Halton HRA Bird Surveys on behalf of Halton Council Non-Breeding Bird Surveys – Interim Report 1 September – mid-November 2018

Document Control Project Name: Halton HRA Bird Surveys Project Number: REF-Halto-536-1098 Report Title Non-Breeding Bird Surveys – Interim Report

Issue Date Notes Prepared Reviewed V1 27/11/2018 Draft of Interim Report C Bonnington H Fearn for Client Approval BSc MSc DPhil MSc CIEEM MCIEEM

This report has been prepared in accordance with the terms and conditions of appointment for the Non-Breeding Bird Surveys [on request]. Avian Ecology Ltd. (6839201) cannot accept any responsibility for any use of or reliance on the contents of this report by any third party.

CONTENTS

1 SUMMARY ...... 1

2 INTRODUCTION ...... 2

2.1 Project Background ...... 2

2.2 Study Area Overview ...... 2

3 METHODOLOGY ...... 4

3.1 Habitat Suitability Appraisal ...... 4

3.2 Non-Breeding Bird Surveys ...... 4

3.3 Limitations ...... 5

4 RESULTS ...... 6

4.1 Habitat Suitability Appraisal ...... 6

4.2 Non-Breeding Bird Surveys ...... 7

5 DISCUSSION ...... 10

1 SUMMARY

1.1.1 This interim report summarises the results of the first period (autumn passage) of bird surveys carried out for , to provide an ornithological evidence base to allow the council to determine whether any local development plan will affect the integrity of European designated sites.

1.1.2 The council has identified some sites for allocations for potential future development. Of those sites identified, three are located in, and around, Hale village (termed the ‘Northern allocations’), and two, south-west of (termed the ‘Southern allocations’), to the north of the .

1.1.3 The Mersey Estuary Special Protection Area (SPA)/ Ramsar is designated for a number of qualifying bird species, including some species which are alone qualifying species (e.g. golden plover and dunlin), and others which are part of a qualifying waterbird assemblage (e.g. curlew and lapwing). Habitats within 600m of the allocations were assessed for their suitability for supporting these qualifying bird features (termed ‘Target species’), and thus whether the fields were functionally linked to the SPA/ Ramsar.

1.1.4 The study area, which consisted of optimal habitats within 600m of the allocations, was subjected to Wetland Bird Counts (including one nocturnal count) and Targeted Vantage Point (VP) Surveys, carried out between September and mid-November 2018.

1.1.5 The preliminary results have found that in terms of the Northern allocations, field 24 (grazing marsh) supports >1% of the SPA qualifying population of golden plover and redshank. Furthermore, field 34 (arable, tilled land) also supports >1% of the SPA golden plover population. In terms of the Southern allocations, field 39 (grazing marsh) supports >1% of the SPA teal population.

1.1.6 Field 24 is buffered from the Northern allocations by woodland associated with Pickerings Pasture Local Nature Reserve and a water treatment plant, and field 39 is buffered from the Southern allocations by Hale village and the road network. There is also substantial spatial segregation between these fields and the allocations. Field 34 is however, adjacent to the Northern allocations.

1.1.7 It should also be noted that no evidence of usage by SPA associated bird species on any of the proposed allocation sites themselves was found. As such, any potentially adverse impacts on the Mersey SPA/Ramsar would be limited to disturbance of birds using land near to the allocation sites.

1.1.8 Subsequently, based on the findings to date, there is no clear evidence that inclusion of any of the currently proposed development sites within the Halton Delivery and Allocations Local Plan would lead to adverse effects on European site integrity.

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 1

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 Project Background

2.1.1 Any plans or projects which may impact upon a European designated site (SPA/SAC) or Ramsar site are subject to Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) in accordance the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (‘the Habitats Regulations’) and Articles 6(3) and 6(4) of the European Habitats Directive.

2.1.2 The HRA process requires competent authorities (in this case Halton Council; ‘HC’) to have adequate information so as to determine that any local development plan (or subsequent planning application submitted to them) will not affect the integrity of any European designated site or Ramsar site by compromising the conservation objectives of that site1. This includes possible impacts on nearby land outside the designated site boundary which is used by qualifying interest species in significant numbers. Such areas are referred to as ‘functionally linked’ land, and typically include farmland close to estuaries, such as that within Halton district around the River Mersey. Any plan or project which leads to adverse impact on the designated site integrity cannot lawfully proceed. It is therefore incumbent on HC to ensure the Halton Local Plan is in full accordance with the requirements of the Habitats Regulations whereby the integrity of the Mersey Estuary SPA/Ramsar will be fully maintained.

