DOCSLIB.ORG

The Species Recovery Programme

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Species Recovery Programme 1 Species Recovery Programme 10th Anniversary Conference Preface............................................................................................................................3 Introduction....................................................................................................................3 Dr Tony Whitten, World Bank ......................................................................................6 Origins of the Species Recovery Programme ............................................................6 Chris Baines.................................................................................................................11 The Nature of the Future..........................................................................................11 Dr Tony Gent, The Herpetological Conservation Trust ..............................................16 Conservation of amphibians and reptiles.................................................................16 Dr Martin Warren, Butterfly Conservation..................................................................25 Species recovery work on butterflies and moths: an overview................................25 Dr Roger Key, English Nature.....................................................................................31 ‘Pot’ beetles - Cryptocephalus spp. .........................................................................31 Dr Johannes Vogel, Programme Leader UK Biodiversity, The Natural History Museum, London .........................................................................................................36 Engaging With the Public – Progress and Perspectives on the English Nature-NHM Biodiversity Co-ordination project ..........................................................................36 Dr Valerie Keeble, People’s Trust For Endangered Species .......................................42 The benefits of wider involvement – the case of the stag beetle .............................42 D A Joyce, S Burke, L A Martin, and A S Pullin........................................................50 Genetics of Butterflies: Understanding Leading to Conservation ...........................50 Dr Michael F. Fay, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew .......................................................59 Conservation Genetics of Cypripedium calceolus...................................................59 Steve Compton, Centre for Biodiversity and Conservation, University of Leeds.......62 Endemic Beetles in Britain: How Many Are There?...............................................62 Dr David Sheppard, Invertebrate Ecologist, English Nature.......................................67 The Importance of Scrub and Bare Ground.............................................................67 Dr Nigel Bourn, Butterfly Conservation......................................................................72 Habitats, the Landscape & Butterflies .....................................................................72 Dr Jenny Duckworth, Plantlife ....................................................................................76 A Rolling Stone Gathers No Moss: Discuss............................................................76 Colin Speedie, MER Consultants ................................................................................79 The Basking Shark: Global Threats & Risks...........................................................79 Peter Richardson, Marine Conservation Society (MCS) .............................................90 Saving Turtles Together: The Partnership Approach ..............................................90 Barry Collins, UK Ecology Manager, Center Parcs ....................................................97 Species recovery and commercial development ......................................................97 Philippa Roberts, Earthwatch.....................................................................................102 The Business & Biodiversity Resource Centre......................................................102 Leigh Lock & Cath Jeffs, RSPB................................................................................106 The Case of the Cirl Bunting .................................................................................106 Dr Phil Wilson, Wessex Environmental Associates..................................................112 The Arable Flora....................................................................................................112 Brian Banks – English Nature....................................................................................117 American Bullfrogs in Britain ...............................................................................117 Jason Reynolds, Durham Wildlife Trust....................................................................123 Squirrels: Grey Versus Red ...................................................................................123 Paul Bradley, Department of Animal & Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield......130 White-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes at Craven Limestone Complex SAC, North Yorkshire ...........................................................................................130 Dr Gillian Gilbert – RSPB .........................................................................................133 2 Species Recovery Programme 10th Anniversary Conference Reedbeds & Bitterns ..............................................................................................133 George Barker MBE ..................................................................................................138 Nature in Cities? You Can’t Be Serious!..............................................................138 Alfred Baldacchino, Head, Biodiversity protection Unit, Malta ...............................146 Species Action in Malta- the beginning.................................................................146 Martin Harper, Conservation Director, Plantlife .......................................................151 A worldwide vision to save England’s threatened plants ......................................151 Mike Harley, English Nature .....................................................................................159 Climate Change & Nature Conservation In Britain & Ireland ..............................159 Dr Mark Avery, RSPB/Biodiversity