DOCSLIB.ORG

Needs Assessment for Wharves and Rail Depots in Hampshire

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Needs Assessment for Wharves and Rail Depots in Hampshire Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework Needs Assessment for Wharves and Rail Depots in Hampshire Update February 2011 A Study by Land & Mineral Management Limited for Hampshire County Council, Portsmouth City Council, Southampton City Council, New Forest National Park Authority and the South Downs National Park. Front Cover – Aerial shot of the River Itchen wharves – Copyright - Digital Millennium Map Partnership, 2006 CONTENTS SECTIONS Executive Summary 1. Introduction and Background 2. Hampshire Wharves and Rail Depots - Operations Review of Existing Operations and – Capacities of existing wharf and rail depots in Hampshire 3. Establishing what the Future Need for Wharves and Rail Depots up to 2030 4. Possible Constraints and Issues Related to the continued use or expansion of Wharves and Rail Depots in Hampshire 5. Meeting Hampshire’s Future Need for Wharves and Rail Depots in Hampshire 6. Proposals for Wharf and Rail Depot Site Safeguarding – including Possible Safeguarding Measures 7. Summary and Recommendations TABLES Table 1 Probable Import and Export Facilities in Hampshire c.1990 Table 2 Crown Estate Landings of Marine Dredged Sand and Gravel at Hampshire Ports from 1989/90 (tonnes) Table 3 Hampshire Imports of Land Won Aggregate by Sea or Rail (tonnes) Table 4 Probable Changes to Hampshire Site Operators since 1990 Table 5 Hampshire Wharves and Rail Depots ‘Lost’ or ‘Gained’ since 1990 Table 6 Recent Average Annual Aggregate Imports into South Hampshire Wharves (2004- 2009) and Rail Depots (2003-2007) (k.tonnes) Table 7 Potential Maximum Aggregate Imports Capacity at Existing South Hampshire Wharf and Rail Depots Table 8 Adjusted Potential Maximum Aggregate Imports Capacity at Existing South Hampshire Wharf and Rail Depots Table 9 Hampshire Primary Aggregate Sales by Type 1998-2009 (excluding road imports) Table 10 National Statistics for Hard/Crushed Rock Compared to Sand and Gravel (k.tonnes) in England Table 11 Draft Revised Regional Guidelines for Primary Aggregates in the South East 2005- 2020 (m.tonnes) Table 12 Comparison of Population and Total Aggregate Demand Forecasts by Hampshire Area (2006-2030) Table 13 Hampshire Aggregate Import Forecast Scenarios (2011-2030) Table 14 Classification of Hampshire Wharf and Rail Depot Facilities FIGURES AND PLANS Figure 1 Site Location Diagram for Wharves and Rail Depots and other sites identified in the Assessment Plan W1 Southampton (Western Docks) Plan W2 Southampton Wharves (River Itchen) Need Assessment for Wharves and Rail Depots (Update February 2011) Plan W3 Fareham Wharf Plan W4 Tipner Wharf Plan W5 Kendalls Wharf Plan W6 Bedhampton Wharf Plan W7 Marchwood Wharves Plan PW1 Possible New Minerals and Waste Handling Wharf Facilities at Marchwood Military Port and Dibden Bay Plan PW2 Port of Southampton /Southampton Water Plan PW3 Port of Portsmouth / Portsmouth Water Plan R1 Fareham Depot Plan R2 Botley Depot Plan R3 Eastleigh East and West Depots Plan PR1 Possible New Aggregates Rail Depot at Basingstoke Plan PR2 Possible New Aggregates/Recycling Rail Depot Facilities at Micheldever APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 South East Plan (May 2009) - selected new Transport, Waste and Mineral Policies APPENDIX 2 Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan (Adopted December 1998) - Wharves and Rail Depot Policies APPENDIX 3 London Plan Implementation Report Policies for Safeguarding Wharves on the River Thames APPENDIX 4 Recommended potential areas of content for the development of replacement Hampshire Wharves and Rail Depot Policies (policies S13 (Wharves and Depots), S14 (Safeguarding) and DC18 (Wharves and Depots) to replace the quashed Core Strategy policies REFERENCES Land & Mineral Management Ltd. 2 Need Assessment for Wharves and Rail Depots (Update February 2011) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This needs assessment has been conducted to support part of the necessary background work required by Hampshire (Hampshire County Council, Southampton City Council, Portsmouth City Council, New Forest National Park Authority and the South Downs National Park), to support the delivery of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Development Framework. It is an update of an assessment completed by Land & Mineral Management