2.1.3 Avian Ecology was commissioned to provide an evidence base to assist in the formulation of future planning policy and site allocations within Halton. As such, the study will form part of the evidence base for the Halton Delivery and Allocations Local Plan.

2.1.4 This first interim report details the results of the autumn passage bird surveys.

2.2 Study Area Overview

2.2.1 In consultation with Natural (NE), it is understood that HC has identified study areas within the Borough of Halton which may be allocated for future housing development and could, potentially, be considered as land which is functionally linked to the Mersey SPA. These are allocation sites H1, H2 and H3 located in Hale village, and W13 and W24 which are located to the south-west of Halebank. For the purpose of this interim report, these five allocation sites, and the fields within 600m of each site is considered as the study area. Fields which are only partly within the 600m buffer zone, are treated as within the study area. Figure 1 shows the location of the allocation sites with 600m buffer zone around each site.

2.2.2 For ease of analysis, and due to their close proximity, the following terms of reference are used:

 Southern Allocations, defined as allocation sites H1-H3 (and the buffer zones around these).

 Northern Allocations, defined as W13 and W24 (and buffer zones around these).

2.2.3 These two areas together constitute the study area.

2.2.4 The study area consists of fields which may support wetland birds. Part of the study area (within the buffer zone of the Northern allocations) includes estuary habitats within the Mersey SPA/Ramsar. Areas within the SPA/Ramsar are excluded as the objective of the study is to determine functional linkage only. Based on aerial maps, and subsequent ‘ground-truthing’ habitat appraisals, three other

1 Conservation Objectives are published by Natural England and provide a framework which should inform any ‘Habitats Regulations Assessments’. The Mersey Estuary SPA Conservation Objectives are available at: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/5790848037945344 Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 2

allocation sites; W47 (Halebank) and R12 and R58 (), are considered unsuitable for wetland bird species, as these are either developed or provide sub-optimal habitat. This is further supported with reference to Review and analysis of changes in water-bird use of the Mersey Estuary SPA, Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA2, which indicates that no notable low and high tide waterbird assemblages are present on and surrounding these three allocation sites. These allocation sites are therefore not considered further in this interim report.

2 http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/4713137133584384 (accessed 28/11/2018) Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 3

3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Habitat Suitability Appraisal

3.1.1 All fields within 600m of the allocation sites were subject to a refined Phase 1 habitat (walk-over) survey following the UK industry standard Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) Phase 1 Habitat Methodology (Joint Nature Conservation Commitee, 20103). For each field, the habitats were marked using standard Phase I habitat codes, with further information on the suitability, or otherwise, for wetland bird species.

3.2 Non-Breeding Bird Surveys

3.2.1 Two types of non-breeding bird surveys were carried out to determine the usage of the study area by wetland bird species. These were:

(1) Wetland Bird Counts (one which was a nocturnal survey); and,

(2) Targeted Vantage Point (VP) Surveys.

3.2.2 The methodology was discussed and agreed in writing in advance with NE and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB). Details of the methodologies used, as agreed with NE and RSPB, are given in Appendix 1.

3.2.3 Bird usage of the study area was principally determined by the Wetland Bird Counts, and supplementary data was provided by the VP Surveys.

3.2.4 The results of the nocturnal Wetland Bird Count, carried out on 6th November 2018, are regarded separately.

3.2.5 To date, eight Wetland Bird Counts, one nocturnal Wetland Bird Count and 42 hours of VP Surveys have been carried out, between end of September and mid-November 2018. This represents the full schedule of surveys agreed with HC, NE and RSPB.

3.2.6 All wetland bird species, including waders, waterfowl, herons, egrets, rails and Annex 1/ Schedule 1 raptors and owls were recorded during both survey types. Furthermore, records were also made of secondary species, which consisted of non-Annex 1/ Schedule 1 raptors and owls, gulls and notable flocks of Birds of Conservation Concern (BoCC Amber and Red List species (Eaton et al. 20154).

