coloured fields are lookup fields which take site data from the main Louth Wetland Map (LWM) site database (using the site code as the lookup reference) while the green fields contain field survey data.

Site Description Layout: Layout containing a series of descriptive text fields in which survey observations were to be recorded. Notes to guide the recorder on what information is to be included in each descriptive field are provided.

Species List Layout: Layout containing a list of the flora and fauna recorded on the site during the field survey.

Site Photograph Layout: Layout containing 3 site photographs from the field survey.

GIS Maps Layout: Layout containing 3 possible site maps produced and exported from the LWM GIS dataset after survey was completed (Locations map showing site on OS Discovery Map (only summary maps produced for the LWS); Aerial photograph showing site boundary and Fossitt Habitat Map after survey of the site).

The final two layouts, accessed via the pink link buttons display the Fossitt Habitats Present on the site and Threats and Damaging Operations layouts within the main Louth Wetland Map (LWM) database.

An explanation of the data fields used in the survey database are provided below.

Name in bold is the name applied to database fields as seen when accessing the database in browse/operating mode; the underlined name is the actual field name assigned within database (used when exporting data).

3.1. Data fields held in the LWS database

Main Site Survey Layout

Site Code (Site Code) The unique site code for the site as displayed in the Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) database.

Lookup fields – where data is taken from LWM database and displayed in the Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) database:

• Site Name (Site Name) • Total Site Extent (ha) from GIS (Total Site Extent (ha) from GIS) • Easting Centre (Easting Centre) • Northing Centre (Northing Centre) • Townland Name(s) (Townland) • Solid Geology (Solid Geology) • Subsoil Type (Subsoil type) 90 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______• River Catchment (River catchment Name) • Site designation (Site designation) • Site type (Site type) • Wetland areas on site (Wetland areas on site) • Site designation (Site designation) • Site source (Site source) • Site background data sources (as per Bibliography references) (Site background data)

These fields are locked within the LWS survey database and can only be changed or altered in the LWM site database.

Date of wetland survey (Date of wetland survey) Date detailed field survey undertaken. Format dd/mm/yyyy.

Site source information (Site source information) List of information sources on site, relating to where site was reported, when survey undertaken etc. Check box options.

Conservation Ranking following Survey (Conservation ranking following survey) Conservation ranking for site based on results of field survey and subsequent conservation assessment. One check box option to be selected following survey.

• A Rating: Recommended for SAC status (International) • B Rating: Recommended for NHA status (National) • C Rating: County conservation value • D Rating: Local conservation value (higher value) • E Rating: Local conservation value (lower value) • F Rating: Unknown value - Survey required • No conservation value

A button also links to a page of background information on conservation ranking to assist in assigning site to appropriate status.

Altitude (mOD) (Altitude m) Altitude of site meters above Ordnance datum.

Water Table Depth (cm) (water table cm) Water table depth within wetland site. Recorded in cm.

Substrate type (Substrate type) Check box options: • Clay • Peat • Silt • Tufa • Rock • Other (describe)

Substrate depth (cm) (substrate depth cm) Substrate depth under wetland area recorded in cm.

Substrate stability (substrate stability) Check box options: • Very firm • Firm • Some quaking • Quaking • Floating mat

Management on site (management on site) Check box options: • None 91 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______• Rough Grazing • Grazing • Burning • Peat Cutting • Mowing • Silage • Other

Landuse adjacent to wetland site (Adjacent landuse) Landuse outside of wetland site boundary, Fossitt habitat list. Check box options, select as many as required.

Species Recorded on Site

Flora on site (Flora on site) List of flora recorded on site. Higher and lower plants, mosses and lichens.

Fauna on site (Fauna on site) List of fauna recorded on site. Vertebrates and invertebrates.

Site Descriptions

Site Location (Site location) In this section include information on the location of the site relative to nearest town etc.

Site Description and wetland habitats recorded (Site Description n wetland habitats recorded) In this section include general site description, habitats present, substrate type, stability, depth and water table.

Description of any potential Hab Dir Annex I habitats/ Rare Flora Fauna Species etc. (Description of any potential Annex 1 habitats) EU Habitats Directive habitats recorded for the site, rare species information etc.

Target Notes (Target Note Text) Target notes relating to areas mapped in the GIS habitat maps are stored here.

Management Recommendations following survey (Management Recommendations following survey) Recommendations regarding possible management options on the site.

Future Survey Recommendations (Future Survey Recommendations) Additional survey recommendations relating to the site.

Landowner Information Comments (Landowner Information Comments) Comments on ownership or the history of the site provided by local residents/land owners.

Site Photographs

Site Photographs 1, 2 & 3 (Site Photograph 1, 2 & 3) Layout allows maximum of 3 site photographs to be imported to represent wetlands on site.