Challenge.........................................................165 Species Conservation – Future Challenges............................................................165 Alex Kirby, BBC News Online Environment Correspondent...................................170 Key note address....................................................................................................170 Appendix 1.................................................................................................................173 Species Recovery Programme Founder Awards....................................................173 Appendix 11...............................................................................................................175 References and contacts:........................................................................................175 Appendix 111.............................................................................................................178 Marine turtle information sheets............................................................................178 3 Species Recovery Programme 10th Anniversary Conference The Species Recovery Programme 10th Anniversary Conference Proceedings Editors: Dave Stone, Jenny Tither and Paul Lacey. Preface These are the official proceedings of English Nature’s Species Recovery Programme 10th anniversary conference, held at the Hayes Conference Centre at Swanwick in Derbyshire, between Wednesday 5 and Friday 7 December 2001. Introduction In December 2001 over 200 of the UK’s leading conservationists gathered in Derbyshire, England for a conference to celebrate the tenth anniversary of English Nature’s Species Recovery Programme. The conference delegates represented over 100 organisations, all of which had played their part in taking forward this ambitious programme to conserve some of the most endangered plants and animals in the country. The conference was a celebration of partnership, as well as longevity. The programme reflected on the successes of the past ten years, critical lessons for species conservation, and perhaps most importantly, some of the challenges that species’ recovery work will have to meet over the next decade. The challenges that emerged over the three days focused on the issues of agricultural practice; ecosystem solutions to species management; the importance engaging communities and businesses, developing international collaboration; and the need to address exploitation of our seas. As I write this, nearly one year on from the actual conference, I am acutely aware that the conference touched on many issues raised by the England Biodiversity Strategy and even at the 2002 world summit in Johannesburg. The recovery of species is not an easy process, and it is often asked what the real value is in years of work to save an obscure invertebrate or lichen. It can be argued that the saving an organism is a laudable act in its own right, and I have a great deal of sympathy with that view. The added value lies in the important focus for learning provided by scarce species. The extremes of their predicament and the solutions there-in often bring to light approaches
Load more

Recommended publications
  • QQR 7 Information Pack
    7th Quinquennial Review of Schedules 5 and 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) Information Pack (version 2.21) 14 May 2021 1 Version 2.2: Four reptiles and two seals removed from the EPS list (Annex 1); one EPS amphibian and two EPS reptiles that are all Endangered removed from Annex 2 – these species were included in Version 2 and/or 2.1 in error. See Annex 1 and Annex 2 for further information. 1. Introduction Every five years, the country nature conservation bodies (Natural England, Natural Resources Wales and NatureScot), working jointly through the UK Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), review Schedules 5 and 8 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (WCA) 1981. The review will provide recommendations to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and to Ministers for the Environment in the Scottish Government and Welsh Government for changes to these schedules2. This is known as the Quinquennial Review (QQR). As part of the QQR, stakeholders are provided with the opportunity to propose changes to the species on the schedules. This Information Pack has been produced for the 7th QQR (QQR 7). It is important to note that this QQR differs from previous ones. The Information Pack explains the new selection criteria, provides a timetable, and explains the process to be used by stakeholders. Contact details of the QQR Inter-agency Group who are managing QQR 7, are listed in Section 5. In addition, the Information Pack provides details of how to complete the online survey through which stakeholders propose new species for inclusion on, or removal of existing species from Schedules 5 and 8, or propose a change to how species are protected on the schedules.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing for Species: Integrating the Needs of England’S Priority Species Into Habitat Management
    Natural England Research Report NERR024 Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat management. Part 2 Annexes www.naturalengland.org.uk Natural England Research Report NERR024 Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat management. Part 2 Annexes Webb, J.R., Drewitt, A.L. and Measures, G.H. Natural England Published on 15 January 2010 The views in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Natural England. You may reproduce as many individual copies of this report as you like, provided such copies stipulate that copyright remains with Natural England, 1 East Parade, Sheffield, S1 2ET ISSN 1754-1956 © Copyright Natural England 2010 Project details This report results from work undertaken by the Evidence Team, Natural England. A summary of the findings covered by this report, as well as Natural England's views on this research, can be found within Natural England Research Information Note RIN024 – Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat management. This report should be cited as: WEBB, J.R., DREWITT, A.L., & MEASURES, G.H., 2009. Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat management. Part 2 Annexes. Natural England Research Reports, Number 024. Project manager Jon Webb Natural England Northminster House Peterborough PE1 1UA Tel: 0300 0605264 Fax: 0300 0603888 [email protected] Contractor Natural England 1 East Parade Sheffield S1 2ET Managing for species: Integrating the needs of England’s priority species into habitat i management.
