NATURE CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2015-2020
FOR LAND OWNED BY
LINCOLNSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
IN
LINCOLNSHIRE COASTAL COUNTRY PARK
Jeremy Fraser March 2015
Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust Banovallum House Manor House Street HORNCASTLE Lincolnshire LN9 5HF Tel: 01507-526667 E-mail: [email protected]
CONTENTS
Page
1 Introduction ...... 1
2 Lincolnshire Coastal Country Park ...... 2
3 The Study Area ...... 2
4 Surrounding Land ...... 2
5 Sources of Information ...... 3
6 Statutory Sites of Nature Conservation Importance...... 4
7 Non-Statutory Sites of Nature Conservation Importance ...... 4
8 Agri-Environment Schemes and Management Plans ...... 5
9 Species Protection and Action Plans ...... 6
10 Local Wildlife Site Survey Techniques ...... 7
11 Overview of Habitats ...... 8
12 Site Descriptions ...... 9
13 Habitat Management ...... 13
14 Further Management Issues ...... 16
15 Threats ...... 17
16 Management Objectives ...... 19
17 Management Prescriptions ...... 19
18 Work Plan ...... 22
19 Measures of Success ...... 22
20 Costs ...... 23
21 Further Management Proposals ...... 24
22 References ...... 25
23 Acknowledgements ...... 26
APPENDICES
Page
Map 1 Lincolnshire Coastal Country Park Boundary ...... 29
Map 2 Lincolnshire County Council Ownership Boundary ...... 31
Map 3a Land Surveyed in 2014 (1) ...... 33
Map 3b Land Surveyed in 2014 (2) ...... 35
Map 3c Land Surveyed in 2014 (3) ...... 37
Map 3d Land Surveyed in 2014 (4) ...... 39
Map 4a Nature Conservation Areas (1) ...... 41
Map 4b Nature Conservation Areas (2) ...... 43
Map 4c Nature Conservation Areas (3) ...... 45
Map 5a Habitat Areas (1) ...... 47
Map 5b Habitat Areas (2) ...... 49
Map 5c Habitat Areas (3) ...... 51
Map 5d Habitat Areas (4) ...... 53
Map 6a Management Areas (1) ...... 55
Map 6b Management Areas (2) ...... 57
Map 6c Management Areas (3) ...... 59
Map 6d Management Areas (4) ...... 61
LINCOLNSHIRE COASTAL COUNTRY PARK
LINCOLNSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL LAND
NATURE CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN 2015 to 2020
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. The Lincolnshire Coastal Country Park (LCCP) is a 35 square kilometre area on the North Sea coast of Lincolnshire between Sandilands in the north and Chapel St Leonards in the south (see Map 1 & Section 2). Much of the seaward edge of the park is owned by Lincolnshire County Council (LCC), where important coastal habitats are visited by large numbers of tourists and local residents every year (see Map 2). This management plan refers primarily to the area shown on Map 2, but also considers neighbouring land to the west.
1.2. Major aims of this document are to describe the habitats present and to outline realistic management objectives over five years, with the aim of benefitting the flora and fauna and accommodating the need for continued substantial public access.
1.3. Relevant reports, data and background information considered during compilation of this management plan are outlined in Section 5. The author also carried out field surveys (primarily botanical) in 2014, with the dual purpose of informing the management plan and providing data to allow selection of Local Wildlife Sites (LWSs), where appropriate (see Sections 7, 10, et al).
1.4. Most of the sites shown on Map 2 are not currently managed, although there is some recently created wetland. Management is undertaken more widely on adjacent and nearby land, including Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust (LWT) nature reserves and Sandilands Golf Course.
1.5. Two neighbouring sites in the coastal strip are known as Chapel Six Marshes. To minimise confusion, the northern area, which is an LWT nature reserve, is hereafter referred to as Chapel Six Marshes (LWT), whereas the southern area is referred to as Chapel Six Marshes (LCC).
2. LINCOLNSHIRE COASTAL COUNTRY PARK
2.1. Following several years of planning and discussions, the LCCP came into being in the late 2000s, when a Strategic Business Plan for 2009-12 was produced (Tarttelin, 2009). Led by LCC, the other project partners are East Lindsey District Council, Environment Agency (EA), LWT, Lindsey Marsh Drainage Board, Natural England, National Farmers Union and National Trust.
2.2. The vision for LCCP refers to the creation of a dynamic and extensive area providing high quality facilities for people and better protection for wildlife. A wide range of inter-connected targets lie at the heart of the vision, which have been grouped into the following four Strategic Aims: A sustainable, varied and attractive coastal landscape, rich in wildlife and attractive to visitors and residents in every season;
1 A new green tourism destination with high quality accessible natural green space and opportunities to experience the area’s cultural and natural heritage; An associated visitor or heritage centre, observatories and interpretation points; and A vibrant, diverse and sustainable local community.
2.3. Funding up to the end of 2014 has come from a variety of sources, including LCC, LWT, EA, Heritage Lottery Fund, WREN, Rural Development Programme for England and Agri-Environment Schemes.
2.4. Some projects already completed within the park are: land purchase at Huttoft Marsh (funded by LWT, LCC and EA) and Anderby Marsh (funded by WREN, LWT and LCC); a new permissive path from Wolla Bank to Anderby Creek; an all-ability path and wetland creation at Chapel Six Marshes (LCC); several refurbished car parks; production of a series of walking leaflets; development of interpretation facilities at main coastal sites; and production of an annual events programme.
3. THE STUDY AREA
3.1. As Map 2 shows, the land under consideration in this plan (hereafter referred to usually as ‘the study area’) lies entirely east of the coast road, measuring 20m to 200m wide and 7.3km long. It is aligned approximately north-by-west to south-by- east, parallel to the North Sea coast, with three very short breaks and one major gap of 575m. Wolla Bank Reedbed nature reserve is owned by LCC, but did not form part of the study area at LCC’s request, because it is managed by LWT.
3.2. Public usage dominates the coast here, and there are five car parking areas accessed from the nearby coast road. One is in Anderby Creek, while further north a large number of vehicles and visitors can be accommodated on the seaward side of the dune ridge at Huttoft Car Terrace and on the landward side of the dune ridge at Marsh Yard. To the south of Anderby Creek, there is a small car park at Wolla Bank and a much larger area for cars at Chapel Six Marshes (LCC), both of which are immediately inland of the dune ridge. Toilet blocks are present at all these car parks, with the exception of Wolla Bank. From these and other access points, visitors wander along the whole length of the LCC holding. Dog walking is a very popular pursuit.
3.3. Two topographical features found almost throughout are a low fixed dune ridge and a strip of shallowly sloping upper beach further east. In some locations actively forming foredunes are present between beach and fixed dunes. The latter were subject to re-modelling and subsequent shrub planting in the 1980s in order to strengthen their sea defence capability.
3.4. Few further landscape features are present at the very narrow northern end of the site. Further south the site widens, encompassing shallow landward dune slopes that in places incorporate wetland, much of which has been recently created or restored with nature conservation in mind.
4. SURROUNDING LAND
4.1. Many of the sites mentioned below are shown on Maps 4a, 4b and 4c.
2 4.2. Land to the east of the coast road, but outside the study area, comprises, in north to south order: Sandilands Golf Course LWS; Huttoft Marsh nature reserve; Arable fields; Anderby Creek settlement, including a fishing lake; Anderby Marsh nature reserve; Wolla Bank Reedbed nature reserve, which is part of Sea Bank Clay Pits Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI); Wolla Bank South LWS; Chapel Six Marshes (LWT) nature reserve. This land, together with Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) has just become Chapel Six Marshes LWS; Private houses and grounds.
4.3. Other nearby land immediately west of the coast road is mostly arable fields, plus the settlement of Chapel St Leonards in the far south, but areas of nature conservation interest, again in north to south order, are: Sandilands Pit nature reserve (part of Sea Bank Clay Pits SSSI); Huttoft Bank Pit nature reserve (part of Sea Bank Clay Pits SSSI); Moggs Eye Sea Bank Ponds LWS; Wolla Bank Pit nature reserve (part of Sea Bank Clay Pits SSSI); Ridge-and-furrow grazing marsh field; Chapel Pit nature reserve (part of Sea Bank Clay Pits SSSI).
4.4. The majority of the sites listed in Sections 4.2 & 4.3 were surveyed in 2014, exceptions being: All arable fields; All settlements, private houses and grounds; Moggs Eye Sea Bank Ponds LWS, surveyed in 2004; Anderby Creek fishing lake; Ridge-and-furrow field west of Chapel Six Marshes (LCC & LWT). This was clearly worth investigation, but unfortunately the owner was unwilling to permit entry.
5. SOURCES OF INFORMATION
5.1. In 2010, ESL (Ecological Services) Ltd carried out some wildlife surveys east of the coast road in the Moggs Eye and Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) areas, with emphasis on protected species (ESL, 2010). Management recommendations were also put forward, some of which were incorporated into the major improvements that took place in 2012. Some elements of the ESL final report have been used in this plan.