3.2.7 Given that the aim of this commission is to ascertain whether any of the allocation sites (and adjacent habitats, within 600m) are functionally linked to the Mersey Estuary SPA/Ramsar, only those species which are qualifying species of this designated site are considered as ‘Target Species’5. The SPA citation is given in Appendix 2. The most recent population estimates (5 year average) for the Mersey Estuary SPA are taken from the BTO WeBS website6, and these estimates are provided in Appendix 3.

3 JNCC (2010) Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey. A technique for environmental audit. , UK. 4 Eaton, M., Aebischer, N., Brown, A., Hearn, R., Lock, L., Musgrove, A., Noble, D., Stroud, D. and Gregory, R. (2015) Birds of Conservation Concern 4: the population status of birds in the UK, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. British Birds 108: 708-746.

5 The Mersey SPA citation criteria can be found on the Natural England website, and is available at: http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/5790848037945344

6 The population estimates can be found on the WeBS page of the BTO website, and is available at: https://app.bto.org/webs- reporting/ Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 4

3.2.8 Some Target Species are qualifying features of the Mersey SPA, alone, under Article 4.1 or 4.2 of the Directive, and others collectively make up a qualifying waterbird assemblage, under Article 4.2 of the SPA citation. For the analysis, for each of the Southern allocations and Northern allocations, the peak number of each Target species was determined. For those species which are, alone, qualifying species, the peak number was compared to the population estimate for the SPA. If the peak number using the study area was 1% or more of the SPA population estimate for that species, this would provide evidence that, for that species, the study area is functionally linked to the SPA. For those species which are part of the qualifying waterbird assemblage (so are not individually a qualifying species), one of three thresholds would need to be reached to appraise the study area as being functionally linked to the SPA for that species. These are:

(1) 1% of each and every listed species that make up the assemblage;

(2) 1%, or more, of the designated species nationally important population7; or

(3) Over 2,000 birds of that species.

3.2.9 Throughout this report only common names of bird species are used. Appendix 4 presents the scientific names of the bird species recorded.

3.3 Limitations

3.3.1 The results of the survey are only a snap-shot of the habitat use and activity of the Target Species within the study area. At this stage the data is relatively limited as it only considers the first stage of the survey period (autumn passage). The subsequent surveys which are scheduled will provide information into the habitat use and activity of Target species for the remaining non-breeding period (until May). As such, the results presented in this interim report are not conclusive evidence of the presence or absence of functional linkage.

3.3.2 It is appreciated that factors, including cropping regime/ land use and disturbance will influence habitat use within the study area by Target species. It is an assumption that the cropping regime/ land use during the survey period is typical. For the purposes of accounting for potential impacts of such factors the land use and any disturbance events were recorded during the surveys.

3.3.3 All surveys were carried out from PrOWs, which allowed full visual coverage of the study area.

7 National populations of species are taken from Musgrove, A., Aebischer, N., Eaton, M., Hearn, R., Newson, S., Noble, D., Parsons, M., Risely, K. and Stroud, D. (2013) Population estimates of birds in Great Britain and the . British Birds 106: 64-100.

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 5

4 RESULTS

4.1 Habitat Suitability Appraisal

4.1.1 The habitat type of the fields surveyed within the study area are summarised in Table 4.1. Built environment, woodland and scrubland are excluded from the study area as habitats are unsuitable for supporting wetland birds. Fields that are open and consist of arable land or rough pasture are considered the most suitable for supporting wetland birds.

Table 4.1. Habitat Suitability Appraisal within the study area Potentially suitable for Allocation Field reference Habitat type supporting wetland birds (Yes - Y/ No - N) Northern 24 Grazing marsh Y 25 Rough pasture Y

26 Tilled arable land Y

27 Rough pasture Y

28 Tilled arable land Y

29 Arable land Y

30 Arable land (winter wheat) Y

31 Arable land (winter wheat) Y

32 Arable land (winter wheat) Y

33 Tilled arable land Y

34 Tilled arable land Y

35 Arable land (winter wheat) Y

36 Arable land Y

37 Arable land Y

38 Arable land (winter wheat) Y

38a Marshy grassland Y

60 Construction site with standing water N 61 Parkland with scattered trees N 62 Rough pasture Y 62a Rough pasture Y 8 Stubble (arable land) Y 10 Grazing marsh Y Southern 11 Root crop/ stubble (arable ) Y