    [Show full text]
  • Räumliche Verteilung Der Larven Von Cryptocephalus Moraei (Linnaeus, 1758) (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Cryptocephalinae) 511-514 N0V1US Nr.22 (11/1997) Seite 511
    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: NOVIUS - Mitteilungsblatt der Fachgruppe Entomologie im NABU Landesverband Berlin Jahr/Year: 1997 Band/Volume: 22 Autor(en)/Author(s): Schöller Matthias Artikel/Article: Räumliche Verteilung der Larven von Cryptocephalus moraei (Linnaeus, 1758) (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Cryptocephalinae) 511-514 N0V1US Nr.22 (11/1997) Seite 511 Räumliche Verteilung der Larven von Cryptücephalus moraei (LINNAEUS, 1758) (Coleóptera, Chrysomelidae, Cryptocephalinae) MatthiasSCHÖLLER, Berlin Abstract Spatial distribution of the larvae of Cryptocephalus moraei (Coleóptera, Chrysomelidae, Cryptocehalinae) From 1993 till 1995, two populations of C. moraei have been studied in Berlin, Germany. From eight plots with a surface of 250 cm2 each, the number of larvae and Hypericum perforatum-plants nave been counted. The number of larvae was found to be positively correlated with the number of H. perforatum-plants. Generally, the larvae have been found in the vicinity of the plant axis. This aggregation may be due to reduced mobility, to preference of a certain microclimate or due to host selection. Einleitung Die Larven der meisten Arten der Cryptocephalini leben zwischen der Laubstreu und fressen dort totes Pflanzenmaterial (Phytosaprophagie), vor allem Blätter (ROSENHAUER 1852, ERBER 1988, SCHÖLLER 1995). Im Labor ist das Wirtsspektrum dieser Larven größerals das der Imagines, sie akzeptieren tote Blätter vieler Pflanzen aus verschiedenen Familien. Die räumliche Verteilung der Larven im Habitat ist bislang für keine der ca. 1400 Arten aus dem TribusCryptocephalini bekannt. Diese Arbeit stellt Ergebnisse einer Freilanduntersuchung zur räumlichen Verteilung der Larven von C. moraei vor. Material und Methode in den Jahren 1993-1995 wurden zwei Populationen von C.
    [Show full text]
  • Aculeate Conservation Group/ Hymettus Report for 2006
    Aculeate Conservation Group/ Hymettus Report for 2006 1. Background to 2006 Research. 1.1 During 2006 a new body, Hymettus Ltd., was constituted. Hymettus will take over and extend the role of the Aculeate Conservation Group. This report deals with research originally agreed at the 2005 ACG Annual Review and funded by English Nature (now also re-incarnated as Natural England), but executed under Hymettus Ltd.. During 2006 work was financially supported by English Nature, Earthwatch, Syngenta and the RSPB in accordance with the relevant Annex a documents, which see for details. 1.2 2005 Projects are reported in the following order of taxonomic group: ants, wasps, bees, other projects. 2. Ant Projects. 2.1 Formica exsecta 2.1.1 At the 2005 Review meeting Stephen Caroll was asked to enquire of the Devon Trust as to whether they would be prepared to consider looking at the possibility of proposing a landscape project for the Bovey Basin which would include the habitat requirements of Formica exsecta and , if so, whether a contribution from the ACG towards the costs of looking at this would be appropriate. 2.1.2 The Trust received this request enthusiastically and have submitted a copy of Andrew Taylor’s (their Officer) Report. Stephen Caroll will be able to bring us up to date with developments at the Review meting. The Report is presented here (appendices may be obtained from Mike Edwards): Landscape-scale habitat work in Devon’s Bovey Basin Report to Hymettus Limited, October 2006 1. Introduction The Bovey Basin is located in the Teignbridge district of South Devon.
    [Show full text]
  • England Biodiversity Indicators 2020
    4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance England Biodiversity Indicators 2020 This documents supports 4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance Technical background document Fiona Burns, Tom August, Mark Eaton, David Noble, Gary Powney, Nick Isaac, Daniel Hayhow For further information on 4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance visit https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/england-biodiversity-indicators 1 4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance Indicator 4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance Technical background document, 2020 NB this paper should be read together with 4b Status of UK Priority Species; distribution which presents a companion statistic based on time series on frequency of occurrence (distribution) of priority species. 1. Introduction The adjustments to the UK biodiversity indicators set as a result of the adoption of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity (including the Aichi Targets) at the 10th Conference of Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity mean there is a need to report progress against Aichi Target 12: Target 12: By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained. Previously, the UK biodiversity indicator for threatened species used lead partner status assessments on the status of priority species from 3-yearly UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) reporting rounds. As a result of the devolution of biodiversity strategies to the UK's 4 nations, there is no longer reporting at the UK level of the status of species previously listed by the BAP process. This paper presents a robust indicator of the status of threatened species in the UK, with species identified as conservation priorities being taken as a proxy for threatened species.