5.2. Lincolnshire Environmental Records Centre was asked to provide species data for the study area, but unfortunately a general lack of precise location information severely reduced the value of those records. Another problem was how to interpret long lists of invertebrate data, many of which were not of recent origin.
5.3. Systematic ornithological surveys took place throughout the LCCP area over the period 2008-12, forming part of a wider investigation organised by the Lincolnshire Coastal Grazing Marshes Partnership (Tarttelin, 2013). Breeding and wintering birds were surveyed to provide baseline data regarding density, numbers and, to some extent, trends in the key bird species using the area. Furthermore, the work allowed a meaningful assessment of habitat conditions and site management on the
3 grazing marshes. One key finding was the importance of Higher Level Stewardship schemes and high-level water table management regimes for breeding waders and wildfowl. Although there is no grazing marsh owned by LCC between Sandilands and Chapel St Leonards, there is some immediately adjacent adding to the value of the coastal fringe from an environmental point of view.
5.4. A detailed study of damselflies and dragonflies on or near the LCC land has taken place since 2012 (Bottomer & Bottomer, 2012, 2013 & 2014). Visits have been made to all the sites every weekend between the beginning of May and the end of October, except during two weeks in June and one in September, when the recorders were unavailable. The six recording areas are Huttoft Pit (SSSI), Anderby Creek to Wolla Bank, Wolla Bank Reedbed (SSSI), Wolla Bank Pit (SSSI), Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) and Chapel Pit (SSSI). A summary of the findings at Anderby Creek to Wolla Bank and Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) are included in Sections 12.1.4 and 12.1.5, below.
5.5. LWT reserves staff and volunteers also provided useful information about reserves in and near the study area.
6. STATUTORY SITES OF NATURE CONSERVATION IMPORTANCE
6.1. National and international nature conservation designations protect the northern Lincolnshire coast (Humber Estuary and Saltfleetby-Theddlethorpe Dunes) and the southern Lincolnshire coast (The Wash and Gibraltar Point). However, the only biological SSSI near the study area is Sea Bank Clay Pits, which comprises five separate borrow pit areas totalling 16.8ha in size (see Maps 4a, 4b and 4c). These pits were excavated to provide clay to repair sea defences after the storm surge on 31 January 1953. Since then, they have become flooded and colonised by a rich wetland flora; now all are LWT nature reserves. These reserves are all beside the coast road and comprise Sandilands Pit, Huttoft Bank Pit, Wolla Bank Reedbed, Wolla Bank Pit and Chapel Pit.
6.2. Chapel Point to Wolla Bank is a geological SSSI (see Maps 4b and 4c) of importance for inter-tidal sediments that record sea level change in the early Holocene. The western edge of this site overlaps with upper beach sections of Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) and Chapel Point Dunes, North.
7. NON-STATUTORY SITES OF NATURE CONSERVATION IMPORTANCE
7.1. Before 2006, the non-statutory biological designation used by most local authorities in Lincolnshire was the Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI), one of many equivalent names (see glossary in Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership, 2013 and Annex A of Defra, 2006).
7.2. At that time, selection of land for SNCI designation was mostly based on subjective opinions, but it was clear that more objectivity was required. Consequently, selection guidelines were published by the Lincolnshire Biodiversity Action Plan Partnership (now Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership) in line with national guidance (Defra, 2006). The Defra document introduced the name Local Site for application nationwide, instead of SNCI and all equivalent existing names. Every Local Site is either an LWS, where the interest is biological, or a Local Geological Site (LGS), where the interest is geological (see Section 7.5).
4 7.3. Now in its 3rd edition, the selection guidelines (Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership, 2013) provides the basis for selection of all LWSs in Lincolnshire.
7.4. From 2005 onwards, surveys have been commissioned throughout Lincolnshire to reassess the value of SNCIs and, in some cases, to assess newly recognised sites of nature conservation value. Subsequent selection or rejection as LWS has resulted in a progressive reduction in number of SNCIs. However, in early 2014 most of the coastal LCC land in LCCP had not been fully assessed and was either SNCI or had been identified as potentially of LWS quality. All of these areas have now been assessed following the 2014 surveys, leaving only LWSs in the study area.
7.5. Two SNCIs remain adjacent to the study area: Main Drain and two separate parts of Huttoft Bank Dunes (see Maps 4a and 4b). Main Drain SNCI was last surveyed in 2004 and therefore needs to be reassessed as soon as possible; it is a large canalised watercourse flowing eastwards along the northern boundary of Anderby Marsh nature reserve. Some of Huttoft Bank Dunes SNCI has become LWS, leaving Huttoft Marsh nature reserve (see Section 8.4.1) and part of an arable field between Marsh Yard and Moggs Eye. The status of the nature reserve will be reviewed by the LWS Panel in a few years when new habitats there have time to settle down, whereas a decision on the arable land is expected before the end of 2015.
7.6. While the geological equivalent of LWS is LGS (see Section 7.2), the equivalent of SNCI is Regionally Important Geological/Geomorphological Site (RIGS). Two RIGS (which are to be re-assessed in 2015) are relevant to the study area: Huttoft Bank Foreshore RIGS includes upper beach within Huttoft Car Terrace to Marsh Yard; and Wolla Bank Foreshore RIGS includes upper beach within Anderby Creek to Wolla Bank.
8. AGRI-ENVIRONMENT SCHEMES AND MANAGEMENT PLANS
8.1. No agri-environment schemes relate to the study area. This section describes Environmental Stewardship agreements on adjacent land, at both Entry Level (ELS) and Higher Level (HLS).
8.2. One HLS agreement applies to all LWT nature reserves in or near the study area, including the five constituent parts of Sea Bank Clay Pits SSSI. These predominantly wetland sites are subject to the following management prescriptions: restoration and maintenance of reedbeds; cutting of wetland; restoration of species- rich grassland; and maintenance of successional areas and scrub. Management plans have not been produced, because all relevant matters form part of the HLS agreement, which began in August 2010 and expires in July 2020.
8.3. Currently within the same HLS agreement is Anderby Marsh nature reserve, 23ha of improved pasture and arable land purchased by LWT in September 2009. Grassland has since been established throughout and water levels have risen as a result of de-commissioning an Internal Drainage Board sluice at the northern end of a south-north drain near its junction with Main Drain SNCI (see Section 7.5). HLS- funded options here are: permanent grassland with very low inputs; maintenance of grassland for wintering waterfowl and waders; creation of wet grassland for breeding waders; and grazing supplement for cattle. To fulfil these requirements, the main management tools used are cattle grazing and topping of vegetation. As
5 explained in Section 8.2, LWT does not produce a separate management plan where an HLS agreement is in force.
8.4. Two further nature reserves adjacent to the study area are being incorporated into the Sea Bank Clay Pits HLS agreement at the time of writing. These are Huttoft Marsh and Chapel Six Marshes (LWT), neither of which has a separate management plan.
8.4.1. Huttoft Marsh was purchased in 2012 by LWT and LCC jointly, when it mostly comprised unmanaged grassland, with some short-mown grass and several drains. Towards the end of 2014 the site was subject to various drainage works, including creation of shallow lagoons; it will now be managed under HLS to restore the grassland for wintering waterfowl and waders.
8.4.2. The only management at Chapel Six Marshes (LWT) nature reserve in recent years has been some scrub removal and occasional light grazing, plus the digging of a trial pond in 2012 when major wetland creation was taking place to the north and south. From now on, it will be managed by grazing from September to November to fulfil the HLS option of restoration of sand dune systems.
8.5. The privately owned area south of Wolla Bank Reedbed and east of Wolla Bank Pit nature reserve is referred to here as Wolla Bank South. As a result of recent excavation there are now extensive reedbeds and areas of water, but with scope for some rough grazing. HLS funded management comprises reedbed creation works, as well as restoration of wet grassland, a grazing supplement for cattle and a wetland grazing supplement. The agreement began in October 2011 and expires in September 2021.
8.6. ELS agreement land adjacent to the study area occupies all the fields east of the coast road between Huttoft Marsh nature reserve in the north and Anderby Creek in the south. Here, the old sea defence, which is known as Roman Bank, is managed as permanent grassland with very low inputs, but everything else is still arable with 4m buffer strips. The agreement began in January 2011 and expires in December 2015.
8.7. Details of the next generation of agri-environment schemes (Countryside Stewardship) have not yet been finalised.
9. SPECIES PROTECTION AND ACTION PLANS
9.1. This section provides an outline of species protection at European level and nationally. The relevance of Lincolnshire Biodiversity Action Plan is also considered. All species mentioned are known to be present in the study area, or have been recorded in the area or nearby in recent years, or could occur in the area. Depending upon the species involved, the level of protection may vary from comprehensive to far less so; for example common frog, common toad and smooth newt are only protected with regard to sale.
9.1.1. Strongest protection is afforded to European Protected Species, which are listed on Schedule 2 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations (2010). These include otter, great-crested newt and all bats.