11a Root crop (arable land) Y

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 6

12 Arable land (winter wheat) Y

13 Root crop (arable land) Y

14 Root crop (arable land) Y

15 Arable land (winter wheat) Y

16 Arable land (winter wheat) Y

17 Carrot (arable land) Y

18 Rough pasture Y 19 Parkland N 20 Amenity grassland N 21 Arable land Y 22 Arable land Y

39 Grazing marsh Y

39a Rough pasture Y

40 Tilled arable land Y

41 Tilled arable land Y

42 Arable land Y

43 Arable land Y

51 Tilled arable land Y

52 Stubble (arable land) Y

53 Arable land Y

4.2 Non-Breeding Bird Surveys

4.2.1 A total of nine Target Species were recorded within the study area during the Wetland Bird Count. These consisted of five species which are themselves qualifying features of the Mersey Estuary SPA/Ramsar under Article 4.1 or 4.2 of the Directive, and four species from the qualifying waterbird assemblage, under Article 4.2.

4.2.2 Table 4.2. details the peak number of Target species within the Northern and Southern allocations, and whether each species is functionally linked to the SPA/Ramsar, based on the % of SPA population present.

Table 4.2. Qualifying species (under Article 4.1 and 4.2 of the Directive) results Northern allocations Southern allocations Species name Peak % of SPA Functionally Peak % of SPA Functionally number population linked to SPA/ number population linked to SPA/ present* Ramsar present* Ramsar Dunlin 58 0.1 No 0 0 No

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 7

Northern allocations Southern allocations Species name Peak % of SPA Functionally Peak % of SPA Functionally number population linked to SPA/ number population linked to SPA/ present* Ramsar present* Ramsar Golden plover 351 23 Yes 1 0.1 No Redshank 250 8.1 Yes 0 0 No Teal 11 0.3 No 146 3.4 Yes Black-tailed 0 0 No 1 <0.1 No godwit *The most recent bird populations of the Mersey Estuary SPA are taken from the BTO WeBS website.

4.2.3 Table 4.3. details the peak number of Target Species within the Northern and Southern allocations, for those species which make up the qualifying waterbird assemblage, and whether the peak number of each species reaches the threshold required to prove that the study area is functionally linked to the SPA/ Ramsar.

Table 4.3. Species of qualifying waterbird assemblage (under Article 4.2 of the Directive) results Northern allocations Southern allocations Species Thresholds† Thresholds† name Peak Functionally Peak Functional number Over % of linked to SPA/ number Over % of ly linked 2,000 nationally Ramsar 2,000 nationally to SPA/ birds population birds population Ramsar Curlew 6 No <0.1 No 148 No 0.1 No Lapwing 627 No 0.1 No 91 No <0.1 No Wigeon 2 No Negligible No 30 No <0.1 No Shelduck 13 No <0.1 No 0 No 0 No † To determine whether qualifying birds within the waterbird assemblage constitute a significant population.

4.2.4 During the VP Surveys, six Target Species were recorded as using the study area. These consisted of curlew, lapwing, shelduck, redshank, grey plover and ringed plover. For the majority of these species, the peak number using the study area was lower than those peak values stated in Tables 4.2 and 4.3. However, based on this supplementary data from the VP Surveys, for two species the peak number using the study area was higher (at least for one of the allocations) than those recorded during the Wetland Bird Counts, and the details of these species are given in Table 4.3.

Table 4.4. Species of qualifying waterbird assemblage (under Article 4.2 of the Directive) additional results Northern allocations Southern allocations Species Thresholds† Thresholds† name Peak Functionally Peak Functional number Over % of linked to SPA/ number Over % of ly linked 2,000 nationally Ramsar 2,000 nationally to SPA/ birds population birds population Ramsar Shelduck - - - - 3 No 0 No Ringed 9 No No No 0 No 0 No plover † To determine whether qualifying birds within the waterbird assemblage constitute a significant population.

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 8

4.2.5 During the nocturnal Wetland Bird Count, five Target species were recorded; curlew, lapwing, redshank, golden plover and teal. The peak number for all species was considerably less than the peak numbers in Tables 4.2 and 4.3. Tables 4.5 and 4.6 detail the results of the nocturnal Wetland Bird Count.