    [Show full text]
  • Additions, Deletions and Corrections to An
    Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society No. 36 (2012) ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF THE IRISH BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS (LEPIDOPTERA) WITH A CONCISE CHECKLIST OF IRISH SPECIES AND ELACHISTA BIATOMELLA (STAINTON, 1848) NEW TO IRELAND K. G. M. Bond1 and J. P. O’Connor2 1Department of Zoology and Animal Ecology, School of BEES, University College Cork, Distillery Fields, North Mall, Cork, Ireland. e-mail: <[email protected]> 2Emeritus Entomologist, National Museum of Ireland, Kildare Street, Dublin 2, Ireland. Abstract Additions, deletions and corrections are made to the Irish checklist of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera). Elachista biatomella (Stainton, 1848) is added to the Irish list. The total number of confirmed Irish species of Lepidoptera now stands at 1480. Key words: Lepidoptera, additions, deletions, corrections, Irish list, Elachista biatomella Introduction Bond, Nash and O’Connor (2006) provided a checklist of the Irish Lepidoptera. Since its publication, many new discoveries have been made and are reported here. In addition, several deletions have been made. A concise and updated checklist is provided. The following abbreviations are used in the text: BM(NH) – The Natural History Museum, London; NMINH – National Museum of Ireland, Natural History, Dublin. The total number of confirmed Irish species now stands at 1480, an addition of 68 since Bond et al. (2006). Taxonomic arrangement As a result of recent systematic research, it has been necessary to replace the arrangement familiar to British and Irish Lepidopterists by the Fauna Europaea [FE] system used by Karsholt 60 Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society No. 36 (2012) and Razowski, which is widely used in continental Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • BOROUGH PLAN BACKGROUND PAPER: Biodiversity and Geodiversity Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council
    BOROUGH PLAN BACKGROUND PAPER: Biodiversity and Geodiversity Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council 2015 1 Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 2 2. DESIGNATIONS RELEVANT TO NUNEATON AND BEDWORTH ................... 4 3. INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATION ...................................................................... 7 4. NATIONAL LEGISLATION, POLICY AND GUIDANCE ..................................... 8 5. SUB-REGIONAL STRATEGIES ....................................................................... 17 6. LOCAL STRATEGIES ...................................................................................... 17 7. EVIDENCE BASE ............................................................................................. 19 8. ISSUES AND OPTIONS & PREFERRED OPTIONS CONSULTATION RESPONSES ........................................................................................................... 21 9. POLICY JUSTIFICATION ................................................................................. 23 10. DELIVERING AND IMPLEMENTING POLICIES .......................................... 26 APPENDIX 1: NUNEATON AND BEDWORTH’S DESIGNATED SITES AND PRIORITY HABITATS & SPECIES ......................................................................... 27 APPENDIX 2: NUNEATON AND BEDWORTH BIODIVERSITY VALUE MAP ....... 63 APPENDIX 3: SECTION 41 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND RURAL COMMUNITIES ACT 2006 - SPECIES OF PRINCIPAL IMPORTANCE IN ENGLAND ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coastal Vegetated Shingle
    Natural England Commissioned Report NECR054 Coastal Vegetated Shingle Development of an evidence base of the extent and quality of shingle habitats in England to improve targeting and delivery of the coastal vegetated shingle HAP First published 17 December 2010 www.naturalengland.org.uk Foreword Natural England commission a range of reports from external contractors to provide evidence and advice to assist us in delivering our duties. This work was jointly funded by the National Trust, Defra and managed by Natural England with support of a project steering group. The views in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Natural England. Background Vegetated shingle is a Biodiversity Action Plan assessment, especially related to long-term climate priority habitat because it is so rare and so valuable change and sea level rise. for wildlife. All the major examples of the habitat and The data and other products will also be used by many of