9.1.2. Domestic legislation covers the same group of species, plus a lot more. Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981, as amended), additional species listed on
6 Schedule 5 are adder, grass snake, slow-worm, common lizard, smooth newt, common frog, common toad, water vole and brown hare. Birds on Schedule 1 are bittern, marsh harrier, hen harrier, bearded tit and Cetti’s warbler, which must not be disturbed while breeding and are protected at all other times by special penalties.
9.1.3. Wild birds in general, as well as their eggs and nests, are protected under Part 1, Section 1(1) of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. This means that habitat management work between the beginning of March and the end of August can only go ahead if an experienced ecologist confirms that there are no active nests in the area, having first carried out a thorough search.
9.1.4. The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006, as amended) protects further ‘Species of principal importance for the purpose of conserving biodiversity’. These animals are listed under Section 41 of the Act, and include European eel, turtle dove, skylark, linnet, yellowhammer, reed bunting, grasshopper warbler, song thrush, dunnock, starling and house sparrow.
9.1.5. Protection of habitats and sites at European and national level is referred to in Section 6.1.
9.1.6. The 3rd Edition of the Lincolnshire Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP) is a non-statutory publication concerned with sustainable conservation and enhancement of the county’s biodiversity (Collop, 2011). It contains a series of locally focussed action plans, each one relevant to a significant Lincolnshire habitat, species or group of species. These action plans incorporate targets and actions, which were drawn up with the intention that they would be SMART, ie specific, measureable, achievable, realistic and time-limited.
9.1.7. LBAP habitat action plans of significance in the study area relate to Coastal Sand Dunes and Reedbeds. Relevant LBAP Species Action Plans are those for Bats, Farmland Birds, Newts and Water Vole.
9.1.8. The study area is also used by badgers, and under the Protection of Badgers Act (1992) it is an offence to kill, injure or take a badger, and to recklessly interfere with a sett.
9.1.9. Natural England must be contacted before carrying out any activities that may impact upon protected species, as a licence may be needed.
10. LOCAL WILDLIFE SITE SURVEY TECHNIQUES
10.1. A document usually referred to as the Selection Guidelines (Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership, 2013) is used when surveying, assessing and selecting candidate LWSs. Key elements of that approach are described below, all of which were followed in the 2014 surveys.
10.2. Once funding for surveys has been secured, the first step is to contact relevant owners and occupiers to obtain permission for entry to their land. A letter is sent at this stage, providing written evidence that the scope and possible implications of the survey have been clearly explained. Then a survey is carried out within each logical recording unit, which in some cases is a whole site and in others is part of a site, ie a single field or a 1km stretch of linear habitat. It is normal to complete the survey during one visit.
7 10.3. Botanical recording forms the major part of the survey, because many of the LWS selection criteria require botanical data to allow assessment of habitat quality. Typically, a qualifying site must support more than a threshold number of key plant species listed in the Selection Guidelines, although a few criteria allow selection of all acceptable examples of a particular scarce and valuable habitat.
10.4. In addition to plant identification, the standard survey involves incidental recording of any fauna that can be quickly identified, ie birds, butterflies, day-flying moths, dragonflies, damselflies and occasionally some distinctive members of other groups. Survey of protected animal species is not normally carried out.
10.5. A wide range of other data is collected, for instance concerning the value and condition of habitats present, topographical features, species frequency/abundance, evidence of habitat management, and anything relevant about surrounding land. A sketch map is often produced, perhaps annotated with useful information supplied by the land manager/owner.
11. OVERVIEW OF HABITATS
11.1. The study area comprises: shallowly sloping sandy beach, foredunes (absent in many places), fixed dunes and then low-lying areas inland of the dunes. The main habitats present are sparse grassland, coarse grassland with scrub and trees, and wetland. Maps 5a, 5b, 5c and 5d show where most of these features and habitats occur, which are described below.
11.1.1. The extensive, gently sloping, sandy beaches on this part of the Lincolnshire coast are mostly east of the study area, but some of the uppermost parts are included. Although the bare sand is of little obvious botanical interest, Sections 12.1.5 and 12.1.6 refer to a geological SSSI near Chapel Point.
11.1.2. In many places, the next feature is a line of low fixed dunes, usually behind a concrete sea wall and pathway. Much of this ridge is dominated by dense vegetation, comprising species such as sea couch, marram, lyme-grass, common reed, sea buckthorn, elder, dewberry, bramble, and in places plantations of pine and other trees. Good grassland habitat is very scarce, largely because there is no stock grazing and almost no cutting. However, hairy violet, lady’s bedstraw, common knapweed, cat’s ear, oxeye daisy, tufted vetch and sand sedge were located in the occasionally mown edge of a few tees on the eastern margin of Sandilands Golf Course.
11.1.3. Between the beach and fixed dunes, immediately east of the sea defences, sand has built up in places to form low foredunes. These are a younger stage in dune formation, and consequently the vegetation cover is much lower than on the older fixed dunes. Marram is one of the first species to colonise, but before long the substrate becomes suitable for a number of associated species that only occur on sparsely vegetated coastal sand, such as sea-holly, sea sandwort, prickly saltwort, sea rocket, frosted orache and sand couch.
11.1.4. Shallow and fairly dry slopes landward of the dunes are dominated by coarse, competitive plants. However, a short and sparse sward is able to survive where visitor pressure is high, particularly in car parks and along paths. The diverse flora here includes a large population of the localised strawberry clover, plus hare’s-foot clover, buck’s-horn plantain, common cudweed, thyme-leaved sandwort, common stork’s-bill, small-flowered crane’s-bill and fern-grass.
8 11.1.5. Wetland habitats are largely restricted to low lying areas west of the dunes between Anderby Creek and Chapel St Leonards, some of which is considered by Natural England to be a type of dune slack. Common reed is abundant along drains, beside recently excavated water bodies, and in areas of wet and drier reedbed. A wide range of other wetland plants include spiked water-milfoil, common fleabane, angelica, meadowsweet, toad rush and greater pond-sedge. Further species indicate brackish water conditions, such as brackish water-crowfoot, sea club-rush, saltmarsh rush, sea-milkwort, lesser centaury and parsley water-dropwort.
11.1.6. Trees and scrub are prominent in many places, both wet and dry. While the lack of grazing and cutting has allowed woody vegetation to colonise and spread naturally, much scrub has developed after planting to stabilise dunes for sea defence purposes. Tree planting has also occurred in places, most obviously inland of the dune ridge.
12. SITE DESCRIPTIONS
12.1. The study area was divided into six compartments, each of which was surveyed separately according to the LWS selection guidelines. Descriptions of each recording unit are given below, starting at the northern end of the LCC land and progressing southwards. Maps 3a, 3b, 3c and 3d show all areas surveyed in 2014.
12.1.1. Boy Grift Drain to Huttoft Car Terrace. This eastern part of Sandilands Golf Course and Dunes (see Maps 3a and 5a) is a 1.5km stretch of beach and dune varying in width from 20m to 70m. The site comprises, from west to east: parts of a low ridge of fixed dunes; a concrete seawall and associated pathways; a parallel strip of lower foredune in the southern half of the site; and shallowly sloping bare sand at the top of the beach. It also includes the northern end of Huttoft Car Terrace car park. The inland ownership boundary does not follow an obvious line on the ground, thus including parts of the adjacent golf course in some places and excluding much of the dune ridge in others.
The present morphology and vegetation of the fixed dunes was influenced by landscaping and subsequent shrub planting in the 1980s, with the aim of improving sea defences. Most of the planting was with sea-buckthorn, gorse and wild privet, and these species are still prominent today, forming dense thickets, especially in parts of the south. In spite of very little management, there are substantial scrub- free areas, and although most of these support coarse grassland, there is also a good selection of much more interesting plants, again mainly in the south. A flora typical of good neutral grassland includes common bird’s-foot-trefoil, lady’s bedstraw, hairy violet, common knapweed, tufted vetch, cat’s-ear, oxeye daisy, lesser trefoil, yarrow, smooth hawk’s-beard and smooth meadow-grass. More specialist coastal and dune plants are also present, such as hound’s-tongue, prickly saltwort, sea rocket, sand sedge, marram, lyme-grass, sea couch and sea fern- grass, the latter being very scarce in Lincolnshire and here found on the edges of surfaced tracks. Further woody species include elder, bramble, dewberry and woody nightshade.
The foredunes are between 5m & 20m wide and appear to be extending northwards, because they become progressively narrower, lower and more sparsely vegetated from south to north. It is the middle section which is of most botanical interest, where a good range of plants have had time to establish, but the more competitive species have not yet taken over. Many of the coastal species already mentioned are present here, but plants restricted to the open sandy sward are
9 around 25 specimens of sea-holly, as well as sea sandwort, frosted orache and sand couch.
Butterflies and moths were conspicuous during the LWS survey, including ringlet, gatekeeper, meadow brown, small & Essex skipper, common blue, small copper, peacock, green-veined white, shaded broad-bar, yellow-tail and cinnabar. Some of the birds seen were swallow, house martin, linnet, goldfinch, wren and starling.