Site Photograph Captions 1, 2 & 3 (Site Photograph Caption 1, 2 & 3) Layout allows maximum of 3 site photograph captions to be recorded.

Site & Habitat Maps

Site location map discovery Figure 1 (Site location map discovery) Layout allows image of wetland site location map based on OS Discovery map to be imported. A caption field for the map is also included (Site location map caption).

Air photo site location Figure 2 (Air photo site location) 92 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Layout allows image of wetland site location map based on Aerial photograph to be imported. A caption field for the photograph is also included (Air photo site location caption).

GIS habitat map Figure 3 (GIS habitat map) Layout allows image of wetland habitat map to be imported. A caption field for the habitat map is also included (GIS habitat map caption).

All three of the above can be viewed as enlarged images by selecting the appropriate “Go to enlarged layout” button.

4. Data fields in the Bibliography database

Bibliog Number: Unique number created by Filemaker Pro application when new publication record is added to database. This is subsequently used in the main LWM database to relate back to reference in the Bibliography database.

Authors: Author(s) of report, surname and initial format.

Year: Year in which report/publication was published.

Title: Title of report/publication and where relevant title of book this appeared in.

Journal, Publisher, Location, No. Pages: further details of publication.

93 Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Appendix 3: Field Survey Card used during the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Appendix 4: Site Evaluation Criteria

Modified from National Roads Authority (2009). Guidelines for Assessment of Ecological Impacts of National Roads Schemes.

Rating Importance of Ecological Sites A Internationally important Sites designated (or qualifying for designation) as SAC* or SPA* under the EU Habitats or Birds Directives. Undesignated sites containing good examples of Annex I priority habitats under the EU Habitats Directive. Sites designated (or qualifying for designation) as SAC* for salmonids or Annex II species under the EU Habitats Directives. Major salmon river fisheries. Major salmonid (salmon, trout or char) lake fisheries. B Nationally important • Sites or waters designated or proposed as an NHA* or statutory Nature Reserves. • Undesignated sites containing good examples of Annex I habitats (under EU Habitats Directive). • Undesignated sites containing significant numbers of resident or regularly occurring populations of Annex II species under the EU Habitats Directive or Annex I species under the EU Birds Directive or species protected under the Wildlife (Amendment) Act 2000. • Major trout river fisheries. • Water bodies with major amenity fishery value. • Commercially important coarse fisheries. C+ County value Area of Special Amenity. Area subject to a Tree Preservation Order. Area of High Amenity, or equivalent, designated under the County Development Plan. Resident or regularly occurring populations (assessed to be important at the County level) of the following: • Species of bird, listed in Annex I and/or referred to in Article 4(2) of the Birds Directive; • Species of animal and plants listed in Annex II and/or IV of the Habitats Directive; • Species protected under the Wildlife Acts; and/or • Species listed on the relevant Red Data list. Site containing area or areas of the habitat types listed in Annex I of the Habitats Directive that do not fulfil the criteria for valuation as of International or National importance. County important populations of species, or viable areas of semi-natural habitats or natural heritage features identified in the National or Local BAP, if this has been prepared. Sites containing habitats and species that are rare or are undergoing a decline in quality or extent at a national level. C High value, locally important Sites containing semi-natural habitat types with high biodiversity in a local context and a high degree of naturalness, or significant populations of locally rare species. Sites containing any resident or regularly occurring populations of Annex II species under the EU Habitats Directive or Annex I species under the EU Birds Directive. Small water bodies with known salmonid populations or with good potential salmonid habitat. Large water bodies with some coarse fisheries value. D Moderate value, locally important Sites containing some semi-natural habitat or locally important for wildlife. Small water bodies with some coarse fisheries value or some potential salmonid habitat. Any water body with unpolluted water (Q-value rating 4-5). E Low value, locally important Artificial or highly modified habitats with low species diversity and low wildlife value. Water bodies with no current fisheries value and no significant potential fisheries value. F Unknown Value Sites of possible ecological value which require further investigation at the optimum season to establish importance. Sites of possible fisheries value requiring further survey.

* SAC = Special Area of Conservation, SPA = Special Protection Area, NHA = Natural Heritage Area 96

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Appendix 5: Detailed location of sites surveyed in 2011 as part of the Louth Wetland Identification Survey

Reproduced under OSI License number 2011 / 30 / CCMA / Louth Local Authorities. Unauthorized reproduction infringes Ordnance Survey Ireland and Government of Ireland copyright. © Ordnance Survey Ireland, 2011.