the minor ones have been notified for their Natural England and partner organisations in other wildlife value. To help identify restoration targets and contexts, such as the evaluation of shingle resources monitor the habitat we need to know what there is, within flood risk management applications; where it is, its geomorphology and the activities incorporating the scales of change that have been taking place that could affect it. observed and allowing assessment of options for This study was commissioned to provide a spatial longer term adaptation to climate change. Whilst dataset of the inventory for coastal vegetated shingle recognising the limitations of the work, this will inform in England.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridgeshire & Essex Butterfly Conservation
    Butterfly Conservation Regional Action Plan For Anglia (Cambridgeshire, Essex, Suffolk & Norfolk) This action plan was produced in response to the Action for Butterflies project funded by WWF, EN, SNH and CCW This regional project has been supported by Action for Biodiversity Cambridgeshire and Essex Branch Suffolk branch BC Norfolk branch BC Acknowledgements The Cambridgeshire and Essex branch, Norfolk branch and Suffolk branch constitute Butterfly Conservation’s Anglia region. This regional plan has been compiled from individual branch plans which are initially drawn up from 1997-1999. As the majority of the information included in this action plan has been directly lifted from these original plans, credit for this material should go to the authors of these reports. They were John Dawson (Cambridgeshire & Essex Plan, 1997), James Mann and Tony Prichard (Suffolk Plan, 1998), and Jane Harris (Norfolk Plan, 1999). County butterfly updates have largely been provided by Iris Newbery and Dr Val Perrin (Cambridgeshire and Essex), Roland Rogers and Brian Mcllwrath (Norfolk) and Richard Stewart (Suffolk). Some of the moth information included in the plan has been provided by Dr Paul Waring, David Green and Mark Parsons (BC Moth Conservation Officers) with additional county moth data obtained from John Dawson (Cambridgeshire), Brian Goodey and Robin Field (Essex), Barry Dickerson (Huntingdon Moth and Butterfly Group), Michael Hall and Ken Saul (Norfolk Moth Survey) and Tony Prichard (Suffolk Moth Group). Some of the micro-moth information included in the plan was kindly provided by A. M. Emmet. Other individuals targeted with specific requests include Graham Bailey (BC Cambs. & Essex), Ruth Edwards, Dr Chris Gibson (EN), Dr Andrew Pullin (Birmingham University), Estella Roberts (BC, Assistant Conservation Officer, Wareham), Matthew Shardlow (RSPB) and Ken Ulrich (BC Cambs.
    [Show full text]
  • Subfamily Cryptocephalinae
    Subfamily Cryptocephalinae Adapted and updated from Joy (1932). A Practical Handbook of British Beetles. Image Credits: The images of leaf beetles in this document are reproduced from the Iconographia Coleopterorum Poloniae, with permission kindly granted by Lech Borowiec. Creative Commons. Mike Hackston © 2014, adapted from Joy (1932) Checklist from the Checklist of Beetles of the British Isles, 2012 edition, edited by A. G. Duff. (available from www.coleopterist.org.uk/checklist.htm). Currently accepted names are written in bold italics, synonyms in italics. Tribe CLYTRINI Kirby, 1837 Genus LABIDOSTOMIS Dejean, 1836 tridentata (Linnaeus, 1758) Genus CLYTRA Laicharting, 1781 laeviuscula Ratzeburg, 1837 quadripunctata (Linnaeus, 1758) Genus SMARAGDINA affinis (Illiger, 1794) Tribe CRYPTOCEPHALINI Gyllenhal, 1813 Genus CRYPTOCEPHALUS Geoffroy, 1762 aureolus Suffrian, 1847 biguttatus (Scopoli, 1763) bilineatus (Linnaeus, 1767) bipunctatus (Linnaeus, 1758) coryli (Linnaeus, 1758) decemmaculatus (Linnaeus, 1758) exiguus Schneider, 1792 frontalis Marsham, 1802 fulvus (Goeze, 1777) hypochaeridis (Linnaeus, 1758) labiatus (Linnaeus, 1761) moraei (Linnaeus, 1758) nitidulus Fabricius, 1787 parvulus Müller, O.F., 1776 primarius Harold, 1872 punctiger Paykull, 1799 pusillus Fabricius, 1777 querceti Suffrian, 1848 sexpunctatus (Linnaeus, 1758) violaceus Laicharting, 1781 Creative Commons. Mike Hackston © 2014, adapted from Joy (1932) Subfamily Cryptocephalinae Keys to genus and species adapted from Joy (1932) by Mike Hackston 1 Antennae with segments 7-10 at least one and a half times as long as broad; antennae not thickened towards apex. Head hidden by pronotum when viewed from above. Tribe Cryptocephalini. ........... .......... Genus Cryptocephalus 20 species on the British list, many of them very rare and some are listed as Priority Species for Biodiversity Action Plans. Only one species is common.