12.1.2. Huttoft Car Terrace to Marsh Yard. This is a 1.2km long stretch of coast to the south of Sandilands Golf Course and adjacent to Huttoft Marsh nature reserve (see Maps 3a, 3b, 5a and 5b). It comprises: bare sand on the upper beach with some botanically-poor foredunes; a concrete pathway and linear car parking area at the top of the beach; a line of low, fixed dunes and flatter ground inland supporting much unmanaged vegetation, dominated by dense scrub and trees in central and northern parts, with larger amounts of grassland further south; and a gravel car parking area inland of the dunes at the southern end of the site, characterised by a short, open sward.
Woody vegetation on the fixed dunes includes pine, sycamore, sea-buckthorn, elder, hawthorn, woody nightshade, bramble and dewberry. Other robust or weedy plants here are marram, lyme-grass, common reed, sea couch, false oat-grass, creeping & spear thistle, hedge & large bindweed, curled dock and amphibious bistort. Species found in less vegetated sandy areas include prickly saltwort, sand couch, hound’s-tongue, procumbent pearlwort, sea fern-grass and sand sedge.
The most interesting flora on site is typical of neutral soils. It is largely restricted to the vicinity of the southern car park and along a track that extends northwards. Present here are hare’s-foot & strawberry clover, lesser & hop trefoil, buck’s-horn plantain, common bird’s-foot-trefoil, tufted vetch, meadow vetchling, yarrow, smooth hawk’s-beard, autumn hawkbit, cat’s-ear, black medick, silverweed and smooth meadow-grass. Damper habitat west of the car park supports dense willow scrub, while further north of that there is much common reed.
Birds, butterflies and moths seen during the LWS survey included common whitethroat, reed bunting, swallow, Sandwich tern, Essex skipper, painted lady, red admiral and cinnabar.
12.1.3. Marsh Yard to Anderby Creek. This is a 1.75km long stretch of coast to the north of Main Drain in Anderby Creek (see Maps 3b, 3c, 5b and 5c). Eastern parts of the site comprise: bare sand on the upper beach with some young dunes; and a line of low, fixed dunes supporting much coarse grassland and plentiful woody vegetation, including many garden escapes in the south. Habitats inland of the dunes include planted and naturally occurring trees and scrub on both dry and damp land, grassland, sparsely vegetated car parking areas, a track and a little bare sand.
The northern end of the site is notable for supporting a huge population of the rather scarce strawberry clover throughout a linear car park. A track extends south from this to Moggs Eye, where a large patch of open grassland occurs. Few competitive plants grow in these habitats and therefore the flora is rich in species typical of good neutral grassland, such as common bird’s-foot-trefoil, cat’s-ear, lady’s bedstraw, dove’s-foot & small flowered crane’s-bill, black medick and smooth meadow-grass. Sparsely vegetated sandy areas here or on the dunes hold common cudweed, annual pearlwort, common stork’s-bill, viper’s-bugloss, thyme-leaved sandwort, fern-grass and sand sedge.
10 Many parts of the dune ridge are dominated by coarse vegetation, such as marram, lyme-grass, sea & sand couch, common reed and dewberry. Other weedy species are hogweed, weld, red valerian, rosebay willowherb, fat hen, large bindweed, creeping & spear thistle, hedge mustard and pineappleweed. Trees and shrubs include white poplar, hybrid black poplar, pine, ash, buckthorn, sea-buckthorn, buddleia, wild & garden privet, elder, hawthorn and ivy. South of Moggs Eye there is a plantation of sycamore, with pine and horse chestnut. Damp areas, particularly inland in the north, support osier, grey sallow, woody nightshade, comfrey, amphibious bistort and silverweed.
Birds and invertebrates seen during the LWS survey included migrating whimbrel, reed bunting, house martin, common blue, brown argus, meadow brown, gatekeeper, peacock and common darter.
12.1.4. Anderby Creek to Wolla Bank. This is a 1.1km long stretch of coast on the seaward side of Anderby Marsh and Wolla Bank Reedbed nature reserves (see Maps 3c, 5c and 5d). It varies in width from 55m to 200m and comprises bare sand on the upper beach; a line of fixed dunes; and substantial gentle slopes inland in the north. Due to lack of management, most places support coarse and weedy vegetation, with substantial cover of scrub and trees. Good open dune vegetation is very limited in extent.
Extensive areas of woody vegetation on dry ground include large populations of sea-buckthorn, elder, garden privet, bramble and dewberry, plus sycamore, apple, woody nightshade and wild clematis. Also abundant is common reed, with creeping, spear & welted thistle, prickly, smooth & perennial sow-thistle, common & hoary ragwort, field & hedge bindweed, bristly oxtongue, common nettle, hemlock, weld and soapwort. Other robust plants typical of sand dunes are sand & sea couch, marram and lyme-grass.
Relatively small areas have much less coarse vegetation, particularly along well- used paths and towards the outer edge of the dunes. This flora includes thyme- leaved sandwort, dove’s-foot crane’s-bill, oxeye daisy, meadow vetchling, tufted vetch, common bird’s-foot-trefoil, cat’s-ear, lady’s bedstraw, black medick and sand sedge. Damper land is largely restricted to the western edge of the site, which is adjacent to linear water bodies almost throughout. Here can be found common fleabane, angelica, meadowsweet, sea club-rush, false fox-sedge, greater pond- sedge and more common reed.
Fauna noted during the LWS survey were reed bunting, reed warbler, swallow, wren, wood pigeon, speckled wood and common darter. Surveys by ESL in late summer 2010 revealed two common lizards, but no evidence of water voles and great crested newts. Also present are breeding Cetti’s warbler, willow warbler and common whitethroat, plus wall brown butterfly and a large, active badger sett.
Detailed studies (Bottomer & Bottomer, 2012, 2013 & 2014) showed that there are large populations of common blue, blue-tailed & azure damselfly, and common & ruddy darter. Smaller numbers of migrant hawker, emperor, four-spotted chaser, black-tailed skimmer and hairy dragonfly are also present. However, there is very little open water on site and many of the dragonflies are likely to be breeding in Wolla Bank Reedbed, where there is plenty of open water and good amounts of surface vegetation.
12.1.5. Chapel Six Marshes (LCC). This is a 0.5km long stretch of coast north of Chapel St Leonards, bounded to the west by Anderby Road and to the north by Chapel Six
11 Marshes (LWT) nature reserve (see Maps 3d and 5d). In the east is the upper part of a shallowly-sloping sandy beach, which is within Chapel Point to Wolla Bank geological Site of Special Scientific Interest. The adjacent sand dune ridge is also included, west of which are visitor facilities and two recently created wetland areas. Habitats present are bare sand, short vegetation in car parking areas, coarse grassland, a little open water, much reedbed, and varying cover of trees and scrub. The resulting flora is diverse and interesting.
In contrast to all other parts of the study area, this site was subject to major improvements during the period 2011-12, comprising both habitat works and upgrading of visitor facilities. In habitat terms, the main result is many new inter- connected linear waterbodies to north and south of the entrance road. Although now largely obscured by vigorous reed growth, the huge increase of water’s edge habitat was designed to augment wetland biodiversity in areas that had previously been much drier.
Dense common reed restricted opportunities to survey the aquatic flora, but spiked water-milfoil, water-crowfoot and duckweed were recorded. Other wetland species were toad & saltmarsh rush, sea club-rush, parsley water-dropwort, wild celery, angelica and common fleabane.
Common reed also occurs on the sand dune ridge, with marram, lyme-grass, sand & sea couch, sand sedge, sea sandwort, dewberry and plentiful sea buckthorn. Woody vegetation is prominent at the southern end of the site, on the embankment along the entire western boundary, and in wetter central areas. Here species include pine, white poplar, goat, white & crack willow, osier, grey sallow, blackthorn, hawthorn, ivy, wild & garden privet, elder, dog-rose, bramble and woody nightshade.
Recent improvements for visitors have included creation of a circular path in the southern half of the site. This has provided opportunities for colonisation by grassland plants, although most of the interesting flora is associated with the landward slope of the dune ridge and the open sward in car parking areas. Some of the neutral grassland species in these places are common knapweed, meadow vetchling, tufted vetch, oxeye daisy, autumn hawkbit, meadow buttercup, yarrow, smooth tare and red fescue. Opportunists of open and disturbed ground include buck’s-horn plantain, common stork’s-bill, small-flowered & dove’s-foot crane’s-bill, black medick, wild mignonette, sticky groundsel, silverweed and annual meadow- grass. Coarse grassland comprises species such as creeping & spear thistle, hogweed, rosebay & great willowherb, comfrey, cow parsley, hedge & large bindweed, curled dock, Yorkshire-fog, common couch, wood small-reed and false oat-grass.
Fauna noted during the LWS survey were moorhen, migrating whimbrel, wood pigeon, green-veined white, small tortoiseshell and common darter. Surveys by ESL in late summer 2010 revealed three common lizards, plenty of evidence of water voles and no great crested newts. Also present are breeding Cetti’s warbler and sedge warbler, little grebe in winter and wall brown butterfly; otters have been seen nearby and signs noted within the site.
