Appendix 1.2.13. INDEX 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 General Introduction 1 1.2 Background 3 2. OVERVIEW OF THURROCK 2.1 Recent Changes 5 2.2 Other Changes, Opportunities and Issues 6 2.3 BAP Resources Within Thurrock 6 2.3.1 Habitats 7 2.3.2 Species 14 2.3.3 Other BAP Issues 18 2.3.4 Summary of BAP Action Points 19 2.4 The Role of Local Wildlife Sites 20 2.5 Discussion of Local Wildlife Sites 21 2.6 Introduction to Wildlife Corridors 22 2.6.1 Corridor Requirements 23 2.6.2 Wildlife Corridors in Thurrock 26 2.6.3 Planning for the Future 28 References and Selected Bibliography Glossary of Abbreviations MAP1 Primary Corridors/Barriers Appendix 1 Development of Local Wildlife Site Selection Criteria In Essex Appendix 2 Species Indicative of Ancient Woodland In Essex Appendix 3 Species Indicative of Old, Unimproved Neutral/Acid Grassland and Marsh In Essex Appendix 4 Indicative Chalk Grassland Plants Appendix 5 Evolution of Local Nature Conservation Initiatives Appendix 6 Local Wildlife Sites Register Appendix 7 Tables and Maps of Potential Local Wildlife Sites Appendix 8 A Review Of Thurrock SSSIs Within The Local Wildlife Site Framework GREENGRID WILDLIFE STRATEGY FOR THURROCK 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 General Introduction Lying at the centre of the Thames Gateway, Thurrock is a key growth area that is set to undergo significant change. The next 15 years will see large numbers of additional houses plus development for employment. The protection and enhancement of those elements of the environment which give Thurrock its positive identity, including its ecological character, will be a critical aspect of the Greengrid and will influence the views of those who live and work in the area, as well as those passing through or considering investing. The East of England Plan Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS14), which was first produced in 2004, encourages local authorities to, “sustain and improve the quality of life for all people who live in, work in, or visit the region, by developing a more sustainable, prosperous and outward-looking region, while respecting its diversity and enhancing its assets”. With respect to the proper conservation of an areas natural assets, The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 places a duty on public bodies [Section 40(1)] to consider biodiversity: “Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity”. Appendix 5 provides a more detailed summary of the evolution of UK and EU legislation and central government advice on incorporating wildlife conservation within the planning system. In some ways, Thurrock represents a microcosm of neighbouring Essex: a sparsely populated and largely arable north, a densely populated south and north-east, and a zone of former and current grazing marshes along the southern and eastern coastal zones. This vastly differing countryside character in such a relatively small area creates a particularly demanding environment in which to balance nature conservation, sustainable development and quality of life issues for local residents. In other ways, Thurrock is unique: it is a strange quirk of Thurrock’s topography, geology and climate that a large number of the most important wildlife areas are within the urban zone, rather than the open countryside. The main exception to this is the complex of woodland and grassland either side of One Tree Hill in the Langdon Hills. It is within the urban environs of Grays, Purfleet, West Thurrock and Tilbury that one can find sites that are of at least regional if not national importance for their invertebrate populations, giving rise to significant potential for conflict with the development pressure in the Thames Gateway, being one of the Government’s Growth Areas. One of the key factors in this phenomenon is the ridge of Thames Terrace sand and gravel deposits that run east-west across the southern part of the borough and then swinging north-east towards Basildon. Much of the wildlife value of these areas now lies at the fringe of previous industrial action (included within the term “brownfield land”) i.e. quarrying of sand, gravel and chalk, and one is left to marvel at what the area’s wildlife might have looked like before the industrial revolution. Ja nuary 2007 1 Greengrid Wildlife Strategy Version 1.2 EECOS Such areas of “waste ground” are invariably targeted for re-development in preference to siting proposals on greenfield land, and there is some justification in doing so in order to limit urban sprawl into greenbelt land. However, there is an urgent need to consider the ecology of brownfield land before decisions about a site’s future are made, since this habitat supports some of the rarest species nationally and are often biodiversity “hotspots” in terms of the number of plants and animals they can support, several of which are the subject of national Biodiversity Action Plans aimed at halting their decline. The wildlife value of brownfield sites