MENDIP HILLS AREA OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY

MANAGEMENT PLAN 2014 - 19

HABITAT REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT

Screening Report

December 2013

This report was prepared by Larry Burrows, Ecologist – Planning Policy, Somerset County Council on behalf of the Mendip Hills AONB, as the 'competent authority' under the 'Habitat Regulations' 2010 (as amended)

Copyright The maps in this report are reproduced from Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. (Somerset County Council)(100038382)(2013)

2 Contents

1. Introduction ...... 4 2. Methodology ...... 5 Report Methodology ...... 7 3.0 Potential Impacts of the Management Plan Objectives and Actions on Ecology ...... 8 Introduction ...... 8 Recreational Pressure ...... 8 Habitat Loss...... 9 Habitat Fragmentation ...... 10 Barrier Effects ...... 11 Habitat Isolation ...... 11 Proximity Impacts ...... 11 Air Pollution...... 12 Hydrological Impacts ...... 12 Impacts from Renewable Energy Schemes ...... 13 Cumulative Impacts ...... 13 4. Identification and Description of the Natura 2000 Sites ...... 14 Introduction ...... 14 Identification of Natura 2000 sites ...... 14 Conservation Objectives...... 18 Ecological Zones of Influence...... 18 Description and Characterisation of Natura 2000 Sites ...... 18 5. Other Relevant Plans or Projects ...... 35 6. Analysis of the draft Management Plan ...... 37 Introduction ...... 37 Management for Nature Conservation Purposes ...... 37 Analysis of Policy in the draft Management Plan ...... 37 Analysis of Potential Significant Effects on Features of Natura 2000 Sites ...... 48 7. Conclusion ...... 51 References ...... 52

3 1. Introduction

1.1 The Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) was designated in 1972. It covers 198 square kilometres of the Mendip Hills from Bleadon in the west to the A39 in the east. The AONB Partnership is made up of 44 organisations, including 28 parish councils, committed to implementing the AONB Management Plan.

1.2 Under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, the Mendip Hills AONB needs to produce a Management Plan to demonstrate how the AONB will be protected. The Management Plan contains a number of objectives and policies to this end.

1.3 This report updates, where necessary, the findings of the first, screening step of the Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) process of the draft Mendip Hills Management Plan 2014 – 19 carried out in July 2013 where objectives and actions have been amended following further consultation.

1.4 As the ‘competent authority’ under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the ‘Habitats Regulations’), the Mendip Hills AONB is required to assess the Management Plan through the HRA process as policies in the plan can potentially affect Natura 2000 sites.

1.5 Natura 2000 sites include European Sites - Special Protection Areas (SPA) classified under the EC Birds Directive 2009 and Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) designated under the European Communities (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (known as the ‘Habitats Directive’), and, as a matter of Government policy, all Ramsar sites as if they are fully designated European Sites for the purpose of considering development proposals that may affect them.

1.6 The definition of ‘Habitat Regulations Assessment’ is simply an assessment, which must be appropriate to its purpose under the Habitats Directive and Regulations. According to the Habitats Regulations 2010, regulations 61(1), before authorising a plan that is likely to have a significant effect on a European site, and is not connected to the management of the site, the Council shall assess the implications for the site in view of its conservation objectives.

1.7 The purpose of HRA of land use plans is to ensure that protection of the integrity of European sites (Natura 2000 sites) is a part of the planning process. The requirement for a HRA of plans or projects is outlined in Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive.

4 2. Methodology

2.1 The Department for Communities and Local Government’s (DCLG) consultation document ‘ Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Appropriate Assessment’ (August 2006). This document gives three main tasks to the Appropriate or Habitats Regulations Assessment 1 process:

• Likely significant effects

• Appropriate assessment and ascertaining the effect on site integrity

• Mitigation and alternative solutions

2.2 The process is further detailed in ‘The Appropriate Assessment of Spatial Plans in England ’, published by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (Dodd et al, 2007).

2.3 The RSPB guidance (2007) sets out a 3-step approach to appropriate assessment as follows.

Step 1: Screening for likely significant effects. This is the initial evaluation of a plan’s effects on a Natura 2000 site. If it cannot conclude there will be no significant effect upon any Natura 2000 site, an Appropriate Assessment (AA) is required. In the DCLG guidance this is called evidence gathering. Where counter-acting measures can be applied they will be applied at this stage. Counter- acting measures are those which are changes in the wording of policy or within text will clearly prevent a potential significant effect from the Plan.

Step 2 Appropriate Assessment – scoping and further information gathering Preparation for the AA where the screening has shown there is likely to be significant effects or where there is uncertainty about a potential significant effect upon a Natura 2000 site.

Step 3 Appropriate Assessment An evaluation of the evidence gathered on impacts and consideration of whether changes to the plan are needed to ensure that it will have no significant adverse effect upon any Natura 2000 site. This should be the end of the AA process and the plan can be adopted.

2.4 This report contains Step 1 of the process and compiles information in order to assess the likely effects of potential activities arising our of priorities in the draft Partnership Plan on Natura 2000 sites alone, or in combination with other plans or projects.

2.5 When carrying out this screening, it must be viewed as a coarse filter and therefore a ‘Precautionary Approach’ has been taken in the assessment of

1 Note that the terms Habitats Regulations Assessment and Appropriate Assessment have been used interchangeably. However, for the purpose of this report the term Appropriate Assessment will refer to Stage 3 of the Habitats Regulations Assessment process.