    [Show full text]
  • Crostwight Heath Parish: Honing/Witton Grid Reference: TG 395302 Area: 17.0 Ha District: North Norfolk Survey Date: 08/08/18
    WILDLIFE IN COMMON PROJECT SURVEY Wildlife Site Survey Form (Ref. No. CWS 1226) Site Name: Crostwight Heath Parish: Honing/Witton Grid reference: TG 395302 Area: 17.0 ha District: North Norfolk Survey date: 08/08/18 Registered Common Number: CL 4 Habitat map: 1 WILDLIFE IN COMMON PROJECT SURVEY Habitat description (refer to the annotated map) Compartment A: South Woodland: Mixed Semi-natural Woodland This is an attractive woodland primarily consisting of oak (Quercus robur), downy birch (Betula pubescens) and planted Scott’s pine (Pinus sylvestris) on acid, sandy/gravelly soil on an undulating terrain. The overall impression is of a natural area, with a very varied and visually appealing terrain and vegetation structure. Much of the oak is low-branched and wide-spreading; there are some notably large birch. The woodland also includes sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa), sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus), beech (Fagus sylvatica), and rowan (Sorbus aucuparia), while aspen (Populus tremula) is a feature, suckering widely along Heath Road. There are some interesting large veteran oaks on an old wood bank. The shrub layer comprises mainly small birch, occasional holly (Ilex aquifolium) (some large), hazel (Corylus avellana), hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna), elder (Sambucus nigra), and bramble (Rubus fruticosus agg). Rarities include the unusual alder buckthorn (Frangula alnus). There are encouraging signs of natural regeneration, with plenty of young birch, holly, rowan, hazel, and sweet chestnut. There is plentiful fallen wood. Broad-buckler fern (Dryopteris dilatata) dominates as ground cover in places, with bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) the main ground flora in other areas. Honeysuckle (Lonicera periclymenum) also acts as ground-cover as well as ascending as a climber, with the ground being bare (with deep leaf litter) in denser shade.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity and Geodiversity Background Paper
    Biodiversity and Geodiversity Background Paper CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 5 1.1 Purpose 5 1.2 What Is Biodiversity 5 1.3 What Is Geodiversity 6 2 DESIGNATIONS RELEVANT TO NUNEATON AND BEDWORTH 7 2.1 Natura 2000 Site Network 7 2.2 Special Areas of Conservation 8 2.3 Special Sites of Scientific Interest 8 2.4 Local Nature Reserves 8 2.5 Local Geological Sites 8 2.6 Local Wildlife Sites 8 2.7 Priority Habitats and Species 8 2.8 Ancient Woodlands 9 2.9 Veteran Trees 10 3 INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATION 10 3.1 The Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife 10 and Natural Habitats (the Bern Convention) 3.2 Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc) Regulations 1994 10 (regulation 38). 3.3 Directive 2009/147/EC (the Birds Directive), as amended 11 3.4 Directive 92/43/EEC (the Habitats Directive) 11 4 NATIONAL LEGISLATION 11 4.1 Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 11 2006 4.2 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended 12 4.3 The Hedgerow Regulations 12 4.4 Natural Choice: Securing the Value of Nature 13 4.4.1 Local Nature Partnerships 14 4.4.2 Biodiversity Offsetting 14 4.4.2.1 Mitigation Hierarchy 15 4.5 National Planning Policy Framework 15 4.6 Local Sites: Guidance on their Identification, Selection and 16 Management 4.7 Keepers of Time: A Statement of Policy for England’s 16 Ancient Woodland 4.8 Geological Conservation: A Good Practice Guide 16 5 REGIONAL STRATEGIES / POLICIES 16 5.1 Enhancing Biodiversity Across the West Midlands 16 2 6 SUB-REGIONAL STRATEGIES / POLICIES 17 6.1 Warwickshire Geodiversity Action Plan 17 6.2 Warwickshire,
    [Show full text]