Detailed studies (Bottomer & Bottomer, 2012, 2013 & 2014) showed that there are large populations of common blue & blue-tailed damselfly, four-spotted chaser, and common & ruddy darter. Smaller numbers of small red-eyed damselfly, migrant hawker, broad-bellied chaser, emperor, black-tailed skimmer and hairy dragonfly are also present. Although the recent habitat improvement works created much
12 open water, the great majority of this is now dominated by common reed, and that is limiting the suitability of the site for both damselflies and dragonflies.
12.1.6. Chapel Point Dunes, North. This 0.62km long stretch of coastline (see Maps 3d and 5d) comprises two main elements. In the east is the upper part of a shallowly- sloping sandy beach, which is within Chapel Point to Wolla Bank geological Site of Special Scientific Interest. Elsewhere, in central and southern parts, there are heavily scrubbed-up fixed dunes, which also support some coarse grassland.
Plants of good quality dunes are few in number, but include marram, lyme-grass, sea & sand couch, hound’s-tongue, sea bindweed, prickly saltwort and sand sedge. Neutral grassland species also occur sparsely, and are represented by common bird’s-foot-trefoil, autumn hawkbit, lady’s bedstraw, meadow vetchling, yarrow, silverweed and black medick. In contrast, plants typical of unmanaged sand dunes near habitation are abundant, such as horse-radish, creeping thistle, hedge bindweed, ground-elder, cow parsley, field horsetail, common ragwort, ivy, Russian- vine, hogweed, amphibious bistort, common reed and false oat-grass. Woody vegetation includes sea-buckthorn, elder, hawthorn, grey sallow, cultivated rose, bramble, dewberry and honeysuckle.
Fauna noted during the LWS survey were common blue, ruddy darter and common darter.
13. HABITAT MANAGEMENT
13.1. Habitat management in the study area is currently minimal. Some commonly used management techniques that could be adopted are: stock grazing; removal of vegetation by flail collector or by hay-making; flailing and leaving cut material; planting of trees and scrub; removal of trees and scrub by cutting; use of herbicide; and periodic excavation of existing and new waterbodies. Merits and drawback of each of these are discussed below, and then Section 14 goes on to explore five additional issues that have particular local significance.
13.1.1. Appropriate grazing is one of the most valuable means of maintaining a botanically- rich sward in grassland areas. Generally, any grazing is better than none at all, because unmanaged grassland becomes increasingly dominated by competitive and robust plants that are common and widespread in the wider countryside. Grazing reduces the vigour of this coarse vegetation and provides opportunities for short-sward and sparse-sward species to survive, especially if there is also some ground disturbance from hooves. In many cases, low to moderate grazing pressure can result in a habitat mosaic of bare patches, short and longer grassland, scattered and perhaps denser scrub, and a few trees. Such mosaics can be excellent habitat for a range of invertebrates and other fauna. Grazing by cattle is preferable to sheep, because the former are less discriminating, so take more of the coarse vegetation and leave more of the shorter species, plus their hooves create more bare ground. Un-vegetated patches are good if scarce species germinate, but less good if the weed flora is encouraged! The highly selective grazing of equines, their tendency to create highly nutrient-rich latrine areas and ability to encourage ragwort and other weeds need very careful husbandry if the outcome is to be sufficiently beneficial. Rabbit grazing has positive and negative aspects, but there is usually a net benefit, especially in the absence of other management.
13.1.2. If grazing is not feasible, another means of counteracting scrub encroachment and encouraging a diverse sward is by mechanical removal of vegetation. This is more
13 effective than grazing in reducing soil fertility, but has an adverse effect on invertebrate populations. The traditional approach is to make hay annually in late summer, which takes several days if the weather is good, or longer if it is not. Another option is to use a flail collector that cuts and removes in one operation, with obvious advantages of greater speed and lower cost, plus a need for only one day of good weather. However, this technique is far more harmful to invertebrates than hay-making and therefore is perhaps most appropriate for occasional use on very coarse vegetation with little invertebrate interest, or to prepare for (re-)introduction of grazing. If the aim is to manage coarse vegetation annually, it would be appropriate to use a flail collector at first, with the intention of switching to hay- making if the sward improves.
13.1.3. Reduction of soil fertility will be minimal if cut vegetation is left on the surface, because most of the nutrients released by the rotting process will return to the soil. Another disadvantage of leaving cut vegetation is the covering up of bare ground that would otherwise be suitable for successful germination of many desirable species. In addition, arisings can smother and adversely affect the basal parts of plants that have had most of their above surface parts severed. Thus, in many cases occasional cutting and not removing arisings is a worse option than no cutting at all. However, if cutting occurs frequently throughout the growing season, some of the negative impacts are minimised, and on sandy soil a restricted range of desirable plants will be able to survive, such as the rarer clover species.
13.1.4. Generally, planting of woody vegetation on grassland, heathland, wetland or other semi-natural habitat that normally supports few trees and shrubs should be strongly discouraged. Such planting impedes mowing, reduces grazing opportunities, casts shade, changes soil characteristics and can cause the replacement of scarce and valuable habitat by common shade-tolerant and nutrient-loving species. Of even greater concern, is the planting of trees and shrubs that are not native or are not suited to the location.
13.1.5. Removal of trees and shrubs from previously open habitats is an often used management technique, although it is more beneficial for some species than others, and for many can be a disadvantage. Some difficulties associated with removing woody vegetation include: A felling licence is required from the Forestry Commission before significant amounts of tree felling take place (this is relevant to Prescription 8, Section 17.1.8). On dunes, a felling licence may be difficult to obtain, because Forestry Commission may consider that a ‘change of character’ would result. Removing trees and scrub is likely to lead to a profusion of woody regrowth, unless there is considerable investment in ongoing appropriate management, such as immediate stump treatment with herbicide followed by adequate levels of grazing or further cutting in succeeding years; Even if there is follow-up management, clearance of well-established scrub and woodland is likely to result in regrowth of undesirable vegetation in the enriched soil, such as willowherb, nettles, docks and thistles; Scrub is an excellent habitat for breeding warblers and other fauna that require shade, shelter, etc; Scrub is a vital source of food for many species, for example thrushes feeding on berries in the autumn and winter; Removal of scrub on sand dunes that perform a sea defence role may be considered undesirable by EA; There may be public disquiet at the ‘destruction of habitat’.
14 Some reasons for removing woody vegetation are: In an ideal state, the study area would support few trees, and all of those would be native species appropriate to the situation, such as willows in wetlands and ash on damp and fairly fertile soils. In addition, the dunes would be treeless, with a scatter of scrub, and would support much botanically-rich dune grassland. Today this stretch of coast is dominated by scrub, trees and coarse grassland; Scattered young scrub is unlikely to cause significant changes to the soil in which it is growing, so there is a good chance that desirable grassland species will re-colonise promptly once the scrub has gone; Scattered young scrub may be cheaper and easier to remove than established clumps; Dense old scrub is worth removing in order to prevent further scrub encroachment into adjacent species-rich grassland; Dense old scrub is also worth removing if this facilitates other management, ie provides access for grazing animals; Some scrub supports large numbers of the brown-tail moth on the Lincolnshire coast, which cause health problems in humans if hairs on the larvae are inhaled or make contact with the skin; Trees and scrub attract a range of predators (particularly corvids) and wood pigeons. This is highly unfortunate because major efforts are taking place in the vicinity to encourage birds and other fauna that are highly susceptible to predation. Examples of groups under threat here are breeding waders and wintering waterfowl in the Huttoft Marsh and Anderby Marsh nature reserves, plus the fauna of reedbeds in Chapel Six Marshes (LWT & LCC).
13.1.6. Carefully targeted herbicide application can be a very useful tool for minimising regrowth after woody vegetation has been cut, particularly when it takes the form of stump treatment immediately after cutting. Spot treatment or weed-wiping are also acceptable in certain circumstances, but it is best to avoid any techniques that may adversely affect non-target flora and fauna.
13.1.7. Ponds, lakes, marshes, fens and reedbeds are subject to natural successional change if no management is carried out. This means that over a period of perhaps several decades the area and depth of water gradually decreases, leading to the loss of aquatic species, then loss of other water plants, and eventually the site ceases to be wetland. In order to maintain a good range of wetland types in an area, one approach is to excavate a new wetland every ten years or so and do nothing else to interfere with natural processes. Alternatively, relatively small scale excavation can be carried out relatively frequently on an existing wetland, on rotation, with the aim of retaining a range of habitat types indefinitely. Other actions that can hold back succession include minimising tree cover, and cutting and removing reeds.
Major excavation works at Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) in 2012 have been extremely successful in creating significant areas dominated by common reed. While reedbed is an important habitat, on this site the numerous linear water bodies were created to produce a mosaic of wetland types, far richer in flora and fauna than a monoculture of reeds. Indeed, the ESL report envisaged an outcome of 25-30% open water, 40-50% wet reed, 15-25% drier reed and 5% scrub (ESL, 2010). Therefore, there is an urgent and ongoing need to manage the reeds by rotational cutting and removal of cut material. This would maintain a mixture of: reedbed; shallow edges where sunshine can penetrate to the water’s surface, supporting a
15 diverse wetland flora and fauna; and open water with plentiful aquatic plants and animals.