Table 4.5. Qualifying species (under Article 4.1 and 4.2 of the Directive) nocturnal survey results Northern allocations Southern allocations Species name Peak % of SPA Functionally Peak % of SPA Functionally number population linked to SPA/ number population linked to SPA/ present* Ramsar present* Ramsar Golden plover 2 0.1 No 0 0 No Redshank 7 0.2 No 0 0 No Teal 0 0 No 50 1.2 Yes *The most recent bird populations of the Mersey Estuary SPA are taken from the BTO WeBS website.

Table 4.6. Species of qualifying waterbird assemblage (under Article 4.2 of the Directive) nocturnal survey results Northern allocations Southern allocations Species Thresholds† Thresholds† name Peak Functionally Peak Functional number Over % of linked to SPA/ number Over % of ly linked 2,000 nationally Ramsar 2,000 nationally to SPA/ birds population birds population Ramsar Curlew 0 No 0 No 43 No <0.1 No Lapwing 30 No <0.1 No 5 No <0.1 No † To determine whether qualifying birds within the waterbird assemblage constitute a significant population.

4.2.6 Figure 1 shows the location of those fields which supported >1% of the SPA populations of Target species, within the study area. These consisted of fields 24 and 34 in the Northern allocations section, and field 39 in the Southern allocations section.

4.2.7 For the Northern allocations, the study area was found to be functionally linked to the SPA population for golden plover and redshank, with 23% and 8.1% of the SPA populations respectively using the study area. The peak numbers of both species were recorded within field 24, which is grazing marsh. Field 34, which is arable land (tilled during survey period) also supported >1% of the SPA golden plover population (21 birds; 1.4% of SPA population).

4.2.8 For the Southern allocations, the study area was found to be functionally linked to the SPA population for teal, with 3.4% of the SPA population using field 39 (grazing marsh). This was further confirmed from 1.2% of the SPA teal population using field 39 during the nocturnal Wetland Bird Count survey (50 birds).

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 9

5 DISCUSSION

5.1.1 This interim report summarises the results of the autumn passage bird surveys that have been completed. The results are preliminary and will be updated after subsequent surveys during the winter and spring passage periods. The findings should thus be treated as provisional and subject to change following further survey work and assessment.

5.1.2 Our results to date indicate that parts of the study area are functionally linked to the SPA, principally through the numbers of birds that the grazing marshes support. In the Northern allocations section, the study area supports >1% of the SPA population of golden plover and redshank, with the grazing marsh (field 24) the most important area. However the simple presence of SPA species in significant (>1%) numbers does not necessarily preclude inclusion of any allocation sites within the Halton Delivery and Allocations Local Plan.

5.1.3 Field 24 lies adjacent to the Mersey Estuary SPA, and given its close proximity to the SPA, and suitable habitat onsite (grazing marsh and standing water), it is unsurprising that Target species use the fields. Field 24 is buffered from the allocations W13 and W24 by the sewage treatment works and Pickering Pasture LNR, and their associated woodland. There is also substantial spatial segregation between the allocations (most notably W24) and field 24.

5.1.4 Field 34, which is located adjacent to allocation W24, also supports >1% of the golden plover SPA population, and is, like field 24, therefore functionally linked to the SPA population for golden plover.

5.1.5 In the Southern allocations section, the study area (grazing marsh, field 39) supports >1% of the SPA population of teal, and this was confirmed both during the daytime Wetland Bird Counts and the nocturnal Wetland Bird Count.

5.1.6 The Southern allocations (H1-H3) are located within the Hale village and field 39 is at the extreme northern end of the buffer zone. Field 39 is buffered from the Southern allocations by Hale village and the road network, and there is substantial spatial segregation between the allocations and field 39.

5.1.7 It should also be noted that no evidence of usage by SPA associated bird species on any of the proposed allocation sites themselves was found. As such, any potentially adverse impacts on the Mersey SPA/Ramsar would be limited to disturbance of birds using land near to the allocation sites, such as through construction activity or recreational disturbance.

5.1.8 Subsequently, based on the findings to date, there is no clear evidence that inclusion of any of the currently proposed development sites within the Halton Delivery and Allocations Local Plan would lead to adverse effects on European site integrity.

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 10

FIGURES

Figure 1. Allocation sites and 600m buffer around each site representing the study area.

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 11

Figure 2. VP Survey plan.

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 12

REFERENCES

Eaton, M., Aebischer, N., Brown, A., Hearn, R., Lock, L., Musgrove, A., Noble, D., Stroud, D. and Gregory, R. (2015) Birds of Conservation Concern 4: the population status of birds in the UK, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. British Birds 108, 708-746.