5 significance. The EC Guidance sets out a number of principles as to how to approach decision making during the process. The primary one is the ‘Precautionary Principle’, which requires that the conservation objectives of Natura 2000 sites should prevail where there is uncertainty. In other words if the answer is ‘don’t know’ an adverse impact is assumed. This is the case throughout the HRA process.

2.6 Once potential impacts have been identified, their significance will be considered. A judgement about significance is made in relation to the conservation objectives and targets using the Precautionary Principle.

2.7 “Significant” is interpreted as an effect likely to adversely affect a Natura 2000 site’s integrity. A useful definition of what a significant effect is contained in an English Nature guidance note 2 on the subject: “…any effect that may reasonably be predicted as a consequence of a plan or project that may affect the conservation objectives of the features for which the site was designated, but excluding trivial or inconsequential effects. ”

2.8 “Integrity” is described in ODPM Circular 06/2005: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation as ' the site’s coherence, ecological structure and function across its whole area that enables it to sustain the habitat, complex of habitats and/or the levels of populations of species for which it was classified ' (ODPM Circular 06/2005, para. 20).

2.9 Significance will vary from site to site according to conservation sensitivities and magnitude of the potential impact. Assessment is triggered by likelihood not certainty in line with precautionary principle. (European Communities, 2000) Therefore, the assessment considers whether effects are ‘likely’ and ‘significant’ and not every conceivable effect or fanciful possibility. The Waddensee tests are used:

• Would the effect undermine the conservation objectives for the site? • Can significant effects be excluded on the basis of objective information?

2.10 Significant effects are also determined in-combination with other plans or projects and take account of cumulative effects.

2.11 Natural England and other relevant stakeholders will be consulted on the screening opinion to ensure all elements of the plan are considered which, either alone or in-combination, have the potential for a significant effect on relevant sites. This will help Somerset County Council identify potential impacts, likely pathways for those impacts and key indicators to be used for identifying impacts. The screening should therefore look at the significant effects of the plan objectives and of each individual policy.

2.12 This screening report will include the following information for the Natura 2000 sites:

• Why the site is important for wildlife, i.e. the features (species and habitats) for which the site was designated;

2 English Nature. 1999. Habitats Regulation Guidance Note 3: The Determination of Likely Significant Effect under The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations 1994.

6

• The conservation objectives for the site;

• The latest assessment of the site’s ecological condition; and

• Any particular problems or sensitivities of the site’s features that could be affected by a plan’s policies or proposals

Report Methodology

2.13 This report contains the following sections:

• Considers the sources and potential impacts on nature conservation interests from the outcomes of actions in the Management Plan and the zones of influence from the sources of these impacts.

• Includes the following information for the Natura 2000 sites in Somerset or outside the County where there is potentially a significant effect:

• Why the site is important for wildlife, i.e. the features (species and habitats) for which the site was designated;

o The conservation objectives for the site;

o The latest assessment of the sites ecological condition; and

o Any particular problems or sensitivities of the site’s features that could be affected by a plan’s policies or proposals

• The report also outlines the Ecological Zone of Influence of each Natura 2000 site. Many Natura sites support features, which are dependant on ecological conditions outside the designated area to maintain the integrity of the conservation objectives for which the site is listed.

• The HRA screens each of the policies and strategic areas of search for potential effects on Natura 2000 sites.

• Counter-acting Measures, where required, are recommended for incorporation into the development of the final Management Plan

• Where counter-acting measures are not sufficient to mitigate for the effects of the plan on Natura 2000 sites further work is scoped for a Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment.

7 3.0 Potential Impacts of the Management Plan Objectives and Actions on Ecology

Introduction 3.1 This chapter considers further the potential ecological impacts from actions in the draft Management Plan on features of Natura 2000 sites. Any distances mentioned in the text will be used in considering impacts that may affect a Natura 2000 site and areas supporting ecological functioning arising, and are explained in the following sections.

3.2 The following potential affects on features of Natura 2000 sites are considered:

• Recreational Pressure • Habitat Loss • Habitat Fragmentation • Barrier Effects • Habitat Isolation • Proximity Impacts • Air Pollution • Hydrological Changes • Renewable Energy Schemes • Cumulative Impacts

Recreational Pressure 3.3 Increased recreational pressure from urban populations, including dog walking, jogging, horse riding, mountain biking, motorbike scrambling, off road car driving and other, mostly informal, are likely to result from housing and other development proposed in Local Plans or Core Strategies of district and borough councils within and surrounding the AONB. (Lowen et al, 2009; Penny Anderson Associates, 2009)

3.4 The Mendip Hills AONB is also a holiday and leisure destination, and has many environmental assets that attract both visitors as well as residents. This can lead to significant pressure on sensitive habitats resulting in damage and disturbance to the species they support. Typical impacts of tourism and recreation include:

• Physical damage, for example from trampling and erosion. • Disturbance to species, such as ground-nesting birds and wintering wildfowl, from walking, cycling, and water sports, resulting in increased mortality and nesting success, and displacement. • Air pollution (dealt with under air quality below) and disturbance from traffic. • Disturbance from dogs and damage from dog excrement.

3.5 In addition, in particular where sites are close to urban areas, recreational pressures can be exacerbated by other damaging activities described as proximity impacts above, rubbish tipping, vandalism, arson, and predation

8 particularly by cats (see proximity impacts below).