in 2009. The assessment will particularly support the development of the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan which will update and replace the adopted Hampshire Minerals and Waste Core Strategy. The main objective of the assessment was to establish the need within the plan period for wharves and rail depots based on the current and future potential of existing and new facilities for the importation and exportation of minerals and waste, including their transportation by non-road means within Hampshire. This included an assessment of:- Capacity of existing wharves and rail depots – including associated activities and facilities; Likely future demand for wharves and rail depots; Possible constraints to continued use or expansion at these sites; Potential need to retain existing unused preferred sites and identification of potential new and/or replacement sites. The research also included the undertaking of operator or site owner questionnaires, site visits, a review of references national policy guidelines and many other publications or documents with direct relevance to this assessment. The research has been structured in sections dealing with: Wharf and Rail Depot Operations Review – which includes understanding existing site capacities and any recent trends in meeting demand; Establishing Future Needs and Meeting the Needs for Wharves and Rail Depots – by using recognised forecasting sources, recent research and an alternative ‘bottom up’ approach to forecasting and then comparing relevant information obtained on the expansion potential of existing and new sites; Possible constraints and issues related to the continued use or expansion of wharves and rail depots in Hampshire – constraints and issues such as physical, planning and site specific constraints are considered; Meeting the need for wharves and rail depots in Hampshire – the development of various scenarios to meeting Hampshire’s needs for wharves and rail depots are made and considered; Proposals for Wharf and Rail Depot Site Safeguarding including Possible Safeguarding Measures – by identifying and prioritising sites by means such as size or impact or constraint, and then adopting recognised or other possible new safeguarding measures which can then be used for the most important sites.. The assessment was originally completed by Land & Mineral Management Limited. (LMML) in September 2009, when it assessed the need and requirements for wharves and rail depots up to 2026. The only formal response to the first assessment came in a letter from the agents for Associated British Ports (ABP) received in November 2010. In November 2010, Hampshire commissioned LMML to update the 2009 assessment. The update assesses the need for wharves and rail depots up to 2030, in line with the plan period Land & Mineral Management Ltd. 3 Need Assessment for Wharves and Rail Depots (Update February 2011) proposed for the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan. Relevant comments received from ABP regarding the 2009 assessment have been taken to account, where appropriate in this update, as well as relevant changes in national policy, guidance and other supporting documentation. Research for this assessment has identified the following main features and recommendations:- The dominant materials handled at Hampshire’s wharves and rail depots are construction aggregates in the form of marine sand and gravels or hard (crushed) rock - although other minerals are imported into Western Docks (Southampton), and wastes are handled at three other wharves; The combination of Hampshire’s existing wharves and rail depots infrastructure has changed relatively little in overall terms since 1989/90, when peak consumption of construction aggregates occurred in Great Britain; Additional aggregate capacity levels in excess of the 1989/1990 levels will probably not be required within the plan period up to 2030 – although it may be required by 2050; The current spare capacity of wharves and rail depots in Hampshire is most likely to be sufficient to meet the needs for the plan period to 2030 - unless existing wharf or rail site capacity is permanently lost from site closures, redevelopment or other reasons; If significant spare capacity remains at existing aggregate wharf and rail facilities then Hampshire only needs to identify a limited number of new additional aggregate wharf import facilities – and although these new sites are not likely to be needed until the end of the