14. FURTHER MANAGEMENT ISSUES
14.1. The future of the study area will also be affected by factors of more local relevance, namely: establishment of the National Coast Path; the conservation of sea- buckthorn; re-wetting of land south of Anderby Creek; beach nourishment or other flood risk management measures; and cabling coming ashore from Triton Knoll wind farm.
14.1.1. Plans are advancing to create a path around the entire coast of England, with the section between Boston and Cleethorpes planned for completion in 2020. The precise route will soon be finalised, but impacts on the coastal strip will depend on whether it follows the dune top, the landward dune foot or the seaward dune foot. If a view of the sea is important then the landward option would not be appropriate, but all three options are problematic. If the path is to have a hard surface wide enough to accommodate walkers, cyclists and horse riders, then construction on the dune top would have a considerable footprint in order to maintain sea defence capability. It might be feasible to utilise existing hard surfaces on the seaward foot of the dunes, but this location is vulnerable to high tides and storm surges. Another drawback of the inland option is the significantly increased threat of disturbance (particularly by dogs) to breeding birds and other fauna associated with dune scrub, grassland and reedbeds in the vicinity. There is already increased disturbance along the route of the new permissive path south of Anderby Creek, where the only practical solution appears to be fencing of sensitive areas to exclude walkers, plus provision of signage requesting that dogs are kept under control and not allowed to enter the fenced compartments (see also Section 21.1.6).
14.1.2. Sea-buckthorn is considered to be native on eastern coastal dunes from East Sussex (Dungeness) north to Dunbar in East Lothian (Dargie, 2002), but elsewhere it has been widely introduced, primarily to encourage dune stabilisation. The species is invasive and has increased in extent greatly in recent decades as grazing pressure from livestock and rabbits has decreased, particularly since myxomatosis appeared in the 1950s. This has occurred in areas where the plant is native as well as where it is not native, with a consequent loss of species-rich dune grassland. As a result, considerable resources have been expended in trying to control or eradicate sea-buckthorn throughout its current range. However, this approach should be questioned where the plant has not been artificially introduced, because the EU Habitats Directive identifies sea-buckthorn scrub as a unique and special component of the habitat mosaic in dune systems. Furthermore, the main site identified as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) in the UK on account of its sea- buckthorn habitat is Saltfleetby-Theddlethorpe Dunes and Gibraltar Point SAC (a Natura 2000 site). Thus, although the study area lies outside the SAC, it is in the middle of the 25km gap between its northern and southern parts. Therefore, it would seem prudent to not advocate wholesale sea-buckthorn removal in the study area. However, one complication is that sea-buckthorn was definitely planted along the dunes north of Huttoft Car Terrace – see Section 12.1.1.
14.1.3. Under an HLS agreement, LWT would like to raise water levels substantially on Anderby Marsh Nature Reserve to create/improve wetland and grazing marsh habitat, and to benefit breeding and wintering birds. So far, a modest amount of re- wetting has been achieved by installation of a tilting weir on the decommissioned drain flowing north into Main Drain. Re-positioning of the weir could raise water
16 level much more, but this would lead to overtopping of the new sluice upstream in Wolla Bank South. This, in turn, could have major implications for adjacent Chapel Six Marshes (LWT) and Chapel Six Marshes (LCC). Therefore, it is essential that all relevant parties, including Lindsey Marsh Drainage Board, get together to agree the way forward.
14.1.4. The majority of the sandy beaches on this part of the coast are now composed mainly of sand dredged from offshore and pumped onto the beach – a process of replenishment or nourishment known as the Lincshore sea defence programme. Without the extra sand, the mostly concrete sea defences, which are now partly covered by dunes, would be exposed to erosion and undermined in only a few years by the predominantly erosional forces affecting this stretch of coast (Tarttelin, 2009). Furthermore, the process contributes much of the sand forming the botanically-rich foredunes on the seaward side of the sea defences. A negative outcome is increased amounts of sand being blown inland by easterly winds, causing accumulations in places such as Huttoft Car Terrace car park.
14.1.5. If permission is granted to construct Triton Knoll offshore wind farm, it will almost certainly result in electricity cables crossing the study area to feed into the National Grid. The cable route decision will be made by the Secretary of State after a Planning Inspector provides recommendations following a public examination period. The preferred route is already known, which involves tunnelling under the study area north of Moggs Eye (TF548770), with work areas in the arable field to the west and on the beach to the east. No direct impact is envisaged.
15. THREATS
15.1. The last two sections have considered a range of factors that in some circumstances pose a threat to the flora and fauna of the study area. For completeness, these are summarised below, together with additional factors of possible relevance.
15.1.1. Coastal squeeze. This relates primarily to losses of inter-tidal habitat as sea level rises, where man-made sea defences prevent compensating growth of new habitat further inland. This phenomenon may also threaten reedbeds behind the dune ridge in the future.
15.1.2. Beach nourishment. See Section 14.1.4.
15.1.3. Sea defence and stabilisation. The fixed dune ridge appears at first glance to be a natural feature, but it is really a naturalised sea defence system created by man. Not only is the seaward edge reinforced by a concrete bank and path, but the dune itself partly comprises material excavated nearby and built up artificially. Some sand has been blown in more naturally, but a high proportion of current input is likely to have originated from the beach replenishment programme. Furthermore, marram, shrubs and trees have been planted in the past to ensure that the dunes stay put.
15.1.4. Dredging and marine aggregate extraction. This may disrupt erosional and depositional processes at the coast, with some areas experiencing a net loss of sand, even where beach nourishment takes place. When combined with tidal or storm surges, this can result in significant erosion of foredunes and other coastal features.
17 15.1.5. Lack of appropriate management. While over-grazing can be a problem, there is no prospect of that here. Furthermore, grassland and wetland sites can recover quickly once stock use decreases. On the other hand, lack of grazing for decades in the study area has encouraged the spread of coarse grasses and scrub and it would take many years of careful management to renovate the dunes and other grassland successfully. As far as reedbeds are concerned, excavation to re-wet areas is very effective in the short term, but unless this is followed by an appropriate rotational cutting regime, the habitat soon loses biodiversity as reeds become dominant.
15.1.6. Recreation. As this stretch of coast is very popular with local visitors and tourists, it is inevitable that maintenance of habitats and biodiversity may be affected, especially during the summer half of the year. Sections 14.1.1 and 21.2.5 refer to disturbance of birds and other fauna by visitors, and particularly their dogs, which is exacerbated by creation of new paths, such as that from Wolla Bank to Anderby Creek. Dog faeces are also a major problem, because in addition to health and cleanliness implications there is continual soil nutrient enrichment, which encourages coarse and weedy plants to flourish at the expense of a more desirable dune flora.
15.1.7. Spread of sea-buckthorn. See Section 14.1.2.
15.1.8. Falling water tables. The combined result of unsustainable abstraction and artificial drainage of fields is a major threat to certain habitats that are characterised by high water tables. This adds to the natural tendency for such habitats to become drier over time.
15.1.9. Pollution of freshwater. Watercourses are vulnerable to nutrient enrichment, pollution by pesticide residues and industrial products and siltation.
15.1.10. Impacts of offshore electricity generation. See Section 14.1.5.
15.1.11. Predation. See last bullet point of Section 13.1.5.
15.2. Additional threats to water vole populations are as follows (Collop, 2011):
15.2.1. Damage to and loss of habitat. Routine or other management of water features and bankside vegetation can be harmful to water voles and therefore should be carried out sensitively, on a rotational basis.
15.2.2. Impact of mink. Whether or not American mink are significant predators of, or competitors with, water voles is not entirely clear, especially along many watercourses in Lincolnshire, where water voles appear to be flourishing.
15.2.3. Population fragmentation. Small and isolated populations of animals are always vulnerable to extinction and often have little chance of re-colonisation from nearby surviving populations. Conversely, colonies that are larger and closer to each other are less likely to be wiped out, and, if that happens, there is a good chance of re- colonisation. Recent establishment of LWT nature reserves at Huttoft Marsh and Anderby Marsh are very helpful in that regard, where sympathetic wetland management is taking place.
18 16. MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
16.1. In view of the many complications and constraints operating in the study area, the following objectives (and associated prescriptions, in Section 17) represent a limited yet realistic set of broad proposals for action over the five years 2015 to 2020. These also appear in the work plan in Section 18.
16.1.1. Objective 1: Enhance the nature conservation value of selected areas of grassland. Actions covered by this objective are cutting and removal of grassland, scrub and trees.
16.1.2. Objective 2: Enhance the nature conservation value of selected areas of wetland. This relates to reedbed and ditch management.
16.1.3. Objective 3: Assess impact of management on habitats and species. Monitoring of habitats and species is desirable in all parts of the study area, but highest priority should be given to evaluating changes as a result of management.
16.1.4. Objective 4: Ensure that nature conservation issues are fully taken into account during decision-making. This objective is fundamental to all decisions affecting the study area, including public access and use issues.