3.6 The impacts of tourism, recreation and urban effects can affect a wide variety of habitat types. Some of the most sensitive are heathland habitats, coastal habitats including dunes, shingle banks and estuaries, other wetlands and watercourses, woodland and grasslands. Trampling can be a serious issue which causes damage to or loss of vegetation. (Lowen et al, 2009; Penny Anderson Associates, 2009)

3.7 The presence of humans can cause visual disturbance to some species, for example to birds (Treweek, 1999; Evink, 2002; Seiler, 2002). The introduction or increase in human activity in an area can affect sensitive species by reducing the amount of time spent on essential activity such as feeding or rearing young, and can lead to displacement, declines in populations or even local extinction. Where there is an open aspect human activity may cause disturbance affecting behaviour of sensitive birds, such as golden plovers, at some distance. For example, breeding golden plovers can be disturbed at distances of 200 metres by the presence of humans (Finney at al , 2005).

3.8 Another example is otters. Anecdotal evidence suggests that otters are not seriously affected by disturbance from anglers, walkers and dogs. Otters do not appear to avoid houses, industry, roads and campsites The response of otters to the sounds of anglers or walkers with dogs is to move to a position where they can see the source of disturbance, dive and swim underwater, then resurface and rest on the bank before resuming their previous activity a short while later. Although individual otters do not appear to be influenced by short periods of disturbance there is a lack of information on how sustained levels of disturbance influences female otters with young. (McCafferty, n/d)

3.9 Traffic noise has been shown to affect the behaviour of species, e.g. bird densities decline where noise is over 50 dbA. Dutch and Swedish research (Reijnen et al, 1995; Helldin & Seiler, 2003) into breeding bird populations has shown an increased shift away from roads according to the amount and speed of traffic.

3.10 Street lighting is known to effect wildlife by altering nocturnal conditions. Street lighting can disturb the diurnal rhythm of species. Many of the species, including otters and bats are sensitive to artificial lighting. Indeed, the introduction of street lighting can have significant effects on their behaviour, cause loss of access to feeding areas and resting areas, and hence affect the viability of populations. (Outen, 2002; Stone, 2009).

Habitat Loss 3.11 There is unlikely to be direct loss of habitat within the designated boundaries of a Natura 2000 site. However, outside the designated site loss of habitat is more likely through non recognition of the function it provides in ecologically supporting the conservation objectives of the features of the Natura 2000 site. This can be where land provides habitat which supports qualifying species that are usually mobile, e.g. bats and otters or where a habitat relies on water sources upstream of the site.

3.12 Habitat loss is a major threat to species. In some cases it is directly linked to mortality, and in other cases survival depends on the ability of displaced

9 species to locate alternative habitat. Species require minimum habitat to maintain their populations and it is difficult to assess the impacts of any single scheme. Size of habitat left after loss is also important for species diversity, as there is a threshold for many species that makes smaller patches unviable. The spatial placement of habitat is also important (Treweek, 1999).

3.13 The effects may be local or on a larger geographic scale. Delayed effects of habitat loss are probably common but rarely analysed in ecological impact assessments. Species are not only threatened by habitat loss but also by reorganisation of land use and by reduction in size of habitat patches (Treweek, 1999).

3.14 There are specific issues relating to bats (where these are qualifying features) that need to be considered when assessing the potential effects of the plan. In many instances, Natura 2000 sites will have been designated for bat breeding and roosting sites. However, bats often rely on foraging habitat some distance away from the designated sites, and on habitat features linking foraging locations with breeding and roosting sites. As a result, in order to maintain the integrity of the Natura 2000 sites, and in particular to ensure that there are no adverse effects on bats as qualifying features, the foraging habitat and flight paths also need to be considered, and direct effects such as physical loss from development, or from indirect effects such as disturbance from people, traffic or artificial lighting need to be avoided. Direct loss or change of habitat due to land use change could affect the numbers and types of prey available.

3.15 Within the Mendip Hills AONB habitat loss is most likely to occur as a result of land use change, for example from forestry operations or agricultural practice, but also potentially from housing development.

Habitat Fragmentation 3.16 Fragmentation is the breaking down of habitat units into smaller units of habitat. It is linked to changes in quality and quantity. These could include increase in edge effects, reduction in size of habitat and changes in species composition (Treweek, 1999).

3.17 A key issue in a fragmented landscape is the ability of species populations to survive in and move between small isolated habitat patches scattered within an urban and agricultural landscape. Research has shown that habitat size and wildlife corridors are of vital importance to nature conservation, and to a thriving and diverse wildlife (English Nature, 1996; Dufek, 2001; Evink, 2002). The value of a large area of semi natural habitat outweighs its division into smaller areas where alterations, for example to light, hydrology and levels of disturbance can have a radical effect on species survival. Fragmentation into smaller areas can lead to extinction of predators, larger species and habitat specialists as well effecting pollination in flora – for example Bluebells produce less seed in smaller areas. Road construction and widening would increase fragmentation effects. (Treweek, 1999; Evink, 2002; Seiler, 2002)

3.18 The reduction in habitat area would be less able to support a level of population prior to the land use change and may result in inbreeding to genetic problems and eventual local extinction (Treweek, 1999).

3.19 Changes in land management and improved rights of way access are most

10 likely to cause habitat fragmentation in the AONB.

Barrier Effects 3.20 Linear development, such as new roads and even cycle ways, can form barriers, which prevent the movement of wildlife through the landscape. This is a particular problem for migrating species. Many amphibians use different habitat at different seasons of the year. Barriers formed by roads can cause traffic casualties or reluctance in a species to cross it. Small mammals will not cross roads of 20 to 25 metres wide. Traffic density also forms part of the ability of species to cross roads. (Treweek, 1999)

3.21 Wild flowers, invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles and small mammals will be affected by the presence of a road. Those species, which are unable or reluctant to cross roads, will become isolated and hence loose genetic diversity. This isolation could also lead to in the long term the local extinction of some species, which in turn may affect others up the food chain. The creation of barriers or other obstacles affecting the movement of animals may be caused by cumulative development, be it roads and/or housing, within a species range. Road casualties are a significant cause of fauna mortality. In Somerset, otters are increasingly becoming victims of vehicle collision. Numbers of casualties counted are often under estimated (Slater, 2002).

