Explanatory Memoir to Accompany Sheet 57 of the Geological Survey
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
SY000009.Pdf
SITE SYNOPSIS SITE NAME: SLIEVE RUSHEN BOG NHA SITE CODE: 000009 Slieve Rushen Bog NHA is an extensive upland blanket bog, occurring on the south- east margin of the Cuilcagh Mountain range, approximately 6.5 km south-east of Swanlinbar, Co. Cavan. The northern and north-eastern sides of the site adjoin the international border with Northern Ireland. Conifer plantations extending to the mountain plateau form parts of the north-west, west, south and south-eastern boundaries. Site boundaries in the areas between these plantations include the perimeter of wind power installations, turbary ground and transitions to rough pasture and semi-improved agricultural lands. The townlands covered by the site include Aghanacally, Ballynamadoo, Corneen, Finaghoo, Gortnavreeghan, Legavregra, Finthilough and Mullanacre Upper. This large site occurs on a broad-topped mountain ridge, with a smaller parallel ridge to the north-west, with flat plateaux and gently sloping areas between the ridges. Bedrock geology is shale and sandstone. In flat and gently sloping terrain the blanket bog is very intact, with wet and locally quaking areas, occasional bog pools and excellent hummock-hollow development. Intact bog moss hummocks up to 1 m wide are common. The higher slopes support drier mountain blanket bog and dry heath habitat, while the lower slopes within the site are covered by dry heath, upland grassland and cutover bog. The areas of intact blanket bog vegetation are dominated by Ling Heather (Calluna vulgaris), Deergrass (Scirpus cespitosus) and cottongrasses (Eriophorum spp.), frequent swards of Purple Moor-grass (Molinia caerulea) and abundant Cross-leaved Heath (Erica tetralix) and Bog Asphodel (Narthecium ossifragum). -
Irish Landscape Names
Irish Landscape Names Preface to 2010 edition Stradbally on its own denotes a parish and village); there is usually no equivalent word in the Irish form, such as sliabh or cnoc; and the Ordnance The following document is extracted from the database used to prepare the list Survey forms have not gained currency locally or amongst hill-walkers. The of peaks included on the „Summits‟ section and other sections at second group of exceptions concerns hills for which there was substantial www.mountainviews.ie The document comprises the name data and key evidence from alternative authoritative sources for a name other than the one geographical data for each peak listed on the website as of May 2010, with shown on OS maps, e.g. Croaghonagh / Cruach Eoghanach in Co. Donegal, some minor changes and omissions. The geographical data on the website is marked on the Discovery map as Barnesmore, or Slievetrue in Co. Antrim, more comprehensive. marked on the Discoverer map as Carn Hill. In some of these cases, the evidence for overriding the map forms comes from other Ordnance Survey The data was collated over a number of years by a team of volunteer sources, such as the Ordnance Survey Memoirs. It should be emphasised that contributors to the website. The list in use started with the 2000ft list of Rev. these exceptions represent only a very small percentage of the names listed Vandeleur (1950s), the 600m list based on this by Joss Lynam (1970s) and the and that the forms used by the Placenames Branch and/or OSI/OSNI are 400 and 500m lists of Michael Dewey and Myrddyn Phillips. -
The Geological Heritage of Clare
The Geological Heritage of County Leitrim An audit of County Geological Sites in County Leitrim by Matthew Parkes, Robert Meehan, Vincent Gallagher and Ronan Hennessy 2020 The County Leitrim Geological Heritage Project was supported by 1 For the: Geoheritage Programme Geological Survey of Ireland Beggars Bush Haddington Road Dublin, D04 K7X4 01-6782837 and Sarah Malone Heritage Officer Leitrim County Council Áras an Chontae Carrick-on-Shannon Co. Leitrim, N41 PF67 Email: [email protected] Dedication This audit is dedicated to the memory our colleague and friend, Matthew Parkes, who passed away suddenly in the days prior to completion of the audit’s work. Matthew was an exceptional geologist with a keen eye for detail and an expertise in numerous sub- disciplines of geology. He was inquiring in the field, had huge output in terms of peer reviewed papers, and gave tirelessly to students of geology, of any age, with diligence, care, and passion. Matthew was probably the driving force behind Geoheritage in Ireland, having initially worked in the mid-1990’s on the then-blossoming Irish Geological Heritage Programme in Geological Survey Ireland, and latterly as curator in the Natural History Museum. Matthew worked on and co-authored every one of the reports for the twenty four County Geological Heritage Audits completed thus far in Ireland. This Geological Heritage Audit was funded by the Heritage Council and Leitrim County Council. 2 Contents Section 1 – Main Report Executive Summary 6 1. County Leitrim in the context of Irish Geological Heritage 7 1.1 Leitrim County Geological Sites 10 1.2 Rejected, combined and renamed sites 11 2. -
