URBAN DESIGN GROUP Since 1983 I a Space - Stimulating Peoples Interest

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

URBAN DESIGN GROUP Since 1983 I a Space - Stimulating Peoples Interest Ln• cHi iiL-Vsi.-. >•>'._.-.«•.•• • rnntnrwa 7 198 N AUTUM 4 °2 E U S °IS CONTENTS URBAN METROPOLIS 2000 John Cunningham M.P. answers back. London's landscape plan? DESIGN Goode nature in the city. den Ruyter and Hinse. QUARTERLY Barcelona, Hong Kong and Singapore Suburbanization answers back. was stick in people society wished to ignore, with URBAN DESIGN QUARTERLY No. 24 SEPTEMBER 1987 only poverty in common. And history wonders why high-rises failed. separated by garages, is not the basis of any Why not renovate these tcwer blocks so that they village I know. The appearance of our villages become part private, part public, each contributing should matter more than whether private cars gain a to create a communality, reducing envy making patina of rust standing in the rain. inequalities? Why not government quotas so that private developers restore tcwer blocks selling 70% There should be no questions, and therefore no and returning 30% to locals on waiting lists? Indeed problems, regarding the land coming out of culti- one bright light in our erupting yuppie city is that vation before the end of this century. The redun- for the first time in years it is becoming profit- dant land gives us one last chance to recreate and able for developers to build apartments rather than restore a real rural environment and cover so much offices. As it becomes unfashionable for a yuppie past damage. There is no need for suburban hones to live at the end of a railway line, central London and tiresome pine plantations rather hefty, meaty could become reinhabited, a proper city centre full oak forests, deciduous autumns and revitalized of enough people to show signs of life after 6 pm. ecosystems. Who knows, by 2001 the borders of the One can only go on to hope that the process could city and countryside might become distinguishable spread; with the opening of Canary Wharf old 18th once again instead of our late 20th century blur. and 19th century townhouses, such as in Bloomsbury and St James, could be relieved of their type- Landscape architecture is not left untouched by this writers, the strip lighting removed and humans process. Its most obvious action in our cities must returned; exquisitely tasteful homes now being more be the garden festivals. Where do the festivals get valuable than offices and another defence against landscape architects and where, more importantly, rampant inner city suburbanism. What a dream. does it get our cities? Instead of an inheritance of splendid urban parks we have the expensive kitsch Planners have also been allowed to bring petit of a Hemel Hempstead back garden; great industry bourgeois lifestyles into our urban fabric. Who put into the creation of what the public accept and allowed them to say that cars should have a expect rather than something they can admire. And priority? People living in the suburbs who wish to the final result is more cosmetic green parkland commute? I am urban therefore I walk. I am urban settings for inner-city housing. Like an unwelcome therefore I take public transport. The Euston Road guest crashing a masked ball suburban housing underpass amongst others should be filled in, the estates get in where they should have been left out. Finchley Road narrowed detering the daily queues of one passenger cars, encouraging humans to mingle and Unfortunately for landscape architects the suburban therefore to live. Singapore has resolved this ethos of their profession is less their choice than problem. Each car entering the central area without that of their patrons. Surrounded by architectural 4 passengers must buy a pass and thus, in effect, is clients, landscape architects are repeatedly called fined. upon to plant in the most inappropriate of places. It is as if an entire profession (architecture) has Roads in London have always been of an adequate size intentionally misunderstood another (landscape for buses, deliveries and ambulances, only 6 lane architecture), the former pressing its claim to motorways could ever make than suitable for the superiority by asking only for latin plant names private car. To sacrifice London to the require- from the latter, and thus missing the point ments of the car is aesthetically and politically entirely. The awful result for our cities is a suburban, suggesting that all residents have a fabric unsuccessfully "softened", ie suburbanized, similar ability to own cars. I can think of only by injudicious planting, when a hard solution would one type of environment where car ownership must be have been far more suitable. It seems that land- the norm1 - the suburbs. In a real city it is only scape architects, left