16.1.5. Objective 5: Maximise nature conservation gain on LCC and neighbouring land. In order to maximise nature conservation gain in the wider coastal strip as well as the study area, it is important that neighbours work together, because actions on one property may affect adjacent land, either positively or negatively. Sharing of grazing animals already takes place, and the impacts of water level manipulation south of Anderby Creek is a problem which is currently unresolved (Section 14.1.3).
Another beneficial initiative would be cooperation between LCC and Sandilands Golf Course over management of the golf course and adjacent dunes, which together have just become an LWS. This would reduce potential problems due to the ownership boundary being unclear on the ground, including the possibility that the Golf Club has been inadvertently managing some LCC land.
16.1.6. Objective 6: Review outcomes of the current plan and produce a new plan for 2020-25. The next plan should take note of lessons learnt during 2015-20 and stipulate increased levels of wildlife-friendly management.
17. MANAGEMENT PRESCRIPTIONS
17.1. The prescriptions referred to in Section 16.1 are described below and also appear in the work plan in Section 18, with locational details appearing on Maps 6a, 6b, 6c and 6d. When identifying prescriptions, due attention was paid to instructions that the work plan had to be deliverable within the existing resources of LCC, and must take into account high visitor numbers and the need for public access. In addition, in this first plan period, it is appropriate to make a relatively low-key beginning, featuring a limited range of management techniques that can be built upon in future
19 years. However, if more resources become available before 2020, then additional prescriptions could be added to the present work plan (see Section 21).
As an aid to interpretation, note that all those prescriptions beginning ‘Manage’ relate to ongoing, often annual and sometimes rotational management. The prescription beginning ‘Remove’ relates to a single action.
17.1.1. Prescription 1: Manage grassland north of Huttoft Car Terrace (see Map 6a). There is a little botanically-rich grassland close to tees on the landward edge of the dune ridge, beside the golf course. In order to enhance and extend this valuable habitat type, cut the most diverse sward and adjacent accessible grassland annually in September and promptly remove arisings.
17.1.2. Prescription 2: Manage grassland north of Marsh Yard car park, west of the dune ridge (see Map 6b). Here there is some diverse grassland within a generally coarse sward that includes much common reed. In order to enhance and extend this valuable habitat type, select half of the area, including the richest parts, and manage it by cutting annually in September and promptly removing arisings.
17.1.3. Prescription 3: Manage grassland north of Moggs Eye entrance (see Map 6b). Here, a triangular piece of dry reedbed is close to some nice sparse grassland. To increase botanical richness, mow the reedbed annually in September and promptly remove arisings.
17.1.4. Prescription 4: Manage scattered scrub north of Huttoft Car Terrace (see Map 6a). Scattered scrub amongst grassland is good for wildlife, but it is a transitional habitat that needs ongoing management to counteract successional change. Cut one fifth of the scattered scrub within the mapped area each year on a five year rotation, during the period October to February inclusive. Promptly remove arisings.
17.1.5. Prescription 5: Remove dense scrub north of Huttoft Car Terrace (see Map 6a). Selective removal of sea-buckthorn is more appropriate here than elsewhere, because the species is known to have been introduced in the 1980s. Remove one of the four clumps of dense sea-buckthorn during the period October to February inclusive, by cutting and immediate stump-treatment to minimise regrowth. Promptly remove arisings. Alternatively, grub out the roots after cutting, which is far more effective, but requires a JCB. In subsequent years, Prescription 7 is relevant.
17.1.6. Prescription 6: Manage willow scrub north of the Marsh Yard entrance (see Map 6b). To prevent willow encroaching northwards into grassland and reedbed, and to increase structural diversity, cut the northern half of the willow scrub during the period October to February inclusive and promptly remove arisings. Afterwards, cut the same area once every 5 years.
17.1.7. Prescription 7: Manage scrub regrowth (see Map 6a). After carrying out work under Prescription 5, there will undoubtedly be some regrowth of scrub. This will need to be sprayed with brushwood killer annually in autumn. To control invading ragwort and other ruderal plants spray with an appropriate herbicide annually in spring.
17.1.8. Prescription 8: Remove pine and sycamore trees between Huttoft Car Terrace and Marsh Yard (see Maps 6a and 6b). To minimise predation by corvids and further loss of dune grassland (see Section 13.1.5), all pines and sycamore in the specified area should be cut down and promptly removed during the period October to February inclusive. Pine does not regrow after cutting, but sycamore does, so it
20 is essential to treat sycamore stumps with herbicide immediately after felling. A felling licence is required.
17.1.9. Prescription 9: Manage reedbed at Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) (see Maps 6c and 6d). The aim is to retain dense reeds over half of the wet reedbed area and create a mosaic of reeds and open water over the remaining half, a habitat that is uncommon in nearby wetlands. In the chosen half, cut one fifth annually on a five- year rotation, during the period October to February. Remove arisings promptly, but place some in piles on south facing slopes to decompose, producing egg laying habitat for grass snakes (ESL, 2010). Cut and remove encroaching scrub and trees during reed management.
17.1.10. Prescription 10: Manage ditch at Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) (see Map 6d). This prescription is particularly designed to benefit the water vole population. Cut and remove vegetation annually from one bank during the period October to February inclusive. Cut banks in alternate years. Cut reed can be used to create grass snake mounds, as described under Prescription 9 (ESL, 2010).
17.1.11. Prescription 11: Plant monitoring in all managed areas. Compile species lists with DAFOR scores for each area before management begins and then repeat at 5- yearly intervals.
17.1.12. Prescription 12: Photographic monitoring in all managed areas. Establish a fixed point photography scheme, taking the first set of photographs before management begins and then repeat at 2-yearly intervals.
17.1.13. Prescription 13: Odonata (ie dragonflies and damselflies) monitoring. Comprehensive monitoring of Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) and Anderby Creek to Wolla Bank is undertaken annually (Bottomer & Bottomer, 2012, 2013 & 2014), in addition to monitoring in nearby areas. It would be very useful for this to continue for the next five years, especially as proposed management at Chapel Six Marshes (LCC) is expected to benefit Odonata.
17.2. Maps 6a, 6b, 6c and 6d show that much of the study area would not be affected by the proposed management prescriptions. Most of this land supports coarse vegetation and from a botanical point of view is in an unfavourable condition, but the ideal approach of extensive grazing and vegetation cutting is clearly impractical at present.
17.3. Smaller areas with a sparse sward are in a reasonable condition and it is appropriate to recommend no change, such as on car parking areas, paths and other flat land kept short by visitors’ feet and vehicle use. In addition, the foredunes north of Huttoft Car Terrace are at present not under threat from spread of dense vegetation, and therefore do not require management.
17.4. Adoption of Objective 4 (Section 16.1.4) should ensure that any impacts of new proposals are appropriately assessed before implementation. One particular activity that clearly comes into that category is the re-surfacing of paths, tracks and car parking areas, which are generally richer in plants than most other parts of the study area.
17.5. Prescriptions 9 and 10 are at least partly designed to favour grass snakes, water voles, Odonata and other wetland species. In addition, a wide range of fauna would benefit from the diversification of vegetation structure resulting from proposed
21 grassland management. In future plans, it is worth considering adoption of more obviously species-orientated prescriptions.
17.6. Widespread scrub removal or rotational management has not been advocated for several reasons, such as the international significance of native sea-buckthorn (see Section 14.1.2). Scrub is also an excellent habitat for birds, when breeding, feeding and migrating, and so this is another reason for not embarking on major change.
17.7. A general final point about management and monitoring is that it is essential to record full details of all actions taken. This involves, for example, when and where scrub cutting takes place, as well as what methods were adopted. All these data are needed to allow reliable conclusions to be reached.
18. WORK PLAN
18.1. Management proposals for the period 2015 to 2020 comprise a set of prescriptions relating to six broader objectives that are shown below in tabulated form. See also Sections 16 and 17 and Maps 6a, 6b, 6c and 6d.
Year Objective Prescription 1 2 3 4 5 1 x x x x x 2 x x x x x 3 x x x x x Enhance the nature conservation 4 x x x x x value of selected areas of 5 x grassland 6 x 7 x x x x x 8 x Enhance the nature conservation 9 x x x x x value of selected areas of wetland 10 x x x x x 11 x Assess impact of management on 12 x x x habitats and species 13 x x x x x Ensure that conservation issues are fully taken into x x x x x account during decision-making Maximise nature conservation gain on LCC and x x x x x neighbouring land Review outcomes of the current plan and produce x a new plan for 2020-25
19. MEASURES OF SUCCESS
19.1. In order to justify use of resources for habitat management, there is an understandable desire for evidence of a beneficial outcome. Unfortunately, many different factors influence the natural world, and so it is difficult to decipher the impact of individual actions and events. Nevertheless, adoption of the monitoring prescriptions (Nos. 11-13) should provide data that can be applied to four simple measures of success below. The first two apply to all habitats and the last two to wetland only.
22 19.1.1. An increase in the number of key plant species, ie LWS scoring species (GLNP, 2013).