The Geological Heritage of County Leitrim
The Geological Heritage of County Leitrim An audit of County Geological Sites in County Leitrim by Matthew Parkes, Robert Meehan, Vincent Gallagher and Ronan Hennessy 2020 The County Leitrim Geological Heritage Project was supported by 1 For the: Geoheritage Programme Geological Survey of Ireland Beggars Bush Haddington Road Dublin 4 01-6782837 and Sarah Malone Heritage Officer Leitrim County Council Áras an Chontae Carrick-on-Shannon Co. Leitrim Email: [email protected] Dedication This audit is dedicated to the memory our colleague and friend, Matthew Parkes, who passed away suddenly in the days prior to completion of the audit’s work. Matthew was an exceptional geologist with a keen eye for detail and an expertise in numerous sub- disciplines of geology. He was inquiring in the field, had huge output in terms of peer reviewed papers, and gave tirelessly to students of geology, of any age, with diligence, care, and passion. Matthew was probably the driving force behind Geoheritage in Ireland, having initially worked in the mid-1990’s on the then-blossoming Irish Geological Heritage Programme in GSI, and latterly as curator in the Natural History Museum. Matthew worked on and co-authored every one of the reports for the twenty four County Geological Heritage Audits completed thus far in Ireland. This Geological Heritage Audit was funded by the Heritage Council and Leitrim County Council. 2 Contents Section 1 – Main Report Executive Summary 7 1. County Leitrim in the context of Irish Geological Heritage 8 1.1 Leitrim County Geological Sites 11 1.2 Rejected, combined and renamed sites 12 2. -
About the Walks
WALKING IN FERMANAGH About the Walks The walks have been graded into four categories Easy Short walks generally fairly level going on well surfaced routes. Moderate Longer walks with some gradients and generally on well surfaced routes. Moderate/Difficult Some off road walking. Good footwear recommended. Difficult This only applies to Walk 20, a long walk only suitable for more experienced walkers correctly equipped. For those looking for a longer walk it is possible to combine some walks. These are numbers 10 and 11, 12 and 13, 18 and 20, and 24 and 25. Disclaimer Note: The maps used in this guide are taken from the original publication, published in 2000. Use of these maps is at your own risk. Bear in mind that the countryside is continually changing. This is especially true of forest areas, mainly due to the clearfelling programme. In the forests some of the footpaths may also change, either upgraded as funds become available or re-routed to overcome upkeep problems and reduce costs. These routes are not waymarked but should be by the summer of 2007. Metal barriers may well be repositioned or even removed. A new edition of the book, ‘25 Walks in Fermanagh’ will be coming out in the near future. please follow the principles of Leave No Trace Plan ahead and prepare Travel and camp on durable surfaces Dispose of waste properly Leave what you find Minimise campfire impacts Respect Wildlife Be considerate of other visitors WALKING IN FERMANAGH Useful Information This walking guide was commissioned by Fermanagh District Council who own the copyright of the text, maps, and associated photographs. -
The 2015 National Survey of Breeding Hen Harrier in Ireland
ISSN 1393 – 6670 The 2015 National Survey of Breeding Hen Harrier in Ireland Irish Wildlife Manuals No. 93 The 2015 National Survey of Breeding Hen Harrier in Ireland Ruddock, M., Mee, A., Lusby, J., Nagle, T., O’Neill, S. & O’Toole, L. Golden Eagle Trust, Irish Raptor Study Group & BirdWatch Ireland Citation: Ruddock, M., Mee, A., Lusby, J., Nagle, A., O’Neill, S. & O’Toole, L. (2016). The 2015 National Survey of Breeding Hen Harrier in Ireland. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 93. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of the Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, Ireland. Keywords: Hen harrier, Circus cyaneus, Special Protection Area (SPA), national survey, population estimates, pressures, productivity, habitats Site list: 004160; 004161; 004162; 004165; 004167; 004168. Cover photo: © Marc Ruddock The NPWS Project Officer for this report was: David Tierney; [email protected] Irish Wildlife Manuals Series Editors: R. Jeffrey & F. Marnell © National Parks and Wildlife Service 2016 ISSN 1393 – 6670 Ireland Hen Harrier Survey 2015 ____________________________ Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................................... i Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................................... -
5 Identification of Potential Water-Based Receptors