to design as they have been a minority who can afford to run, and increasingly, to park a car; it is the majority who must use public transport. For planners to respond to the car is to define our cities in physically and politically alien ideas. As such the M25 is a relief from the constant on- slaught. Taking traffic away frcm London the city centre is less frequently used as sane great motor- way interchange. But one fears the motorway will encourage other hideous results. Will it lead to greater pressure for arterial routes through London? Perhaps city motorways to link Victoria coach station to the new orbital road? If private cars were severely reduced public coaches could speed to the M25 junctions on nearly empty roads, slowing down occasionally for the odd bus to trained, could create far more urban, exciting overtake a motorcar for the disabled. surroundings then the usual row of evergreen shrubs and dying planes that they are habitually called The M25 also encourages the spread of that appalling upon to "design". developer's excuse for destruction, 'infill', that somehow it is perfectly acceptable to build an MFI Throughout these pages I am not advocating a return warehouse in half of a severed green field. Our to some unpleasant past nor a trite pastiche of maturing motorways of the sixties and the seventies English countryside that responds superficially to show their increasing integration into the land- its inhabitants. Keeping our cities urban and our scape. Severed areas, particularly on the contin- villages rural makes as much aesthetic as financial ent, are planted with forestry or are left, untouch- sense. Increasing public transport encourages ed by any human to nurture a small scale environ- higher employment and reduces pollution of our ment. Cheap furniture warehouses are not the only environment. Local shops would re-open in both our alternatives to left-over land. The urban, or cities and villages, also demanding more labour. rather the suburban, sprawl must not be encouraged. Urban and rural areas would become more localised, more communal with the added benefit of less crime. Rural areas have suffered suburbanization almost as Vandalism would be reduced with greater urban heavily as our cities. Who is not increasingly population densities leading to less unwatched disgusted by the spread of 'rural' style closes and streets, the community more ready to look after its the like at the edge of our once compact villages? own. It is all very well using real slate roofs and sash windows but to determine layout by vehicular access, A city untouched by alien ideas. Let us leave the to design houses suitable for cars is to destroy our suburbs to become retirement zones for those who rural fabric and merely fulfil suburban aspira- have opted out of real life, soft options for a tions. Convenient sight lines for cars, houses culture without a core. URBAN DESIGN QUARTERLY No. 24 SEPTEMBER 1987 THE SUBURBANIZATION OF LONDON by John Welsh In my mind I know the city from the countryside, the suitable for a junction on the M25. The facade of village from the High Street, but something seems to Islington's Upper Street has been damaged to allow have gone wrong. My city should be busy with people for vehicular access while redundant land has become and dirty, innovative and sometimes sinful, my a suburban lawn. How dare such a grand building be village should be quiet and attractive, sitting on ignored until it becomes an under-used convention age old custom and foundations. Instead the reality centre, of which London has too many already, why is a blur. I drive out of a city where the concept not some great civic building such as a new museum? of strolling is barricaded behind gratings, passing Paris got the Musee d'Orsay and we got the tackiness imitations of inner-city Cotswold cottages and of 1980s tinseltown. finally hit something similar to countryside; tree- less, hedgeless and built-up. I am no longer sure It is easy to see scorn as Elitism, to see bad taste which is city or village. as a response to "the people's" wishes but a pro- fession is trained to lead. Architects, planners v 0) c -H Cn rt E •H o ,c o w •o c 05 o O My twentieth century city has become smothered by and landscape architects all seem to have fallen the symbols and ideas of an alien force. That of into a trap, responding to a suburban ideal when the suburbs. It seeks to rationalize and segregate, dealing with the city while forgetting exactly why to sterilize and make sensible all that is grand and and how it is we live there. glorious in our pompous cities. I am not seeking a Krieresque image of Italianate lifestyles but rather The city has always been the centre for innovation. attempting to reclaim London. To build pastiche, to build in quaint materials is not the action of a city architect.