JNCC (2010) Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey. A technique for environmental audit. Peterborough, UK.

Musgrove, A., Aebischer, N., Eaton, M., Hearn, R., Newson, S., Noble, D., Parsons, M., Risely, K. and Stroud, D. (2013) Population estimates of birds in Great Britain and the United Kingdom. British Birds 106: 64-100.

D.A. Still, N.A. Calbrade & C.A. Holt. (2015). Natural England Commissioned Report NECR173: Review and analysis of changes in water-bird use of the Mersey Estuary SPA, Mersey Narrows & North Wirral Foreshore SPA and Ribble & Alt Estuaries SPA. British Trust for Ornithology.

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 13

APPENDIX 1. SURVEY METHODOLOGY

Wetland Bird Counts

Wetland bird counts were based on the ‘look-see’ methodology, designed to capture levels of bird usage on the ground.

The number of counts proposed is detailed in Table A1 below. One survey per month will be aligned with the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) Wetland Bird Survey (WeBS) counts.

Table A1. Wetland Bird Count Visits. 2018 2019 Visits per Autumn Passage Winter Spring Passage survey area Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May

No. visits 2 4 3 2 2 2 3 4 4 26

Each visit will comprise a count of wetland birds species recorded on the ground in each field over the high tide period (defined as within 2 hours either side of the high tide, in accordance with the BTO WeBS methodology).

Data will be recorded using adapted BTO WeBS recording forms. Each data form will include at least: data, time of day, observer name, weather conditions, and focal species counts in each compartment (individual field), bird behaviour and habitat.

At least one additional nocturnal survey using night vision equipment will be completed for each period (autumn passage, winter and spring passage).

Any wetland birds observed in flight only will be recorded separately, noting the species, number of birds and direction of flight (mapped).

Disturbance incidents, e.g. dog-walking or other recreational and farming activity, will be recorded.

Targeted Vantage Points (VPs) VPs will be based on the methodology presented in SNH guidance (2014, updated 2017), and will provide an overview of bird usage, bird numbers and distribution across the VP survey areas.

The SNH VP survey methodology is designed to understand bird flight activity (to assess wind farm collisions), rather than birds ‘on the ground’. Subsequently the SNH guidance will be adapted order to capture allocation survey site usage (on the ground) by focal bird species around the tidal cycle.

The objective of VP surveys will be to supplement the data gathered during Wetland Bird Counts. VPs will be targeted along the River Mersey foreshore in order to observe birds leaving the SPA/ Ramsar and heading towards inland fields within the study area.

A total of 3 VP locations are used (Figure 2). Each survey will comprise a 2-hour watch, completed within a three hour pre high-tide window (i.e. the period where birds may be displaced by the incoming tide). A total of 64 hours per VP survey effort will be completed. The number of visits, and time spent carrying out the VPs, is detailed in Table A2 below.

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 14

Table A2. VP Survey Visits.

2018 2019

Autumn Passage Winter Spring Passage Totals

Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May

No. visits 2 4 3 2 2 2 3 4 4 26

Hours (per VP) 4 8 6 4 8 8 6 8 8 64

Total Hours 12 24 18 12 12 12 18 24 24 156 (all 3 VPs combined)

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 15

APPENDIX 2. QUALIFYING SPECIES OF THE MERSEY SPA/ RAMSAR

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 16

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 17

APPENDIX 3. TARGET SPECIES SPA ESTIMATES

Species name 5 year average*

Dunlin 51,790 Golden plover 1,527 Redshank 3,083 Teal 4,255 Black-tailed godwit 3,083 Curlew 1,994 Lapwing 8,586 Ringed plover 1,175 Wigeon 1,603 Shelduck 9,100 *Based on estimates from the BTO website.

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 18

APPENDIX 4. TARGET SPECIES LIST

Species common name Species scientific name

Dunlin Calidris alpine Golden plover Pluvialis apricaria Redshank Tringa tetanus Teal Anas crecca Black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa Curlew Numenius arquata Lapwing Vanellus vanellus Ringed plover Charadrius hiaticula Wigeon Anas penelope Shelduck Tadorna tadorna

Halton HRA Bird Surveys Non-Breeding Bird Survey – Interim Report 1 19