plan period, they will need safeguarding in the meantime; Recent industry research reports have indicated that it may be possible to see the development of sustainable alternative technology within the plan period to enable new aggregate supply modes (e.g. pipelines) or even a major new aggregate supply source in the South East (i.e. mined aggregates). Should full scale development of either of these potentially viable options commence within the plan period to 2030, then significant expansion of wharves or even new wharves may not be required; Recent industry research reports have indicated that it may be possible to see the development of sustainable alternative technology within the plan period to enable new aggregate supply modes (e.g. pipelines) or even a major new aggregate supply source in the South East (i.e. mined aggregates). Should full scale
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Solent Connectivity May 2020
    Solent Connectivity May 2020 Continuous Modular Strategic Planning Page | 1 Page | 2 Table of Contents 1.0 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 6 2.0 The Solent CMSP Study ................................................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Scope and Geography....................................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Fit with wider rail industry strategy ................................................................................................. 11 2.3 Governance and process .................................................................................................................. 12 3.0 Context and Strategic Questions ............................................................................................................ 15 3.1 Strategic Questions .......................................................................................................................... 15 3.2 Economic context ............................................................................................................................. 16 3.3 Travel patterns and changes over time ............................................................................................ 18 3.4 Dual-city region aspirations and city to city connectivity ................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Peat Database Results Hampshire
    Baker's Rithe, Hampshire Record ID 29 Authors Year Allen, M. and Gardiner, J. 2000 Location description Deposit location SU 6926 1041 Deposit description Deposit stratigraphy Preserved timbers (oak and yew) on peat ledge. One oak stump in situ. Peat layer 0.15-0.26 m deep [thick?]. Associated artefacts Early work Sample method Depth of deposit 14C ages available -1 m OD Yes Notes 14C details ID 12 Laboratory code R-24993/2 Sample location Depth of sample Dated sample description [-1 m OD] Oak stump Age (uncal) Age (cal) Delta 13C 3735 ± 60 BP 2310-1950 cal. BC Notes Stump BB Bibliographic reference Allen, M. and Gardiner, J. 2000 'Our changing coast; a survey of the intertidal archaeology of Langstone Harbour, Hampshire', Hampshire CBA Research Report 12.4 Coastal peat resource database (Hazell, 2008) Page 1 of 86 Bury Farm (Bury Marshes), Hampshire Record ID 641 Authors Year Long, A., Scaife, R. and Edwards, R. 2000 Location description Deposit location SU 3820 1140 Deposit description Deposit stratigraphy Associated artefacts Early work Sample method Depth of deposit 14C ages available Yes Notes 14C details ID 491 Laboratory code Beta-93195 Sample location Depth of sample Dated sample description SU 3820 1140 -0.16 to -0.11 m OD Transgressive contact. Age (uncal) Age (cal) Delta 13C 3080 ± 60 BP 3394-3083 cal. BP Notes Dark brown humified peat with some turfa. Bibliographic reference Long, A., Scaife, R. and Edwards, R. 2000 'Stratigraphic architecture, relative sea-level, and models of estuary development in southern England: new data from Southampton Water' in ' and estuarine environments: sedimentology, geomorphology and geoarchaeology', (ed.s) Pye, K.
    [Show full text]
  • Gazetteer.Doc Revised from 10/03/02