Recommended publications
  • YORK HOUSE MAY 2017 Ecological Appraisal and Bat Building Inspection
    YORK HOUSE_MAY 2017 Ecological Appraisal and Bat Building Inspection 21 February 2017 Fred Samaha Quantem Consulting LLP 3rd Floor Quality House Quality Court Chancery Lane London WC2A 1HP Dear Fred, York House, Islington – Ecological Appraisal and Bat Building Inspection Thank you for commissioning EPR, on behalf of The Office Group (TOG) to carry out an Ecological Appraisal and Bat Building Inspection on York House, 207-221 Pentonville Road within the borough of Islington. I understand that the current proposals include the addition of two floors to the existing building, plus extensions to the basement, reception and to the rear of the building; hereby referred to as the “Proposed Works”. York House is situated at National Grid Reference TQ306830 in the South West of the Islington Borough on Pentonville Road; approximately 480m east from Kings Cross St Pancras Train Station and 200m west from the Joseph Grimaldi Park. The surrounding land-use is a complex of office, retail and residential blocks within a largely urban setting of Islington, North London. This letter provides a summary of the survey methods, results and recommendations following the Bat Building Inspection with consideration for the predicted likely Zone of Influence of the proposed refurbishment works. This letter covers the ecological issues related to the Proposed Works in respect of the potential to affect roosting bats and any other ecological receptors. Zone of Influence In order to identify the full extent of any potential ecological issues associated with the Proposed Works, I have considered the likely Zone of Influence (ZoI) of the proposals. Considering the Proposed Works, most biophysical changes are likely to extend only to the building itself and immediately adjacent land; this has been identified as the Zone of Influence of the scheme.
    [Show full text]
  • Lbr 2008 Front Matter
    London Natural History Society The Society publishes ornithological and other natural history records for the area within 20 miles of St Paul’s Cathedral. As well as Ornithology, other interests in natural history are catered for through the Society's Sections which record and study the major groups of flora and fauna, and the habitats in which they are found. Meetings organised by each Section are open to all members. New members, beginners and experts alike, are welcomed. An extensive programme of talks and field meetings, to which visitors are welcome, is provided throughout the year. As well as the annual London Bird Report, the Society publishes a journal, The London Naturalist, each year and its Newsletter and Bulletin of the London Bird Club every quarter. Members have access to a large lending and reference library of natural history books and can join one or more of several reading circles which circulate many natural history journals at a fraction of the cost of subscribing direct. Yearly subscriptions range from £20 (for ordinary membership) through £16 for senior members (over 65 years and who have been in continuous membership for ten years or more) to £5 for students (under 18 years of age, or receiving full-time education). Additional family members, who enjoy all the benefits of membership except separate publications, pay only £4 each. Cheques should be made payable to the London Natural History Society and sent to the Assistant Treasurer: Robin Blades, 32 Ashfield Road, London N14 7JY. Further copies of this issue of the London Bird Report may be obtained (price £8.00 plus £1.00 postage and packing in the UK) from: Catherine Schmitt, 4 Falkland Avenue, London, N3 1QR.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Flag Award Winners 2020