3.22 Within the Mendip Hills barrier effects may occur from increased visitor traffic using roads to access locations around the AONB.

Habitat Isolation 3.23 Habitat Isolation is the combined effect of habitat loss, fragmentation and barrier effects. It affects the genetics of a population if it cannot interact with populations elsewhere which can have a long-term effect on viability.

3.24 In general, consequences are:

• Loss of key species (species on which the ecology of other species depend); Reduction or extinction of species at newly formed edges, increased vulnerability to external influences such as disturbance, increased likelihood of invasion by uncharacteristic species; • Inbreeding; • Loss of characteristic species; and • Increased vulnerability to stochastic events, e.g. climate change. (Treweek, 1999)

3.25 Limitations on genetic exchange and response to climate change may have an effect on the population of the species maintained. This isolation can result in a ‘sink’ where a population is growing but there is not sufficient habitat to support this increase and there is no route out of the area to enable migration (Hanski, 1999).

Proximity Impacts 3.26 These are impacts on species and habitats arising from the closeness of development to a Natura 2000 site, including those resulting from development districts neighbouring the Mendip Hills AONB. They are

11 numerous but can include:

• Disturbance effects from construction activities (including noise and lighting); • Increased traffic impacts from construction activities; • Increase human disturbance from use of the new site; • Increased predation from domestic cats and increases in urban living species, such as foxes, rats and corvids; • Increased fly tipping; • Increased incidence of fires on heathland; • Increased levels of lighting; • Increased random disturbance events.

3.27 Habitat may also be degraded through increased fly tipping including of garden waste, which in turn may introduce alien species (e.g. see Gilbert & Beavan, 1997).

3.28 Street lamps can also have an effect on prey availability to bats (Outen, 2002; pers. comm. Emma Stone, University of Bristol). Whereas they do not sustain insect populations per se but attract insects from the surrounding natural environment. Therefore, as a consequence of attracting the insects, street or other artificial lights can deplete prey availability for light sensitive bats in the surrounding area to where they have been installed.

Air Pollution 3.29 Certain interest features of Natura 2000 or Ramsar sites can be directly and/or indirectly affected by pollutants concentrated in the air such as oxides of nitrogen (NOx), oxides of sulphur (SOx) or ammonia, or by pollutants deposited on the ground through acidification or terrestrial eutrophication via soil (deposition of nitrogen).

3.30 Road transport is the source of a number of airborne pollutants. The impacts of nitrogen and nitrogen oxides deposition on vegetation growth are of particular concern. Transport produces other pollutants including sulphur dioxide, ozone and particulates. Air pollution has been linked to ill health amongst trees, particularly over mature specimens, and also a failure to regenerate, either from coppice, pollard or seed. In grassland nitrogen loving species will suppress sensitive flora. Lichens and bryophytes are particularly sensitive.

3.31 The Habitat Regulations Assessment of the draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West (2006) considered 200 metres as the outer distance from a road where nitrogen deposition is expected to occur. Bignall et al, (2004) consider that at an outer distance of 150 metres air quality returns to background levels. The greater distance is used, as a precautionary approach is required.

Hydrological Impacts

Water Quality 3..32 Many Natura 2000 sites are dependent upon there being appropriate water quality to support their integrity, including water courses and estuaries and

12 other wetland habitats, as well as less obvious habitat types (such as heathlands) which may be dependent on ground water quality. Water quality can be affected by a number of factors, such as:

• Pollution from toxic chemicals, metals, oils, pesticides, etc., arising for example from accidental spills, industrial processes, run-off from urban areas, and agriculture. • Pesticides and nutrient enrichment, for example from agricultural fertilisers, leading to eutrophication. • Discharges from sewage treatment works, and over-flowing foul water systems at times of high rainfall and flooding.

3.33 Many of the most significant risks to water quality are as a result of agricultural activity, which largely falls outside the remit of the plan. However, the development can potentially increase the risk of water quality being affected due to extra loads being placed on sewage treatment works, increased hard surfacing and hence run-off, and potential accidental spills, for example from port related activity. Diffuse pollution could result in an in combination impact. Changes in hard surface runoff may leads to changes in flow patterns in watercourses (storm water surges), and increased nutrient and sediment levels in watercourses. River, rhyne and ditch and floodplain habitats such as alluvial forests would be especially vulnerable.

Groundwater Supply 3.34 Both groundwater and surface water levels can be affected by abstraction for public water supply and for industrial and agricultural uses. Climate change is likely to lead to drier summers, which could reduce the availability of water at a time when both population growth and per capita water usage is increasing. Particularly vulnerable are those habitats dependent on groundwater

Flood Risk Management 3.35 This impact may arise due to flood management schemes altering flows in river, stream and ditch habitats. Such impacts may not necessarily be negative, especially if the flood plain is used to manage flood risk.

Impacts from Renewable Energy Schemes 3.36 Horseshoe bats for which the Mendip SACs are designated are not considered vulnerable to mortality from the development of wind turbines. No horseshoe bat casualties have been recorded to 2010 in Europe (Rydell et al, 2010a). However, there may also be other impacts as described above, such as disturbance effects, habitat loss and/or fragmentation.