    Save No. 91 Printed 10/03/02 10:33 AM Gazetteer.doc Revised From 10/03/02 Gazetteer compiled by E J Wiseman Abbots Ann SU 3243 Bighton Lane Watercress Beds SU 5933 Abbotstone Down SU 5836 Bishop's Dyke SU 3405 Acres Down SU 2709 Bishopstoke SU 4619 Alice Holt Forest SU 8042 Bishops Sutton Watercress Beds SU 6031 Allbrook SU 4521 Bisterne SU 1400 Allington Lane Gravel Pit SU 4717 Bitterne (Southampton) SU 4413 Alresford Watercress Beds SU 5833 Bitterne Park (Southampton) SU 4414 Alresford Pond SU 5933 Black Bush SU 2515 Amberwood Inclosure SU 2013 Blackbushe Airfield SU 8059 Amery Farm Estate (Alton) SU 7240 Black Dam (Basingstoke) SU 6552 Ampfield SU 4023 Black Gutter Bottom SU 2016 Andover Airfield SU 3245 Blackmoor SU 7733 Anton valley SU 3740 Blackmoor Golf Course SU 7734 Arlebury Lake SU 5732 Black Point (Hayling Island) SZ 7599 Ashlett Creek SU 4603 Blashford Lakes SU 1507 Ashlett Mill Pond SU 4603 Blendworth SU 7113 Ashley Farm (Stockbridge) SU 3730 Bordon SU 8035 Ashley Manor (Stockbridge) SU 3830 Bossington SU 3331 Ashley Walk SU 2014 Botley Wood SU 5410 Ashley Warren SU 4956 Bourley Reservoir SU 8250 Ashmansworth SU 4157 Boveridge SU 0714 Ashurst SU 3310 Braishfield SU 3725 Ash Vale Gravel Pit SU 8853 Brambridge SU 4622 Avington SU 5332 Bramley Camp SU 6559 Avon Castle SU 1303 Bramshaw Wood SU 2516 Avon Causeway SZ 1497 Bramshill (Warren Heath) SU 7759 Avon Tyrrell SZ 1499 Bramshill Common SU 7562 Backley Plain SU 2106 Bramshill Police College Lake SU 7560 Baddesley Common SU 3921 Bramshill Rubbish Tip SU 7561 Badnam Creek (River
    [Show full text]
  • (Public) 17/09/2013, 17.00
    Public Document Pack CABINET DOCUMENTS FOR THE MEMBERS ROOM Tuesday, 17th September, 2013 at 5.00 pm MEMBERS ROOM DOCUMENTS ATTACHED TO THE LISTED REPORTS Contacts Cabinet Administrator Judy Cordell Tel: 023 8083 2766 Email: [email protected] MEMBERS ROOM DOCUMENTS 14 HAMPSHIRE MINERALS AND WASTE PLAN: ADOPTION Inspectors’ report into the Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (2013). Saved policies of the Minerals and Waste Local Plan (1998). Minerals and Waste Core Strategy (2007). Minerals and Waste Plan for adoption (2013). Inspector’s ‘Main Modifications’. Inspector’s ‘Additional Modifications’. Hampshire County Council’s Cabinet report. List of Southampton sites in background document potentially suitable for waste management facilities. Summary of consultation responses (2013). Monday, 9 September HEAD OF LEGAL , HR AND DEMOCRATIC SERVICES 2013 Agenda Item 14 Report to Hampshire County Council, Portsmouth City Council, Southampton City Council, New Forest National Park Authority and South Downs National Park Authority by Andrew S Freeman, BSc(Hons) DipTP DipEM FRTPI FCIHT MIEnvSc an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government rd Date : 23 May 2013 PLANNING AND COMPULSORY PURCHASE ACT 2004 (AS AMENDED) SECTION 20 REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION INTO THE HAMPSHIRE MINERALS AND WASTE PLAN LOCAL PLAN Document submitted for examination on 29 February 2012 Examination hearings held between 6 to 8 June 2012, 11 to 15 June 2012 and 13 to 14 March 2013 File Ref: PINS/Q1770/429/7 ABBREVIATIONS USED
    [Show full text]
  • 59 EDITORIAL. VOL. XVIII, Pt. 2, of the Proceedings Will Be Published In
    PAPERS AND PROCEEDINGS " 59 EDITORIAL. OL. XVIII, Pt. 2, of the Proceedings will be published in July, 1953. It is hoped that this volume, which will include Vreviews of books received since 1950, notes of Field Meetings, and a list of those periodicals on the H.F.C. exchange list, will bring the Proceedings up to date, e.g., up to the end of 1952. Material intended for publication should be sent to the Hon. Editor, 10 The Close, Winchester. CORRESPONDENCE. THE STEAM PLOUGH IN HAMPSHIRE. Mr. Frank Warren writes concerning Mr. FusselFs article (Vol. XVII, p. 286) : " Richard Stratton of Broad Hinton, and Salthrop, Wiltshire (who lies buried in Winchester Cemetery), bought in 1859 the first Fowler steam plough for use on his farms. His son, James Stratton, came to farm Chilcombe, Winchester, in 1866 and introduced steam ploughing to Hampshire." CORRECTION. In the article on Hampshire Drawings in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, published in the Hampshire' Field Club Proceedings, Vol. XVII, page 139, the reference to the manuscript album should be " Western MSS. 17,507." PAPERS AND PROCEEDINGS 71 SUBJECT SECRETARIES' REPORTS. BIOLOGICAL SECTION. Weather 1951. " Deplorable" seems to be the only suitable adjective to describe the meteorological setting of the year 1951. Only once in the whole year, on July 2nd, did the temperature reach 80°, and on 18th, 20th and 28th of that month 79°. The highest shade temperatures in any other months were 75'5° on April 25th, 75° on September 6th, 74° on two days in June, the 5th and 21st, and on August 1st.