often lies in their invertebrate interest, with a very high number of animals that are not observed by the general public and often not visually appealing and as a result not always considered in ecological assessments of sites being proposed for re-development. In order to address the potential conflicts between ecological value, development pressure and visual appearance, it is important that biodiversity is considered as an integral part of Thurrock’s environment and local character. Protecting our ecological resource and ensuring that it is given proper weight in decisions regarding land-use and land management is critical. Identifying the biodiversity resource, making provision for its protection and management and providing additional biodiversity opportunities through, for example, site layout, the provision of landscape infrastructure and amenity space, building design and sustainable drainage systems should be recognised and undertaken as an integral part of the development process. The Thurrock Biodiversity Study 2006-2011 will assist in achieving this. It is one of a series of broad environmental appraisals undertaken by Thurrock Council as part of the development of its Greengrid Strategy. This Strategy embraces the total human environment in terms of recreational opportunities, cycle and pedestrian infrastructure, urban and sub-urban landscapes and intrinsic “quality of life” factors, as well as the natural world, which is the main focus of this present report. The inter-connections between these facets are extremely complex. In an ideal world, any one piece of “green space”, open land or semi-natural vegetation would help to fulfil all of these functions, but that is rarely the case. Many important wildlife sites, in Thurrock and Essex in general, are not especially attractive to the human eye, but their value to biodiversity in Thurrock and the UK should not be under-valued because of this. Conversely, many important open spaces, recreational routes and landscape features are not of significant wildlife value, although not without some local wildlife interest and of value in retaining some contact between increasingly urbanised populations and “the countryside”. One of the fundamental roles of the Greengrid strategy is to recognise this fact and to strike a balance between these differing demands being placed upon the land in Thurrock. The Greengrid Wildlife Strategy presented here is a distillation of the Biodiversity Study carried out by Essex Ecology Services Ltd for Thurrock Council in 2006. This study comprised: • A land use survey of the whole borough; • An appraisal of wildlife resources in terms of the draft Thurrock Biodiversity Action Plan; • Consideration of the major implications for wildlife within Thurrock in terms of previous land management and future development plans; • The identification of a network of Local Wildlife Sites as the critical wildlife resource of the borough. St anford Marshes Langdon Hills County Park Januar y 2007 2 Greengrid Wildlife Strategy Version 1.2 EECOS 1.2 Background Nationally, concerns over the state of the countryside, the loss of ancient habitats and species diversity have grown primarily since the first half of the 20th Century. Mechanised farming, the demand for more economical food production and the advent of modern pesticides and herbicides began to take a heavy toll on the country’s wildlife habitats. This has been compounded by urban expansion, flourishing trunk road networks and industrial expansion. The overall trend during this period was a transition from a countryside in which wildlife still flourished in a matrix of small fields with bountiful hedgerows, flower-rich meadows and woodlands towards a situation today where wildlife is generally perceived to be surviving in a limited number of “oases”, surrounded by seas of relatively inhospitable farmland or urban sprawl. Initially, the response to this perceived situation was to declare some of these wildlife oases as nature reserves. It was soon realised, however, that nature conservation was not sustainable by confining it to a limited number of key sites, important though these are. Key nature reserves still interact with the wildlife habitats around them, thus, whilst such sites are the “jewels of the crown”, nevertheless one needs the more mundane metal of the crown to hold it all together. Sustainable nature conservation depends on a matrix of important wildlife sites, some of national significance, others of more local interest but vital in their support of the key sites, as well as appropriate means by which plants and animals can move between them, as a shared and mixing gene pool. Local Wildlife Sites are an important component in this matrix of sites, identified to safeguard a “reasonable” network of valuable wildlife sites which, together with the nationally designated Sites of Special Scientific Interest, might act as the fundamental building blocks for nature conservation in the area (see Appendix 1).