3.37 Shoveler ducks may be vulnerable to collision with wind turbines during commuting flights between water bodies.

Cumulative Impacts 3.38 Cumulative impacts are those where an impact in itself may not be significant, but in combination with other impacts from the plan, or from other plans and projects, may amount to a significant impact .

13 4. Identification and Description of the Natura 2000 Sites

Introduction 4.1 This section identifies which Natura 2000 sites are potentially affected.

4.2 Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) are designated due to the presence or providing ecological support to habitats, listed in Annex I, and species, listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC).

4.3 Special Protection Areas (SPA) are designated for bird species listed under Article 4 of the Birds Directive (79/409/EEC).

4.4 Ramsar sites are internationally important wetland sites that have been designated under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands 1971. Under Government policy, as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework, they are to be treated as Natura 2000 sites.

Identification of Natura 2000 sites 4.5 The following Natura 2000 sites have component sites present within the geographic area administered by the Mendip AONB. The locations of the Natura 2000 sites are shown in Figure 1.

• Chew Valley Lake SPA • Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC • Mendip Woodlands SAC • North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC

4.6 A further review for other Natura 2000 sites potentially affected in other counties within 10 kilometres of the AONB border has been carried out in Table 2 through consideration of impacts identified in Chapter 3, such as hydrology.

Table 2: Screening Natura 2000 Sites outside Somerset Natura 2000 Designated Features Screening Conclusion Site Mells Valley Semi-natural dry grasslands and There is some movement of SAC scrubland facies: on calcareous greater horseshoe bats between substrates ( Festuco-Brometalia ); Dry this site and the AONB sites it is grasslands and scrublands on chalk or considered that this will be limestone covered under the assessment of Caves not open to the public the AONB sites. Rhinolophus ferrumequinum ; Greater horseshoe bat Somerset SPA There is potentially some Levels and Non breeding movement of waterfowl between Moors SPA/ the Levels and Moors and Chew Cygnus columbianus bewickii ; Bewick ’s Ramsar swan Valley Lake SPA across the Anas crecca ; Eurasian teal Mendip Hills. However, it is Pluvialis apricaria ; European golden considered that effects on the plover Chew Valley Lake SPA would Vanellus vanellus ; Northern lapwing cover those on the Somerset Anas penelope ; Eurasian wigeon Levels and Moors SPA / Ramsar

14 Natura 2000 Designated Features Screening Conclusion Site Anas clypeata ; Northern shoveler

Waterbird assemblage

Ramsar

Species with peak counts in winter: Gadwall, Anas strepera strepera Water rail, Rallus aquaticus Golden plover, Pluvialis apricaria apricaria Ruff , Philomachus pugnax Common snipe, Gallinago gallinago gallinago

Aquatic Invertebrates

Severn SPA There is potentially some Estuary SPA/ Non breeding movement of waterfowl between SAC/ Bewick's Swan Cygnus columbianus the Severn Estuary and Chew Ramsar bewickii Valley Lake SPA across the Golden Plover Pluvialis apricaria Mendip Hills. However, it is Shoveler Anas clypetea considered that effects on the Teal Anas crecca Chew Valley Lake SPA would Wigeon Anas penelope cover those on the Severn Estuary SPA / Ramsar Waterfowl assemblage

SAC Coastal habitats Migratory fish species

Ramsar Non breeding Bewick’s swan, Cygnus columbianus bewickii Greater white-fronted goose, Anser albifrons albifrons Common shelduck, Tadorna tadorna Gadwall, Anas strepera strepera Dunlin, Calidris alpina alpina Common redshank, Tringa totanus totanus Eurasian teal, Anas crecca Northern pintail, Anas acuta Ringed plover, Charadrius hiaticula Little egret, Egretta garzetta Ruff, Philomachus pugnax Whimbrel, Numenius phaeopus Eurasian curlew, Numenius arquata arquata , Common greenshank, Tringa nebularia Eurasian wigeon, Anas penelope Northern shoveler, Anas clypeata Common pochard, Aythya ferina Water rail, Rallus aquaticus Spotted redshank, Tringa erythropus

Breeding Lesser black-backed gull, Larus fuscus graellsii Herring gull , Larus argentatus argentatus

15

Figure 1: Location of Natura 2000 sites in the Mendip Hills AONB

17 Conservation Objectives 4.7 The qualifying features for which each Natura 2000 sites is designated is given in the site descriptions below. For each of these features Natural England has set Conservation Objectives. It is the effect of the policy within the draft Mendip Hills Management Plan on these Conservation Objectives which support the integrity of the site that the Habitats Regulations Assessment is made.

Ecological Zones of Influence 4.8 Natura 2000 sites are designated for both species and habitat features. Conservation objectives and targets relate to maintaining the integrity of these features. This section describes how ‘Ecological Zones of Influence’ (EZI) are arrived at for each of the Natura 2000 sites potentially affected by the implementation of the Management Plan. These are areas outside the designated Natura 2000 site, which nonetheless if affected can adversely impact on the integrity of the site’s conservation objectives. For example, bat flight lines and feeding areas supporting a designated roost site if lost may affect the viability of the population.

4.9 Habitats are affected directly from on-site loss due to damage or destruction from land use change. However, they can also be influenced by off site factors such as hydrology. Where there are no significant off site requirements in maintaining a sites habitat the EZI is the same as the Natura 2000 sites boundary. However, sites affected by air pollution or dust will be assessed by distances set out in the Chapter 3. All flora species are affected by airborne pollution, although some, such as lichens and bryophytes are more vulnerable.