    [Show full text]
  • Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Draft - for Cabinet) July 2013
    H A M P S H I R E PORTSMOUTH, SOUTHAMPTON, NEW FOREST & SOUTH DOWNS MINERALS AND WASTE PLAN Draft for consideration by the partner authorities at democratic meetings (July 2013) All Plans reproduced within this document meet copyright of the data suppliers Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationary Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution of civil proceedings. HCC 100019180 2012. © Environment Agency Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. Reproduced from the British Geological Survey Map data at the original scale of 1:100,000. Licence 2008/202 British Geological Survey. © NERC. All rights reserved. Hampshire Minerals and Waste Plan (Draft - for Cabinet) July 2013 Foreword 4 1 Introduction 6 2 Vision and Spatial Strategy 9 Hampshire in 2011 10 Issues for the Plan 14 Other Plans and Programmes 15 Vision - Where we need to be 16 Spatial Strategy 17 Key Diagram 21 3 Sustainable minerals and waste development 23 4 Protecting Hampshire's Environment 26 Climate change 28 Habitats and species 29 Landscape and countryside 32 South West Hampshire Green Belt 35 Heritage 37 Soils 38 Restoration of quarries and waste developments 40 5 Maintaining Hampshire's Communities 45 Protecting public health, safety and amenity 46 Flooding - risk and prevention 48 Managing traffic impacts 49 Design, construction and operation of minerals and waste development 51 CommunityDRAFT benefits 53 6 Supporting Hampshire's Economy 55 Safeguarding mineral resources 57 Safeguarding
    [Show full text]
  • North Solent Shoreline Management Plan Coastal Sub-Cells 5A, 5B and 5C
    North Solent Shoreline Management Plan Coastal sub-cells 5A, 5B and 5C Selsey Bill to Hurst Spit, including Chichester, Langstone and Portsmouth Harbours & Southampton Water North Solent Shoreline Management Plan New Forest District Council Coastal Group Town Hall Avenue Road Lymington Hampshire SO41 9ZG Tel 023 8028 5818 www.northsolentsmp.co.uk Document Title: North Solent Shoreline Management Plan Reference: NSSMP CPW1839 Status: Final Date: 16 December 2010 Approved By: A. Colenutt (Project Manager) New Forest District Council have prepared this plan and the supporting appendices on behalf of and in conjunction with the members of the North Solent SMP Client Steering Group. This document should be referenced as: New Forest District Council (2010), North Solent Shoreline Management Plan North Solent Shoreline Management Plan North Solent SMP Volume 1 including Policy Statements & Action Plan Appendix A SMP Development Volume 2 Appendix B Stakeholder Involvement Appendix C Baseline Process Understanding Volume 3 Appendix D Thematic Review Volume 4 Appendix E Issues and Objectives Evaluation Appendix F Initial Policy Appraisal and Scenario Development Appendix G Scenario Testing Appendix H Economic Appraisal and Sensitivity Testing Volume 5 Appendix I Metadatabase and Bibliography Database Appendix J Appropriate Assessment Appendix K Strategic Environmental Assessment Addendum to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Appendix L Water Framework Directive North Solent Shoreline Management Plan Contents Page No 1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Download the South-East IAP Report Here
    Important Areas for Ponds (IAPs) in the Environment Agency Southern Region Helen Keeble, Penny Williams, Jeremy Biggs and Mike Athanson Report prepared by: Report produced for: Pond Conservation Environment Agency c/o Oxford Brookes University Southern Regional Office Gipsy Lane, Headington Guildbourne House Oxford, OX3 0BP Chatsworth Road, Worthing Sussex, BN11 1LD Acknowledgements We would like to thank all those who took time to send pond data and pictures or other information for this assessment. In particular: Adam Fulton, Alex Lockton, Alice Hiley, Alison Cross, Alistair Kirk, Amanda Bassett, Andrew Lawson, Anne Marston, Becky Collybeer, Beth Newman, Bradley Jamieson, Catherine Fuller, Chris Catling, Daniel Piec, David Holyoak, David Rumble, Debbie Miller, Debbie Tann, Dominic Price, Dorothy Wright, Ed Jarzembowski, Garf Williams, Garth