    Green Flag Award Winners 2020 East Midlands Green Flag Award 134 winners Park Title Managing Organisation Belper Cemetery Amber Valley Borough Council Belper Parks Amber Valley Borough Council Belper River Gardens Amber Valley Borough Council Crays Hill Recreation Ground Amber Valley Borough Council Crossley Park Amber Valley Borough Council Heanor Memorial Park Amber Valley Borough Council Pennytown Ponds Local Nature Reserve Amber Valley Borough Council Riddings Park Amber Valley Borough Council Ampthill Great Park Ampthill Town Council Rutland Water Anglian Water Services Ltd Ashby de la Zouth Bath Grounds Ashby de la Zouch Town Council Brierley Forest Park Ashfield District Council Kingsway Park Ashfield District Council Lawn Pleasure Grounds Ashfield District Council Portland Park Ashfield District Council Selston Golf Course Ashfield District Council Titchfield Park Hucknall Ashfield District Council Kings Park Bassetlaw District Council The Canch (Memorial Gardens) Bassetlaw District Council Belper Memorial Gardens Belper Town Council A Place To Grow Blaby District Council Glen Parva and Glen Hills Local Nature Reserves Blaby District Council Bramcote Hills Park Broxtowe Borough Council Colliers Wood Broxtowe Borough Council Chesterfield Canal (Kiveton Park to West Stockwith) Canal & River Trust Erewash Canal Canal & River Trust Nottingham and Beeston Canal Canal & River Trust Queen’s Park Charnwood Borough Council Chesterfield Crematorium Chesterfield Borough Council Eastwood Park Chesterfield Borough Council Holmebrook Valley
    [Show full text]
  • Find Your London Festival Programme
    FIND YOUR LONDON FESTIVAL PROGRAMME 18 - 28 March 2016 london.gov.uk/findyourlondon EVENT MOOD TRANSPORT To help you make the most INFORMATION of the festival, we’ve come For detailed information on up with five different moods. local transport and directions So whatever your mood to each event please you’ll be sure to find a great visit: www.london.gov.uk/ day out. findyourlondon Active IMPORTANT: Festival Curious details can change. For the Inspire most up to date information Play on all Find Your London Relax events please check www. london.gov.uk/findyourlondon before you go. 60% 20% discount discount on entry with this on entry with this Find Your London Find Your London programme programme *Valid from 21-24 March 2 FIND YOUR LONDON FESTIVAL Come outside and explore your city this spring with the Find Your London Festival. From 18-28 March, we invite you to celebrate London’s great outdoor spaces from gardens to parks, high streets to marketplaces. This 11-day festival features over 100 events in each and every corner of London. That means it’s a fantastic opportunity to discover new places, join in fun outdoor activities and put a spring back in your step. There’ll be everything from mind up and make the most yoga in the park, cycle of the festival, we’ve come trails and treasure hunts, up with five different moods. to beekeeping, an Alice in So whether you’re looking to Wonderland Tea Party and be Active, Curious, Playful, much more besides. There Relaxed or Inspired, you’ll are also activities for every find your perfect day out age, from eight to 80 and at Find Your London.
    [Show full text]
  • GOOD PARKS for LONDON 2020 Parks and the Pandemic
    ''Investing in green space every day, not just in times of crisis, is critical.'' Dr Meredith Whitten GOOD PARKS FOR LONDON 2020 Parks and the Pandemic Sponsored by GOOD PARKS FOR LONDON 2020 Contents Foreword 4 Part two Introduction 6 Greater London Authority and the London Acknowledgements 6 Green Spaces Commission 54 From the Chief Executive 8 Signature parks and green spaces Thoughts from our sponsor 9 a) City of London Corporation Open Spaces 56 Overall scores 12 b) The Royal Parks 58 c) Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park 60 Part one d) Potters Fields Park 62 Good Parks for London criteria Capel Manor College 64 1. Public satisfaction 14 Contractors 2. Awards for quality 18 a) Glendale 66 3. Collaboration 22 b) idverde 68 4. Events 26 Case studies 5. Health, fitness and wellbeing 30 a) Parks for Health in Camden and Islington 70 6. Supporting nature 34 b) Parklets in a pandemic 74 7. Community involvement 38 Thanks to our supporters 76 8. Skills development 42 9. Sustainability 46 10. Strategic planning 48 2 GOOD PARKS FOR LONDON 2020 Foreword From grand Victorian parks and sweeping green spaces, such as vegetated roofs. All of these improve existing spaces, while constantly striving to To ensure London’s parks heaths and commons, to biodiverse natural sizes and shapes of green space are valuable. introduce new green spaces. and green spaces remain areas and picturesque green squares, Collectively, they contribute to an interconnected, resilient, we can’t sit green space has long been a ubiquitous multifunctional network of green space across The Good Parks for London report is instrumental passively by or rest on part of life in London.