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

100

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

101

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

102

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

103

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

104

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

105

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______LWS Report Part 2: Site Reports

Appendix 6: Individual Site Reports from the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011

Site Reports Section A – Pages 1-244: Sites Ardee Bog to Labanstown Site Reports Section B – Pages 245-497: Sites Liberties of Carlingford to Wottonstown

Report Part 2 - LWS Site Name LWS Site Code Section A Page Number Ardee Cutaway Bog NHA 95 1 Ardpatrick 79 7 Ardtully Beg 39 11 Artoney 62 16 Babeswood 86 20 Ballagan 48 24 Ballagan and Whitestown 47 29 Ballug 43 34 Ballynamagher 42 38 Ballynamagher West 38 42 Ballynamony (Bradshaw) 44 47 Ballynamony (Murphy) 49 52 Ballynamony (Murphy) East 50 56 Beaulieu 108 60 Bellurgan 20 64 Bellurgan (Marsh Road) - Dundalk Bay SAC 19 68 Bellurgan East 22 72 Boycetown 107 76 Briarhill 105 81 Carraghcloghan 7 85 Carrickbaggot 103 90 Carrickcarnan 2 95 Castlecarragh 29 100 Castlecarragh South 28 104 Coole Bog 96 109 Corradoran Lough 66 114 Corrakit (Windy Gap) - Carlingford Mountain SAC 18 119 Cortial Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Loughs NHA 13 124 Courtbane 4 129 Cunnicar 10 134 Derrycammagh 92 139 Dromiskin 90 144 Dromiskin West 89 149 Drumard 67 153 Drumass 17 157 Drumcah Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Lough NHA 15 162 Drumgoolan 64 167 Drumgowna 65 172 Dunmahon 83 176 Edenagrena 16 180 Edentober 1 184 Galtrimsland 37 189 Galtrimsland Pond 36 193 Galtrimsland South 34 197 Grange Pond 35 201 Grattanstown 102 205 Greenlane 94 209

106

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Greenore 53 213 Hoarstone 74 218 Jenkinstown 21 223 Kilcroney 80 228 Knockattin 81 232 Knockmor 75 236 Labanstown 106 241 Report Part 2 – LWS Site Name LWS Site Code Section B Page Number Liberties of Carlingford 24 245 Liberties of Carlingford East 55 250 Liscarragh Marsh NHA 32 254 Loughanmore Lake 27 259 Lurgankeel 8 264 Maghareagh 9 269 Mapastown 93 274 Millgrange 54 279 Millgrange South 52 284 Morganstown 104 289 Muchgrange 51 293 Mullaghattin Quarry 33 298 Mullatee 56 303 Mullavally 76 308 Newrath 87 313 Newtown Monasterboice 99 317 Newtownbalregan 11 322 Newtowndarver 84 326 Nicholastown (ED Tallanstown) 69 331 Nicholastown South 70 335 Priest Town 100 340 Rampark Lake 26 345 Rassan Bog 3 349 Rathcor Lough 40 354 Rathcor Lower 41 359 Rathcor South 31 363 Rathcor Upper 30 367 Rathneestin 72 371 Rathneestin North 73 375 Reaghstown 68 379 Redbog 57 383 Richard Taaffes Holding 78 389 Rockmarshall 23 394 Rootate 60 399 Ross Lough 58 404 Rosslough North 59 409 Shilties Lough - Carlingford Shore SAC 25 414 Stephenstown Pond NHA 82 418 Stormanstown Bog 97 423 Tankardsrock 12 428 Thomastown (ED Tallanstown) 71 432 Tinure 101 437 Toomes 63 442 Toprass Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Lough NHA 14 446 Treagh 6 451 Treagh North 5 456 Tullakeel 98 461 Tully (ED Killanny) 61 466 Tullycahan 77 471 Whiterath 88 476 Whitestown 46 481 Whitestown Coast 45 485 Woodtown 91 489 Wottonstown 85 493 107

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Site Reports Section A – Pages 1-244: Sites Ardee to Labanstown Site Reports Section B – Pages 245-497: Sites Liberties of Carlingford to Wottonstown