4.10 Unlike habitats, species are not limited by the designated site boundary yet its integrity may depend on habitat several kilometres from the site. For each Natura 2000 site, where a qualifying species is listed as a feature, a description is given, the potential impacts, which are likely to affect that species population’s integrity in terms of the site’s nature conservation objectives, and the methodology of how the EZI is formed.

4.11 Finally all the EZI for each of a site’s features, i.e. the site itself, its species and habitats, are combined into one EZI per site. Figure 2 at the end of the Chapter gives an overview of the extent of EZI.

Description and Characterisation of Natura 2000 Sites

Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC

Qualifying Features • European dry heaths • Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia ); Dry grasslands and scrublands on chalk or limestone • Caves not open to the public

- 18 - • Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines; Mixed woodland on base- rich soils associated with rocky slopes* • Rhinolophus ferrumequinum ; Greater horseshoe bat

Component Sites 4.12 The component sites for the Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC are:

• Crook Peak to Shute Shelve Hill SSSI • Uphill Cliff SSSI • Brean Down SSSI

4.13 Uphill Cliff SSSI and Brean Down lies outside of the Mendip Hills AONB.

Site Condition 4.14 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

Table 3: Mendip Limestone Grasslands Site Condition (1 st June, 2013) SAC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed Crook Peak to Shute 6.08 91.02 0 2.89 0 Shelve Hill

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.15 The primary reason for the sites designation is Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates ( Festuco-Brometalia ). This site comprises coastal and inland sections of the Carboniferous Limestone outcrops of the Mendips. The coastal headland and inland hills support the largest area of CG1 Festuca ovina – Carlina vulgaris grassland in England, including two sub-types (CG1a Carex humilis and CG1c Trinia glauca sub-communities) known from no other site in the UK. Areas of short- turf CG2 Festuca ovina – Avenula pratensis grassland also occur inland. The site is exceptional in that it supports a number of rare and scarce vascular plants typical of the oceanic southern temperate and Mediterranean elements of the British flora. These include white rock-rose Helianthemum apenninum , Somerset hair-grass Koeleria vallesiana and honewort Trinia glauca . Transitions to limestone heath (European dry heaths) situated on flatter terrain also occur.

4.16 The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are the extent of the habitat, the sward composition and the sward structure.

4.17 Transitions to European dry heaths occur on flatter terrain. European dry heaths typically occur on freely-draining, acidic to circumneutral soils with generally low nutrient content. Ericaceous dwarf-shrubs dominate the vegetation. The most common is heather Calluna vulgaris , which often occurs in combination with gorse Ulex spp., bilberry Vaccinium spp. or bell heather Erica cinerea , though other dwarf-shrubs are important locally. Most dry

- 19 - heaths are managed as extensive grazing for livestock

4.18 The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are the extent of the habitat, the amount of bare ground, the vegetative structure and composition, the presence of negative indicators and the sward composition and structure.

4.19 Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines occur in the Crook Peak to Shute Shelve Hill component site of the SAC. Tilio-Acerion ravine forests are woods of ash Fraxinus excelsior , wych elm Ulmus glabra and lime (mainly small-leaved lime Tilia cordata but more rarely large-leaved lime T. platyphyllos. The habitat type typically occurs on nutrient-rich soils that often accumulate in the shady micro-climates towards the bases of slopes and ravines. Therefore it is found on calcareous substrates associated with coarse scree, cliffs, steep rocky slopes and ravines, where inaccessibility has reduced human impact. This habitat type is ecologically variable, particularly with respect to the dominant tree species.

4.20 The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are maintenance of the area of the habitat, natural processes and structural development, the regeneration potential, composition and that species, habitats, structures characteristic of the site are present.

4.21 Caves not open to the public are present on the Crook Peak to Shute Shelve Hill component sites and are selected as features of the SAC as they provide important hibernation sites for greater and lesser horseshoe bats. Greater horseshoe bats are also a feature of the SAC.

4.22 In winter greater horseshoe bats exclusively in underground caves, mines and cellars with a temperature between 5-12 ºC (Ransome, 1996). They will forage in the winter when temperatures are over 5°C. Ophion wasps provide a large amount of the prey consumed through the winter period, which occur in dense swarms in deciduous woodland. (Ransome, 2002)

4.23 With regard to the natural habitats and/or species for which the site has been designated a void the deterioration of the qualifying natural habitats and the habitats of qualifying species, and the significant disturbance of those qualifying species, ensuring the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes a full contribution to achieving Favourable Conservation Status of each of the qualifying features.

Subject to natural change, to maintain or restore:

• The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species; • The structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species; • The supporting processes on which qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species rely; • The populations of qualifying species; • The distribution of qualifying species within the site.

- 20 - Table 4: Mendip Limestone Grasslands Key Environmental Conditions

Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland Sward structure and composition facies on calcareous substrates Absence of negative indicator species

European dry heaths Appropriate management

Control of inappropriate or invasive species

Tilio-acerion (lime-maple) forests on slopes, Appropriate management screes and ravines

Caves not open to the public Pressure from human activity above and below ground

Management of overlying land and catchment

Greater horseshoe bat Undisturbed roosts

Roost conditions maintained

Appropriate management of vegetation at roost entrances

Maintenance and connectivity of habitats used as flight lines on and off site

Feeding areas

Ecological Zone of Influence 4.24 The unimproved calcareous grasslands, dry heath and Tilio-Acerion forests are sensitive to changes in air quality. The habitat therefore may be influenced outside the SAC by dust and air pollution resulting from issues set out in Chapter 3. Air pollution from traffic may have eutrophication effects, which would impact on species composition in the sward. 200 metres is the distance from a road where nitrogen deposition is expected to occur in the Habitat Regulations Assessment of the draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West (2006). Bignall et al, (2004) consider that 150 metres air quality returns to background levels. The greater distance is used, as a precautionary approach is required.