    [Show full text]
  • Tooting Common M a N a G E M E N T P L a N
    TOOTING COMMON M A N A G E M E N T P L A N Picnickers on Tooling Common c.1900. CONTENTS PAGE NO. 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 SURVEY 2 2.1 Introduction 2 2.2 Flora and Fauna 2 2.3 Landscape Features 2 2.4 Circulation 3 2.5 Recreational Use 3 2.6 Underground Services 3 2.7 Artifacts 3 2.8 Microclimate 3 2.9 Geology Soils Topography 3 2.10 History 4 2.11 Consultation 5 2.12 Planning Considerations 5 3.0 ANALYSIS OF PROBLEMS 3.1 Introduction 6 3.2 Movement Patterns/pathways 6 3.2.2 Vehicles 6 3.2.12 Cycling 8 3.2.15 Pathways 8 3.2.21 Horseriding 10 3.2.23 Illegal Access 10 3.2.24 Lighting 11 3.2.27 carparking 11 J.•2.29 Furniture and signs 12 3.2.20 The disabled 13 3.2.31 staff facilities 13 3.3 Recreation 3.3.l Analysis active recreation 14 3.3.2 Football Pitches 14 3.3.10 Tennis 15 3.3.11 Cricket 15 3.3.12 Athletics track 15 3.3.16 The Lido 16 3.3.26 Childrens Play 18 3.3.21 Horseriding 21 3.3.52 Putting Green 23 3.3.53 Trim Trail 23 3.3.54 Cycling 23 3.3.55 Passive Recreation 23 3.3.56 Dogs 23 3.3.57 Fishing 23 3.3.59 The Yachting Pond 24 3.3.62 Events 24 3.3.68 Refreshments 25 3.3.69 Other facilities 25 3.3.76 The Nature Trail 26 3.3.77 Historical Trail 26 3.3.78 Historical features 26 3.3.84 Sculpture 27 3.4 Flora and Fauna/Landscape 28 3.45 Woodlands, trees 29 3.4.11 Recommended species list 31 3.4.23 Wetlands 34 3.4.26 Damp/West Grassland 34 3.4.27 Improved, semi improved grasslands 35 3.4.28 Scrub 35 3.5 Nature conservation education and interpretation 36 3.6 Management Demands and User Restrictions 37 3.7 Surrounding Areas 39 3.8 Buildings
    [Show full text]
  • Green Flag Award Winners 2020
    Green Flag Award Winners 2020 East Midlands Green Flag Award 134 winners Park Title Managing Organisation Belper Cemetery Amber Valley Borough Council Belper Parks Amber Valley Borough Council Belper River Gardens Amber Valley Borough Council Crays Hill Recreation Ground Amber Valley Borough Council Crossley Park Amber Valley Borough Council Heanor Memorial Park Amber Valley Borough Council Pennytown Ponds Local Nature Reserve Amber Valley Borough Council Riddings Park Amber Valley Borough Council Ampthill Great Park Ampthill Town Council Rutland Water Anglian Water Services Ltd Ashby de la Zouth Bath Grounds Ashby de la Zouch Town Council Brierley Forest Park Ashfield District Council Kingsway Park Ashfield District Council Lawn Pleasure Grounds Ashfield District Council Portland Park Ashfield District Council Selston Golf Course Ashfield District Council Titchfield Park Hucknall Ashfield District Council Kings Park Bassetlaw District Council The Canch (Memorial Gardens) Bassetlaw District Council Belper Memorial Gardens Belper Town Council A Place To Grow Blaby District Council Glen Parva and Glen Hills Local Nature Reserves Blaby District Council Bramcote Hills Park Broxtowe Borough Council Colliers Wood Broxtowe Borough Council Chesterfield Canal (Kiveton Park to West Stockwith) Canal & River Trust Erewash Canal Canal & River Trust Nottingham and Beeston Canal Canal & River Trust Queen’s Park Charnwood Borough Council Chesterfield Crematorium Chesterfield Borough Council Eastwood Park Chesterfield Borough Council Holmebrook Valley
    [Show full text]
  • Friends of Stave Hill and Friends of Russia Dock Woodland Response to Environmental Impact Assessment, K1 Development APPLICATION - 18/AP/1604
    Friends of Stave Hill and Friends of Russia Dock Woodland response to Environmental Impact Assessment, K1 development APPLICATION - 18/AP/1604 Section 1 - Executive summary. We, the Friends of Stave Hill, submit that the environmental impact assessment (EIA) put forward by Watermans/GIA on behalf of British Land does not provide sufficient detail or information on the following essential points: • The range of species diversity, both flora and fauna. In the detailed response, we submit that the environmental impact assessment submitted in support of the proposed K1 development does not provide a full indication of the site’s biodiversity, nor does the EIA recognise the importance of that biodiversity. In brief, the EIA has not: 1. undertaken full vegetation surveys 2. undertaken any fauna surveys 3. taken note of existing and recorded flora and fauna 4. fully assessed the impact of the proposed development on existing flora and fauna 5. recognised the value of the sites’ species diversity at local and London-wide levels. • The impact of shading on the landscape of the Local Nature Reserve as a whole. In the detailed response, we submit that the environmental impact assessment submitted in support of the proposed K1 development does not address the wider issues of shading on part of an area managed as a whole landscape. In brief, the EIA does not consider: 1. In order to promote, increase and conserve biodiversity, the site is managed as a whole landscape. An impact on one section will affect the whole site, reducing areas available for forage, shelter, nesting, breeding and early development.