Final Report 1: Baseline Characterisation of Groundwater, Surface Water and Aquatic Ecosystems 5 Identification of Potential Water-based Receptors Potential receptors of UGEE-related contamination are surface water and groundwater bodies, water supplies (abstractions) that source water from surface and groundwater resources, registered protected areas, and groundwater dependent terrestrial ecosystems (GWDTEs). This section describes potential water-based receptors that are present in each of the case study areas, which depend on the surface and groundwater resources described in Sections 2 and 3. Surface and groundwater resources are inherently linked. Groundwater provides baseflow and supporting conditions for streams, lakes and GWDTEs which is especially important during prolonged dry weather conditions. Daly and Craig (2009) estimated that more than 30% of the annual average stream flow in Ireland can be derived from groundwater. In low-flow periods, this contribution can be significantly greater, exceeding 90% in certain aquifer types. With regard to groundwater resources as receptors, there is no fixed depth which can be assigned to define when groundwater ceases to be a usable water resource. This issue is relevant in a UGEE context because of the risks of impact from hydraulic fracturing on groundwater quality. The UK Technical Advisory Group (UKTAG) on the Water Framework Directive (WFD) defined 400 m below ground level as a depth below which it may become increasingly difficult to obtain: a) adequate quantities of groundwater for supply purposes; and b) water that is of a quality that can be used for potable supply purposes. The 400 m depth limit was specified in context of WFD groundwater body delination purposes (to the EC), and should not be interpreted or regarded as a fixed limit for usable groundwater resources in either of the case study areas. -
A House Divided: the Murrays of the Border and the Rise and Decline of a Small Irish House John Murray Left More Formal Records
A house divided: the Murrays of the border and the rise and decline of a small Irish house John Murray left more formal records than did many of his family. Born in 1870, his death at home in 1953 was attributed to the senility in old age for which, he is still just about remembered.1 He was married twice, first to Catherine Seery, in 1895, in the County Fermanagh hamlet of Teemore.2 Almost twenty-three years later, he stood at the same alter, and married Margaret Fee.3 He was widowed twice as well. Tuberculosis (phthisis pulmonalis) took Catherine in the summer of 1910.4 She had been certified with the illness just five months earlier, weeks before the birth of their fifth and final child – her third son, John Joseph.5 Catherine Murray’s was one of a little over ten thousand Irish deaths attributed to the disease that year.6 Although it could and did afflict all classes, it was and is primarily an illness of the poor and under-resourced. By the time that Margaret Murray died in 1953 her husband’s memory had already gone. As the owner of land, his name appears in valuation books, as it does in both of just two Irish censuses that are extant and currently available – 1901 and 1911. He was listed 1 Death of John Murray, Derrylin, 20 Nov. 1953 (General Register Office Northern Ireland, hereafter GRONI, D/1953/152/1019/15/144). Interview with Patricia Brady, Teemore, 13 Jan. 2017. 2 Marriage of John Murray and Catherine Seery, Derrylin, 25th Feb. -
Proposed Water Boundary Changes for the Second River Basin Plans
River Basin Management Plans (2015 - 2021) Proposed Water Boundary Changes for the Second Cycle River Basin Plans December 2015 Proposed water body boundary changes for the Second Cycle River Basin Plans December 2014 Surface water bodies Rivers The criteria for delineation of surface water bodies for the Water Framework Directive are set out in Annex 2, Section 1 of the Directive. For rivers, Northern Ireland followed ‘System A’ typology as specified in Paragraph 1.2.1. The idea is that water bodies, where possible, would not exhibit more than one geology type nor cross the altitude thresholds. System A typology is presented in the table below. Water body cut-off points were also targeted to river confluences aiming for sensible and manageable management units. Table 1: System A typology for water body delineation (from Water Framework Directive, Annex 2, para. 1.2.1) Fixed Typology Descriptors Type Altitude typology high > 800 m mid-altitude 200 to 800 m lowland < 200 m Size typology based on catchment area small 10 - 100 km2 medium > 100 to 1 000 km2 large > 1 000 to 10 000 km2 very large >10 000 km2 Geology calcareous siliceous organic The original work to derive a river water body set for Northern Ireland was undertaken in 2003-2004. At first 719 water bodies were proposed but this was later reduced to 550. However, further work was required to fully complete coverage around cross-border areas resulting in a 575 water body set being finally agreed in 2006. It is this 575 water body set that has been used for water quality classification and programmes of measures for the first River Basin Plan Period. -
Names in Multi-Lingual