4.25 Lesser horseshoe bats which also feed in winter have been radio tracked during this period which revealed that they foraged on average to a maximum distance of 1.2 kilometres from the hibernation site. One bat travelled to an absolute maximum distance of 2.1 kilometres. The winter foraging range appears to be approximately half the area covered in the summer months. (Bat Conservation Trust/BMT Cordah, 2005) It is assumed that this reduction in range would be also apply to the greater horseshoe bat and a buffer of hibernation roosts of 1.5 kilometres would include areas where the majority of winter foraging would occur.

- 21 - Vulnerability 4.26 These sites are all open-access and are heavily used for informal recreation. Recreational pressure is becoming a problem with increased levels of trampling and erosion leading to localised loss of habitat (Natural England). There is also the illegal setting of fires.

4.27 Maintaining appropriate grazing levels, currently under grazing is a problem on some of the grassland and heath, and inappropriate / overgrazing is a problem in some of the woodland. The balance of habitats is heavily dependent upon adequate grazing, which is not always available. Cutting or grazing may be used to maintain these habitats, including control of scrub encroachment (including Cotoneaster), though some scrub can be ecologically beneficial. Bracken is also invasive. The commoning system on which the management of the Crook Peak part of the site once depended no longer exists so the National Trust, who manages the site, supported by Natural England, has established a grazing system, using an absentee grazer.

4.28 Caves are sensitive systems, which often suffer significant pressure from human activities, both above and below ground. It is important to manage the overlying land and catchment in a manner, which takes account of potential consequences on the caves.

4.29 Light pollution is also becoming a problem, especially affecting the behaviour of bats. (prof. judgment: Land Use Consultants, 2006)

Mendip Woodlands SAC

Qualifying Features • Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines; mixed woodland on base- rich soils associated with rocky slopes.

Component Sites 4.30 The component sites for the Mendip Woodlands SAC are:

• Asham Wood SSSI • Ebbor Gorge SSSI • Rodney Stoke SSSI • Cheddar Wood SSSI

4.31 Asham Wood SSSI lies outside of the Mendip Hills AONB.

Site Condition 4.32 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

- 22 - Table 5: Mendip Woodlands Site Condition (1 st June, 2013) SAC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed Ebbor 74.92 25.08 0 0 0 Gorge Rodney 67.1 21.1 0 11.81 0 Stoke Cheddar 0 95.86 0 4.14 0 Wood

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.33 Mendip Woodlands in south-west England is a relatively extensive example of Tilio-Acerion forests on limestone. It is a cluster of three ash-dominated woods on Carboniferous limestone. A rich variety of other trees and shrubs are present, including elm Ulmus spp. and, locally, small-leaved lime Tilia cordata . At Ebbor Gorge elm rather than lime is mixed with ash Fraxinus excelsior in a steep-sided gorge; at both Rodney Stoke and Cheddar Wood lime and ash are found on rocky slopes with patches of deeper soil between the outcrops. Ferns characteristic of this woodland type, such as hart’s- tongue Phyllitis scolopendrium and shield-ferns Polystichum spp., are common. The site is in the centre of the range of common dormouse Muscardinus avellanarius and holds a large population of this species.

4.34 Cheddar Wood is an ancient woodland site stocked with coppice consisting of small-leaved lime Tilia cordata , ash Fraxinus excelsior , pedunculate oak Quercus robur and hazel Corylus avellana . field maple Acer campestre occurs throughout in small quantities, while whitebeam Sorbus aria , yew Taxus baccata , wych elm Ulmus glabra and wild service-tree Sorbus torminalis are less common. Three woodland types can be distinguished: (i) Ash-Field Maple; (ii) Calcareous Pedunculate Oak-Hazel-Ash; and (iii) Pedunculate Oak-Ash-Small-leaved Lime. The latter type has a very restricted distribution and Cheddar Wood provides one of the best and most extensive British examples. Shrubs present include wayfaring-tree Viburnum lantana , dogwood Cornus sanguinea and spindle Euonymus europaeus . The ground flora is varied, with bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta , dog's mercury Mercurialis perennis and wood anemone Anemone nemorosa abundant over most of the wood. Flushed slopes are dominated by ramsons Allium ursinum . Other plants present include wild daffodil Narcissus pseudonarcissus and orchid species.

4.35 Big Stoke, Little Stoke and Calve's Plot Wood are ancient woodland sites which used to be managed as coppice-with-standards. Big Stoke and Little Stoke were almost entirely clear-felled during the 1914–1918 war. The bulk of Little Stoke was cut over again in 1939. These two operations have produced different age classes, with most of trees in Little Stoke being 50–60 years old, whilst those in Big Stoke are 70–80 years old. Three woodland types can be distinguished: Ash-Field Maple; Calcareous Pedunculate Oak- Hazel-Ash; and Field Maple-Ash-Small-leaved Lime. Ash Fraxinus excelsior is the dominant species while pedunculate oak Quercus robur is also common. Small-leaved lime Tilia cordata , whitebeam Sorbus aria , wild service-tree S. torminalis , field maple Acer campestre are more localised in distribution. Hazel Corylus avellana dominates the understorey but many other species

- 23 - are also present including buckthorn Rhamnus catharticus , wayfaring-tree Viburnum lantana , guelder-rose V. opulus and crab apple Malus sylvestris . The ground flora is dominated by dog's mercury Mercurialis perennis , ivy Hedera helix and bluebell Hyacinthoides non-scripta .