    [Show full text]
  • Reedbed Conservation in London.Indd
    This booklet was produced by the London Biodiversity Partnership Reedbeds Habitat Action Plan Working Group, and published in association with Reed Elsevier Press. Reedbed Conservation For an electronic copy of this booklet, Biodiversity Action Plans for London and further information, visit the LBP website: www.lbp.org.uk in London Ten London Boroughs have been identifi ed with reedbeds of over half a hectare in extent. Some key sites for reedbed conservation in London boroughs that you can visit include: • LB Barking & Dagenham: the Chase Nature Reserve - contact London Wildlife Trust, Tel: 020-72610447. • LB Bexley: Crossness Nature Reserve - contact Thames Water, Tel: 0118-3738608. • LB Brent: Brent Reservoir - contact British Waterways, Tel: 020-74328309, or Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre, Tel: 020-82000087. • LB Greenwich: Greenwich Peninsula (and tidal Thames) - contact the Environment Agency, Tel: 0870-8506506. • LB Havering: Ingrebourne Marshes Nature Reserve - contact LB Havering Parks department, Tel: 01708-434743; Rainham Marshes Reserve - contact RSPB, Tel: 01708-892900. • LB Hillingdon: Frays Farm - contact London Wildlife Trust, Tel: 020-72610447. • LB Hounslow: Bedfont Lakes Country Park - contact Bedfont Lakes CP, Tel: 01784-423556; Kempton Park Nature Reserve - contact Thames Water, Tel: 0118-3738608. • LB Newham: Bow Creek Ecology Park - contact Lee Valley Regional Park Authority, Tel: 01992-717711. • LB Richmond upon Thames: Crane Park Island Nature Reserve - contact London Wildlife Trust, Tel: 020-72610447; London Wetland Centre - contact Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust, Tel: 020-84094400; Lonsdale Road Nature Reserve - contact LB Richmond, Tel: 020-88316125; Pen Ponds, Richmond Park - contact The Royal Parks, Tel: 020-89483209 • LB Southwark: Lavender Pond Nature Park - contact Trust for Urban Ecology, Tel: 020-72320498.
    [Show full text]
  • Winter 1988/89
    he Dulwich Society TO FOSTER AND SAFEGUARD THE AMENITIES OF DULWICH Winter 1988-89 THE DULWICH SOCIETY NEWSLETTER 83 WINTER 1 988-89 CONTENTS Editorial Comment:The Governors on Trial ••• As many readers and members will remember, the growing chorus 3 of dissatisfaction with the Dulwich estates governors finally News ••• surfaced, thanks to the society, at a public meeting last February. 5 In its way, it was a momentous meeting: for the first time on Sydenham Hill Wood:The Conf'l.ict and the Future 14 such a scale the governors came face to face with their critics and had to respond to them on the spot, in public and with several Jim Davis:An Appreciation ••• 16 hundred witnesses present. Although there were many critics, and many individual criticisms, Horticulture ••• 16 the fundamental direction of the protests was easier to summarise. It lay in the feeling that the governors constituted a kind of Wildlife.••• 17 ,20 invisible oligopoly, a self-perpetuating, undemocratic and unresponsive cabal whose interests - exemplified in their apparently Trees: .Dulwich Wood Stays Open ••• 18 obsessive urge to cover parts of Sydenham Hill Wood with bricks d and mortar - seemed increasingly at odds with the interests and Grapevine ••• 19 1 wishes of the vast bulk of people living in Dulwich. It was, inevitably, an angry meeting. It was, for many of Wildlife Sightings ••• 20 those 9resent, both illuminating and exasperating. It was probably too short. From the floor came a bombardment of complaints of Governors and Residents:A Progress Report ••• 21 letters left unanswered, jobs left unattended, promises repeated many times yet still unfulfilled, From the governors there Children at the Picture Gallery ••• 25 came an acknowledgement of the strength of feeling of their critics coupled with an admission that their performance had not been up to John Alexander-Sinclair ••• 26 scratch and an assurance that it would improve.