Foster, Georgina Terry, Guy Hagg, Hannah Cook, Henri Brocklebank, Ian Boyd, Jackie Kelly, Jane Frostick, Jay Doyle, Jo Thornton, Joe Stevens, John Durnell, Jonty Denton, Katharine Parkes, Kevin Walker, Kirsten Wright, Laurie Jackson, Lee Brady, Lizzy Peat, Martin Rand, Mary Campling, Matt Shardlow, Mike Phillips, Naomi Ewald, Natalie Rogers, Nic Ferriday, Nick Stewart, Nicky Court, Nicola Barnfather, Oli Grafton, Pauline Morrow, Penny Green, Pete Thompson, Phil Buckley, Philip Sansum, Rachael Hunter, Richard Grogan, Richard Moyse, Richard Osmond, Rufus Sage, Russell Wright, Sarah Jane Chimbwandira, Sheila Brooke, Simon Weymouth, Steph Ames, Terry Langford, Tom Butterworth, Tom Reid, Vicky Kindemba. Cover photograph: Low Weald Pond, Lee Brady Report production: February 2009 Consultation: March 2009 SUMMARY Ponds are an important freshwater habitat and play a key role in maintaining biodiversity at the landscape level. However, they are vulnerable to environmental degradation and there is evidence that, at a national level, pond quality is declining.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Portsmouth Site Allocations Document
    Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Portsmouth Site Allocations Document Screening Statement Client: Portsmouth City Council UE-0060 Portsmouth CC Site Allocations Report No.: HRA Screening_6_20130219 Version: 6 Status: Draft Final Date: February 2013 Author: SPS/NEJP Checked: SPS Approved: NEJP HRA for the Portsmouth Site Allocations Development Plan Document: Screening Statement February 2013 UE-0060 Portsmouth CC Site Allocations HRA Screening_6_20130219 Contents Executive Summary i E1 Introduction i E2 Scope of the Assessment i E3 Findings ii E4 Conclusions and Consultation Arrangements iii 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Purpose and Structure of this Document 1 1.3 Habitats Regulations Assessment 2 1.4 Portsmouth Local Development Framework 3 2 Methodology 7 2.1 Guidance and Best Practice 7 2.2 Methodology 7 2.3 Consideration of Effects 8 3 European Sites 11 3.1 Scope of the Assessment 11 3.2 Site Descriptions 11 3.3 Qualifying Features 11 3.4 SAC and SPA Conservation Objectives 16 3.5 Conservation Objectives for Ramsar Sites 17 3.6 Key Environmental Conditions Supporting Site Integrity 17 4 Likely Significant Effects 19 4.1 Introduction 19 4.2 Results 19 4.3 In Combination Test 21 5 Commentary 23 5.1 Introduction 23 HRA for the Portsmouth Site Allocations Development Plan Document: Screening Statement February 2013 UE-0060 Portsmouth CC Site Allocations HRA Screening_6_20130219 5.2 Strategically Operating Impacts 23 5.3 Dark-bellied Brent Goose and Waders 24 5.4 Sites Proposed for Allocation 25 6 Screening Statement and
    [Show full text]
  • Print 02/02 February
    The non-breeding status of the Little Egret in Britain A. J. Musgrove Mike Langman ABSTRACT The Little Egret Egretta garzetta, formerly a rare vagrant in Britain, has undergone a remarkable range expansion following a large influx in 1989, and at the end of 1990 it was removed from the list of species considered by the British Birds Rarities Committee. Single-site counts in excess of 100 were made in autumn 1995, with the first site count of more than 200 in autumn 1998.The Little Egret was confirmed as a new British breeding bird in 1996, and by 1999 at least 30 breeding pairs were recorded at a total of nine sites. This paper documents the change in the species’ non-breeding status in Britain. Using data from the Wetland Bird Survey, with supplementary counts from roost surveys and county bird reports, it is estimated that more than 1,650 Little Egrets were present in September 1999, over 40% of these between Swanage Bay, Dorset, and Pagham Harbour,West Sussex. A further increase in the British population is expected.The increase in Britain has been mirrored in adjacent areas of northwest Europe. 62 © British Birds 95 • February 2002 • 62-80 Non-breeding status of Little Egret ormerly a rare vagrant in Britain, the Palearctic, very few were reported in the nine- Little Egret Egretta garzetta has undergone teenth century and in the first half of the twen- Fa remarkable range expansion in recent tieth century. In fact, certain well-watched years. Following a large influx into Britain in counties did not record the species until com- 1989, and continued high numbers during paratively recently, with first county records for 1990, the British Birds Rarities Committee took Sussex in 1952 (James 1996), Norfolk in 1952 the decision to remove the Little Egret from the (Taylor et al.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of the Ornithological Interest of Sssis in England