Paul Tempan, Northern Ireland 943 Towards a Chronology of Topographical Elements in Irish Place-Names: Some Strategies for Establishing Relative Chronology Paul Tempan Northern Ireland Abstract This paper examines the issues involved in establishing the chronology of elements referring to landscape features. Much work has been done on the Irish topographical lexicon in recent decades, notably by Prof. Liam Mac Mathúna, whose approach is rooted in word-field studies. His research has focussed on common nouns occurring in Old Irish and Middle Irish texts. This paper takes a complementary approach by asking what further light the evidence of place-names can shed on the topographical lexicon. It attempts to establish the outlines of a (largely relative) chronology, using the element sliabh as an example. It then goes on to consider some strategies which can help to refine this dating, using the elements rinn and ros from the world-field ‘promontory’. In particular, the analysis of suffixes and tautological names are discussed as resources which can help to construct a relative chronology. *** Any attempt to delimit the time-span during which a particular place-name element has been productive must begin with absolute chronology by examining the attestations of names in which the element appears. One such attempt to date an element common in Irish place-names is Alan Mac an Bhaird’s analysis of 330 names whose first element is sliabh, carried out while working for the Place-Names Branch of the Ordnance Survey in Dublin during the 1970s. Sliabh is the most common Irish word for ‘mountain’, but which can also mean variously ‘a mountain range’, ‘an area of upland’, or ‘a moor’. -
Upper Erne Data Collation for Interreg V
UPPER ERNE DATA COLLATION FOR INTERREG V NIEA 2015 Contents Page no. Introduction 3 WFD Status and Objectives 3 Managing freshwater resources in an integrated catchment 4 Narrative summary 6 Results 7 Groundwater 10 Ballina Tributary GBNI1NW363602017 12 Lough-A-Hache River GBNI1NW363602024 16 Newtownbutler River GBNI1NW363602028 18 River Erne (Bellanaleck) GBNI1NW363602035 20 Tamlaght Tributary GBNI1NW363602038 22 Erne River Enniskillen GBNI1NW363602039 24 Upper Lough Erne GBNI1NW363602063 28 Starraghen Tributary GBNI1NW363604067 30 River Erne (Belturbet) GBNI1NW363604081 35 Appendix 37 2 INTRODUCTION INTERREG Europe financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) is scheduled to run from 2014 to 2020 http://www.interreg4c.eu/interreg-europe/. The ERDF budget for the overall INTERREG project is EUR 359 million. The Environment theme will receive a proportion of this. The purpose of this document on the Upper Erne is to demonstrate information available to help with project proposals for river restoration schemes and integrated catchment management actions (including groundwater). It will demonstrate the wide range of information currently available within the NI Environment Agency (NIEA) and ROI Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for each catchment (using the Upper Erne System as an example). This will save applicants duplicating studies already completed while suggesting types of information they can collect. It will provide information on the failing elements for parts of the system. There is pressures information to guide how improvements may be progressed to meet WFD objectives. In addition there are impact assessments to guide how improvements may be progressed to meet WFD 2023 result indicator targets for INTERREG V. Any works to be carried out should be in line with current licensing and regulations1. -
The Geological Heritage of Cavan an Audit of County Geological Sites in Cavan by Matthew Parkes, Robert Meehan, Vincent Gallagher and Sarah Gatley
The Geological Heritage of Cavan An audit of County Geological Sites in Cavan by Matthew Parkes, Robert Meehan, Vincent Gallagher and Sarah Gatley 2013 The Geological Heritage of Cavan An audit of County Geological Sites in Cavan by Matthew Parkes, Robert Meehan, Vincent Gallagher and Sarah Gatley 2013 The Cavan Geological Heritage Project was supported by This report is an action of the County Cavan Heritage Plan 2006 – 2011 1 For the: Irish Geological Heritage Programme Geological Survey of Ireland Beggars Bush Haddington Road Dublin 4 01-6782837 2 Contents Section 1 – Main Report Report Summary …………………………………………………………….………….….…. 6 Cavan in the context of Irish Geological Heritage ……………………………….……. 7 Geological conservation issues and site management ……………………….……… 9 Marble Arch Caves Global Geopark, Cavan County Council and the promotion of geological heritage in County Cavan …………………………………………. 12 Proposals and ideas for promotion of geological heritage in Cavan. …………….……….. 15 A summary of the geology of Cavan ……………………………………………………... 18 Geological heritage versus geological hazards ………………………................................ 23 Glossary of geological terms ……………………………………………………………… 25 Data sources on the geology of County Cavan ……………………………………………… 30 Shortlist of Key Geological References ……………………………………………………… 32 Further sources of information and contacts ……………………………………………… 33 Acknowledgements …………………………………………………………………………….... 33 Appendix 1 Geological heritage audits and the planning process ……………...……… 34 Appendix 2 Bibliography – Geology