    [Show full text]
  • Sat 7 Nov Virtual AGM Page 6
    Autumn/WinterSURREY 2020 SkipperNumber 70 Sat 7 Nov Virtual AGM page 6 Butterfly Conservation Saving butterflies, moths Surrey & SW London & our environment Surrey Skipper 2 Autumn 2020 Branch Committee Chair Simon Saville (first elected 2016) 07572 612722 Conservation Adviser Ken Willmott (1995) 01372 375773 Field Trips Mike Weller (1997) 01306 882097 Membership Ken Owen (2015) 01737 760811 Moth Officer Paul Wheeler (2006) 01276 856183 Skipper Editor Francis Kelly (2012) 07952 285661, 01483 278432 Social Media Francis Kelly (& Mick Rock) see above Transects & WCBS Coordinator Bill Downey (2015) 07917 243984, 0208 949 5498 Treasurer Peter Camber (2011) 0208 224 2957 Website Francis Kelly & Ken Owen see above Committee member Clive Huggins (2014) 0208 942 7846 ALSO National Council Chair Karen Goldie-Morrison (Branch member) County Recorders Butterflies Harry Clarke, Moths Graham Collins Branch reserve Oaken Wood Steve Wheatley Media [email protected] Website butterfly-conservation.org/surrey Twitter @BC_Surrey, @surreymoths Recording irecord.org.uk Facebook Branch page Butterfly Conservation in Surrey Groups Surrey Butterflies (Mick Rock), Surrey Moths Conservation groups Small Blues in Surrey, Wealden Wood Whites Surrey Skipper thank you to all contributors copy deadline published online Spring end Feb ....................mid-March includes new season’s field trips Autumn end Sep ....................mid-October previews AGM & Members’ Day n The full Surrey Skipper is published online only. A Small Skipper is posted to the 10% of members for whom we do not have an email address. Front-page picture Black Hairstreak, Epsom Common, Jun 5, Mick Rock. See page 11 LINK When reading on screen, click underlined link to visit webpage © Surrey Skipper is published by Surrey & SW London Branch of Butterfly Conservation, a charity registered in England & Wales (254937) and Scotland (SCO39268).
    [Show full text]
  • British Journal of Entomology and Natural History
    h2000 ISSN 0952-7583 Vol. 13, Part 1 .461 374 , 13 D. 1 larch 2000 J5RITISH JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY ^^ATOMo^ Or. BRITISH JOURNAL OF ENTOMOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTOR^ Published by the British Entomological and Natural History Society and incorporating its Proceedings and Transactions Editor: M. Wilson. Ph.D.. F.R.E.S.. F.L.S. Departmenl of Biodiversilv & Svstemalic Biology. National Museums & Galleries of Wales, Cardiff CFIO 3NP. (Tel: 02920 573263. Fax: 02920 239009) email: Mike. Wilson c nmgw.ac.uk Associate Editor: Richard A. Jones. B.Sc. F.R.E.S.. F.L.S. 135 Friern Road, East Dulwich, London SE22 OAZ. EiliUinul (jimmittee: D. J. L. Agassiz:. M.A .. Ph.D.. F.R.E.S.1 T. G. Howarth, B.E..V1., F.R.E.S. R. D. G. Barrin gton. B.Sc L F. G. McLean, Ph.D.. F.R.E.S P. J. Chandler. B.Sc. F.R.E.S. M. J. Simmons. M.Sc. B. Goater. B.Sc .. M.LBiol. P. A. Sokoloff. M.Sc. C.Biol.. .M.LBiol.. F.R.E.S. A. J. Halstead. M.Sc., F.R.E.S. T. R. E. Southwood. KB.. D.Sc, F.R.E.S. R. D. Hawkins. MA. R. W. J. Uffen. M.Sc, F.R.E.S. P. J. Hodge B. K. West, B.Ed. British Journal of Entomology ami Natural History is published by the British Entomological and Natural History Society, Dinton Pastures Country Park. Davis Street, Hurst, Reading, Berkshire RGIO OTH. UK. Tel: 01 189-321402. The Journal is distributed free to BENHS members.
    [Show full text]