    Natural England Research Report NERR015 A review of the ornithological interest of SSSIs in England www.naturalengland.org.uk Natural England Research Report NERR015 A review of the ornithological interest of SSSIs in England Allan Drewitt, Tristan Evans and Phil Grice Natural England Published on 31 July 2008 The views in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Natural England. You may reproduce as many individual copies of this report as you like, provided such copies stipulate that copyright remains with Natural England, 1 East Parade, Sheffield, S1 2ET ISSN 1754-1956 © Copyright Natural England 2008 Project details This report results from research commissioned by Natural England. A summary of the findings covered by this report, as well as Natural England's views on this research, can be found within Natural England Research Information Note RIN015 – A review of bird SSSIs in England. Project manager Allan Drewitt - Ornithological Specialist Natural England Northminster House Peterborough PE1 1UA [email protected] Contractor Natural England 1 East Parade Sheffield S1 2ET Tel: 0114 241 8920 Fax: 0114 241 8921 Acknowledgments This report could not have been produced without the data collected by the many thousands of dedicated volunteer ornithologists who contribute information annually to schemes such as the Wetland Bird Survey and to their county bird recorders. We are extremely grateful to these volunteers and to the organisations responsible for collating and reporting bird population data, including the British Trust for Ornithology, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, the Joint Nature Conservancy Council seabird team, the Rare Breeding Birds Panel and the Game and Wildlife Conservancy Trust.
    [Show full text]
  • 9C: New Forest Waterside
    9C: NEW FOREST WATERSIDE Dibden Bay and West Cliff, with backdrop of Southampton water and skyline of the container port and city. Small fields with thick hedges and Remnant mature trees with origins View north from Hythe Pier to Itchen wooded boundaries – West of Hythe from wooded common of Langdown, bridge – extensive shoreline later emparkment and recent modern development – © Ben Stevenson. housing development Waterside cranes and high voltageFawley refinery across Southampton Large scale mid to late 20th C power lines loom over woodedWater – © Trevor Carpenter. development - Totton overlooking horizons – nr. Marchwood Southampton Water. Hampshire County 1 Status: FINAL May 2012 Integrated Character Assessment New Forest Waterside Hampshire County 2 Status: FINAL May 2012 Integrated Character Assessment New Forest Waterside 1.0 Location and Boundaries 1.1 The eastern boundary follows the mean low water mark (spring tides). The area includes Totton, the highly developed and wooded coastal plain, and rising land and terrace at about 30 -40m AOD. However, it excludes the higher, more undulating landscape further inland where Southampton Water is no longer perceived as a coastal estuary. To the south the character area is defined by the transition to a coastal landscape more visually connected with the Solent than the estuary. 1.2 Component County Landscape Types Coastline and Shore, Significant sized settlement , Coastal Plain Enclosed 1.3 Composition of Borough/District LCAs: New Forest DC: Waterside Parishes (predominantly) Fawley Refinery Complex This character area closely follows the NFDC assessment Waterside Parishes boundary. 1.4 Associations with NCA and Natural Areas: NCA 131: New Forest NA 77: New Forest 1.5 Townscape assessment areas: Totton, Hythe 2.0 Key Characteristics • Marine alluvium soils over gravel coastal plain, rising inland to more sandy soils on river terrace, includes large reclaim areas.
    [Show full text]