LWS Site Name LWS Site Code Page Number Edentober 1 184 Carrickcarnan 2 95 Rassan Bog 3 349 Courtbane 4 129 Treagh North 5 456 Treagh 6 451 Carraghcloghan 7 85 Lurgankeel 8 264 Maghareagh 9 269 Cunnicar 10 134 Newtownbalregan 11 322 Tankardsrock 12 428 Cortial Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Loughs NHA 13 124 Toprass Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Lough NHA 14 446 Drumcah Lough - Drumcah, Toprass and Cortial Lough NHA 15 162 Edenagrena 16 180 Drumass 17 157 Corrakit (Windy Gap) - Carlingford Mountain SAC 18 119 Bellurgan (Marsh Road) - Dundalk Bay SAC 19 68 Bellurgan 20 64 Jenkinstown 21 223 Bellurgan East 22 72 Rockmarshall 23 394 Liberties of Carlingford 24 245 Shilties Lough - Carlingford Shore SAC 25 414 Rampark Lake 26 345 Loughanmore Lake 27 259 Castlecarragh South 28 104 Castlecarragh 29 100 Rathcor Upper 30 367 Rathcor South 31 363 Liscarragh Marsh NHA 32 254 Mullaghattin Quarry 33 298 Galtrimsland South 34 197 Grange Pond 35 201 Galtrimsland Pond 36 193 Galtrimsland 37 189 Ballynamagher West 38 42 Ardtully Beg 39 11 Rathcor Lough 40 354 Rathcor Lower 41 359 Ballynamagher 42 38 Ballug 43 34 Ballynamony (Bradshaw) 44 47 Whitestown Coast 45 485 Whitestown 46 481 Ballagan and Whitestown 47 29 Ballagan 48 24 Ballynamony (Murphy) 49 52 Ballynamony (Murphy) East 50 56 Muchgrange 51 293 Millgrange South 52 284 Greenore 53 213 Millgrange 54 279 LWS Site Name LWS Site Code Page Number Liberties of Carlingford East 55 250 Mullatee 56 303 108

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Redbog 57 383 Ross Lough 58 404 Rosslough North 59 409 Rootate 60 399 Tully (ED Killanny) 61 466 Artoney 62 16 Toomes 63 442 Drumgoolan 64 167 Drumgowna 65 172 Corradoran Lough 66 114 Drumard 67 153 Reaghstown 68 379 Nicholastown (ED Tallanstown) 69 331 Nicholastown South 70 335 Thomastown (ED Tallanstown) 71 432 Rathneestin 72 371 Rathneestin North 73 375 Hoarstone 74 218 Knockmor 75 236 Mullavally 76 308 Tullycahan 77 471 Richard Taaffes Holding 78 389 Ardpatrick 79 7 Kilcroney 80 228 Knockattin 81 232 Stephenstown Pond NHA 82 418 Dunmahon 83 176 Newtowndarver 84 326 Wottonstown 85 493 Babeswood 86 20 Newrath 87 313 Whiterath 88 476 Dromiskin West 89 149 Dromiskin 90 144 Woodtown 91 489 Derrycammagh 92 139 Mapastown 93 274 Greenlane 94 209 Ardee Cutaway Bog NHA 95 1 Coole Bog 96 109 Stormanstown Bog 97 423 Tullakeel 98 461 Newtown Monasterboice 99 317 Priest Town 100 340 Tinure 101 437 Grattanstown 102 205 Carrickbaggot 103 90 Morganstown 104 289 Briarhill 105 81 Labanstown 106 241 Boycetown 107 76 Beaulieu 108 60

109

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______Key to Habitat Map Symbols

110

Louth Wetland Identification Survey Foss, Crushell, O’Loughlin & Wilson 2011 ______

Louth Wetland Identification Survey (LWS) 2011 CD ROM Contents

by Peter Foss, Patrick Crushell, Barry O’Loughlin & Faith Wilson

Contents:

1. Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011. Part 1: Main Report prepared by Peter J. Foss, Patrick Crushell, Barry O’Loughlin & Faith Wilson (In PDF format, requires Adobe Acrobat to view) 101 pages

2. Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011. Part 2: Site Reports prepared by Peter J. Foss, Patrick Crushell, Barry O’Loughlin & Faith Wilson (In PDF format, requires Adobe Acrobat to view)

Site Reports Sections A pages 1-244 Site Reports Sections B pages 245-497

3. Louth Wetland Site Database 2011 Version 1.0; Louth Wetland Identification Survey Database 2011 Version 1.0 & Publications Bibliography database (requires Filemaker Pro 8.0 or later format to view).

4. Excel tables to accompany the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 report

a. Report Appendix 1: Summary information on habitats present and conservation ranking for the list of sites surveyed during the LWS 2011 b. LWS_Survey_Database_Site_Summary: Summary information on sites survey during the LWS 2011, including site location, site description, Annex 1 habitats present and conservation ranking. c. LWS_Survey_database_Target_Notes: Target notes on features of interest on sites surrvey on the LWS 2011. d. LWS_Survey_Database_total_export: Total Data Export of all information held within the LWS 2011 site database

5. GIS Shape files from the Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011.

a. ArcView GIS dataset (Requires ArcView 10 GIS Software) b. MapInfo GIS dataset (Requires MapInfo GIS Software)

6. CD box cover for Louth Wetland Identification Survey 2011 (in PDF format)