19.1.2. An increase in frequency and abundance of key plant species, as indicated by DAFOR ratings.
19.1.3. An increase in the diversity of dragonfly and damselfly species.
19.1.4. An increase in size of individual dragonfly and damselfly populations.
20. COSTS
20.1. Management costs are extremely difficult to estimate, because individual circumstances can vary enormously. Therefore, this section attempts to indicate some of the many options and some of the costs associated with them.
20.1.1. When cutting and clearing grassland, it may be feasible to cut small areas by hand with a reciprocating mower or a flail mower at £25 per hour. A tractor would normally be essential, in conjunction with either a flail collector or hay-making equipment. These options cost about £35 per hour, but hay making would require at least three visits, whereas flail collection is a single-visit operation.
20.1.2. Very often, the disposal of bales or cut grass is not straightforward or cheap. Burning on site minimises transport costs, but may lead to accidental fires nearby and encourage unwanted vegetation to subsequently invade burning sites. Dumping of arisings on site is another cheap option, but is unlikely to be feasible or desirable. Composting can have huge transport costs and is only feasible if there is a suitable receptor site nearby. Hay bales weigh a lot less than wet grass, are easier to transport, and in some circumstances may be accepted by a local farmer willing to use them for stock bedding. However, it will cost £50 per hour to hire a tractor and trailer, unless the recipient is willing to collect the bales.
20.1.3. Sea-buckthorn eradication is difficult and expensive. Bushes can either be cut off near ground level or can be grubbed out. The latter requires a JCB at £250 per day, but the regrowth after this treatment is far less vigorous than after cutting. Both approaches will require ongoing annual herbicide treatment of regrowth at a rate of £220 per day for one knapsack operator using brushwood killer in autumn and £200 per day for control of ruderal plants in spring.
20.1.4. It should be possible to arrange a no-cost contract for felling and removal of timber, with a stipulation that all but the smallest brash is also removed. It may then be acceptable to leave the remainder on site to gradually rot away, but ideally this material should be chipped and removed.
20.1.5. Disposal of woody vegetation can be a major difficulty. As with cut grass, burning on site minimises transport costs, but may lead to accidental fires nearby and subsequent invasion by unwanted ruderal plants. Chipping is convenient but cannot be used for grubbed-out roots of sea-buckthorn, because attached sand damages chipper blades. The cost of chipper hire plus two operators is approximately £400 per day, to which must be added an unknown but potentially large amount for disposal. However, it may be possible to find a local market for the chips, and some could be used to line paths on site, which would reduce costs. Composting is another alternative, but should only be considered if there is a
23 suitable and close receptor site, because there will be both landfill and transportation costs.
20.1.6. Reed cutting and removal requires a specialist contractor experienced in use of a weed cutting boat (with two trained operators), such as Reedman Services Ltd, based near Lincoln. Only a small quantity of the cut reed is needed to create grass snake piles (see Section 17.1.9), leaving a large amount for disposal by composting, dumping or burning, all of which have drawbacks (see Sections 20.1.2 and 20.1.5). Selling reed for thatch would be an ideal, sustainable, but highly unlikely outcome.
20.1.7. As costs of travel, transport and equipment hire are significant, some savings can be made by managing larger areas less often and by carrying out several operations during one extended visit.
20.2. The costs referred to above represent average amounts charged by LWT contractors for work carried out in 2014.
21. FURTHER MANAGEMENT PROPOSALS
21.1. It is essential that new management plans continue to be produced every five years from 2020 onwards. As noted in Section 17.1, it is not feasible to expect the current plan to cover all that needs to be done, which means that much more can and should be attempted in the short to longer term. This final section outlines other action that should be considered for inclusion in future plans, or even introduced before 2020 if resourcing permits.
21.1.1. By the beginning of the next management planning period, all pine and sycamore should have been removed from part of the dune ridge to reduce predator pressure (see Section 17.1.8) and prevent loss of dune grassland. This process then needs to be continued, ideal across the whole of the study area. Top priority for further tree removal is Chapel Six Marshes (LCC), where many pine and sycamore are present and the reedbed fauna is greatly threatened by predation.
21.1.2. To the south of Marsh Yard entrance there is a strip of damp land supporting coarse grassland and plentiful willows (grey sallow, osier, and crack, goat & white willow). This area could be managed to encourage greater botanical richness in the grassland and maintain structural diversity of the woody vegetation. To achieve this, a 5 year rotation of willow cutting is suggested, plus annual grass cutting where feasible, with prompt removal of all arisings.
21.1.3. As proposed by ESL, habitat for reptiles (specifically common lizard) could be improved by creating open ‘glades’ within dense dune scrub by a combination of uprooting and burning bushes, and piling some cut material nearby. These 5-10m² areas would provide opportunities for hibernation, basking and feeding, and would be beneficial for many invertebrates (ESL, 2010).
21.1.4. ESL also advocated creation of grassland on the landward foot of the fixed dunes, by removal of scrub and rotovation to produce bare sandy areas (ESL, 2010).
21.1.5. Grazing has not been proposed elsewhere in this plan, because there is little chance that it would be possible for a variety of reasons, such public access issues, availability of animals, need for fencing, etc. However, should the opportunity
24 present itself, the widest area of dunes between Anderby Creek and Wolla Bank might be the most suitable area for introduction of cattle.
21.1.6. As discussed in Sections 14.1.1 and 15.1.6, there are major concerns about dog fouling and disturbance associated with the new permissive path from Wolla Bank to Anderby Creek. These problems are sure to multiply when the Coast Path arrives, leading for increased demands that sensitive areas used by breeding birds should be fenced off and appropriate signage installed.
21.2. Finally, it is important to emphasise that each succeeding management plan should build on experience gained during management and monitoring of the study area up to that time. Thus, many prescriptions will continually re-appear, perhaps with improvements such as changes in rotation periods or annual cutting dates.
22. REFERENCES
Bottomer, C. & Bottomer, S. (2012) Coastal Country Park Odonata Recordings 2012. Unpublished report
Bottomer, C. & Bottomer, S. (2013) Coastal Country Park Odonata Recordings 2013. Unpublished report
Bottomer, C. & Bottomer, S. (2014) Coastal Country Park Odonata Recordings 2014. Unpublished report
Collop, C. (Ed) (2012) Lincolnshire Biodiversity Action Plan 2011-2020 (3rd Edition). Lincolnshire Biodiversity Partnership
Defra (2006) Local Sites – Guidance on their Identification, Selection and Management. Defra
Dargie, T. (2002) Ecological Assessment of Hippophae rhamnoides. Unpublished report to English Nature, Contract No. 12.5.2-2
ESL (Ecological Services) Ltd. (2010) Lincolnshire Country Park: Ecological Baseline and Management Opportunities at Moggs Eye and Chapel Six Marshes. Unpublished report to Lincolnshire County Council
Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership (2013) Local Wildlife Site Guidelines for Greater Lincolnshire, 3rd Edition. Greater Lincolnshire Partnership
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006, as amended) HMSO
Protection of Badgers Act (1992) HMSO
Rooney, P., Houston, J. & Weaver, G. (2009) The Conservation and Management of Sea Buckthorn (Hippophaë rhamnoides) in the UK. Report of the workshop held at Saltfleetby- Theddlethorpe Dunes and Gibraltar Point SAC on 17-18 September 2009. Sand Dune and Shingle Network Occasional Paper No. 3. Liverpool Hope University Press
Stace, C. (1997) New Flora of the British Isles (Second Edition). Cambridge University Press
25 Tarttelin, M (2013) Lincolnshire Coastal Grazing Marshes Project Breeding Birds Surveys – April-June 2012 & Breeding Birds – Baseline 2009, 10, 11 & 12 Compilation & Summary. A restricted access document. Wild Planet Ltd.
Wild Planet Ltd. (2009) Strategic Business Plan Lincolnshire Coastal Country Park 2009-12. Wild Planet Ltd.
Wildlife & Countryside Act (1981, as amended) HMSO
23 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank staff at Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership for their major contributions with regard to data and mapping. I am also grateful for helpful input from LWT colleagues and volunteers.
26
APPENDICES
27
28
Map 1 Lincolnshire Coastal Country Park Boundary
29
30
Map 2 Lincolnshire County Council Ownership Boundary
31
32
Map 3a Land Surveyed in 2014 (1)
33
34
Map 3b Land Surveyed in 2014 (2)
35
36
Map 3c Land Surveyed in 2014 (3)
37
38
Map 3d Land Surveyed in 2014 (4)
39
40
Map 4a Nature Conservation Areas (1)
41
42
Map 4b Nature Conservation Areas (2)
43
44
Map 4c Nature Conservation Areas (3)
45
46
Map 5a Habitat Areas (1)
47
48
Map 5b Habitat Areas (2)
49
50
Map 5c Habitat Areas (3)
51
52
Map 5d Habitat Areas (4)
53
54
Map 6a Management Areas (1)
55
56
Map 6b Management Areas (2)
57
58
Map 6c Management Areas (3)
59
60
Map 6d Management Areas (4)
61
62