4.36 The majority of the Ebbor Gorge component site consists of calcareous Ash woodland with a varied age and canopy structure, currently maintained by rotational coppicing and selective felling. The canopy is dominated by ash Fraxinus excelsior with oak Quercus robur varying in density from co- dominant in Hope Wood to virtual absence from central areas of the Gorge. Local stands of beech Fagus sylvatica , field maple Acer campestre , whitebeam Sorbus sp and hornbeam Carpinus betulus occur throughout the site. Hazel Corylus avellana dominates the under-storey and has been coppiced over a wide area. A variety of associated species include dogwood Cornus sanguinea , spindle Euonymus europaeus , wayfaring tree Viburnum lantana and guelder rose V. opulus and wild privit Ligustrum vulgare . The ground flora is indicative of the calcareous nature of the site, with dog’s mercury Mercurialis perennis being locally dominant. The valley of the main gorge is humid and provides ideal conditions for fungi and ferns. It contains a substantial assemblage of bryophytes with over 120 species recorded including the nationally rare Bryum canariense and very rare Amblystegiella confervoides . In addition, rich communities of lichens occur on limestone outcrops and as epiphytes on older trees giving the Gorge in excess of 150 lichen species

4.37 With regard to the natural habitats and/or species for which the site has been designated avoid the deterioration of the qualifying natural habitats and the habitats of qualifying species, and the significant disturbance of those qualifying species, ensuring the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes a full contribution to achieving Favourable Conservation Status of each of the qualifying features.

Subject to natural change, to maintain or restore: • The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species; • The structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species; • The supporting processes on which qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species rely; • The populations of qualifying species; • The distribution of qualifying species within the site.

Table 6: Mendip Woodlands Key Environmental Conditions

Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Tilio-Acerion forests on slopes, Appropriate management screes and ravines Deer, rabbit and livestock management

Exclusion of off road vehicles

- 24 - Ecological Zone of Influence 4.38 Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines are sensitive to changes in air quality. The habitat therefore may be influenced outside the SAC by dust and air pollution resulting from issues set out in Chapter 3

Vulnerability 4.39 Two parts of the SAC, Ebbor Gorge and Rodney Stoke, are National Nature Reserves, with the exception of a small area at Rodney Stoke. These are not currently under any threat. Cheddar Wood is a Somerset Wildlife Trust nature reserve but is owned by the quarrying company, Associated Aggregates. The woodland is currently protected by local planning policies as a notified SSSI. No threat from quarrying is at present anticipated.

4.40 Woodland areas require active management and the Invasion of inappropriate species into habitats requires control. Heavy browsing by deer can be a problem in some of the woodland.

North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC

Qualifying Features • Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates (Festuco-Brometalia ); Dry grasslands and scrublands on chalk or limestone • Caves not open to the public • Tilio-Acerion forests of slopes, screes and ravines; Mixed woodland on base- rich soils associated with rocky slopes* • Rhinolophus hipposideros ; Lesser horseshoe bat • Rhinolophus ferrumequinum ; Greater horseshoe bat

Component Sites 4.41 The component sites for the North Somerset & Mendip Bats SAC are:

• Compton Martin Ochre Mine SSSI • Banwell Caves SSSI • Banwell Ochre Mine SSSI • Brockley Hall Stables SSSI • King’s Wood and Urchin Wood SSSI • The Cheddar Complex SSSI • Wookey Hole SSSI

4.42 Brockley Hall Stables and King’s Wood and Urchin Wood SSSIs are outside the Mendip Hills AONB.

Site Condition 4.43 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

- 25 - Table 7: North Somerset and Mendips Bat Site Condition (1 st June 2013) SAC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed Banwell 100 0 0 0 0 Caves Banwell Ochre 0 0 100 0 0 Caves Cheddar 54.4 45.60 0 0 0 Complex Compton Martin 0 0 100 0 0 Ochre Mine Wookey 100 0 0 0 0 Hole

4.44 Based on population trends of greater horseshoe bats obtained at roosts in caves in the Cheddar Complex component site numbers of greater horseshoe bats have increased significantly since 1999. Sixty six bats were recorded in 1996. Gough’s Old Cave in particular has since heating has been installed. In February 2009 there were 427 greater horseshoe bats present. (pers. comm. Bob Corns, Natural England)

4.45 The following figures are estimated for 2012

Table 8: Cheddar: Estimated Summer Colony Sizes (extracted from SLR, 2012). Roost Grid Hibernation Breeding Colony Comments Location Reference Count (Jan 2012) Estimate Up Lesser Up Gough’s Lesser ST467539 to horseshoe to Cave horseshoe 100 100 Up Greater Up Numbers of breeding Greater to horseshoe to greater horseshoe are horseshoe Gough’s 500 500 difficult to estimate as ST466538 Old Cave they use an inaccessible Lesser 10 cavity between Gough’s horseshoe Old Cave and Long Hole. Lesser Lesser c. 20 Long Hole ST466538 horseshoe horseshoe 20 Greater 2 horseshoe N/A . Also used occasionally as White Spot Lesser ST474544 9 a hibernation site by greater Cave horseshoe horseshoe bats. N/A Possible breeding area for Great Lesser ST468539 18 lesser horseshoe bats Oons Hole horseshoe (numbers unknown). Totty Pot Lesser Lesser c. ST482535 25 Cave horseshoe horseshoe 25 Lesser N/A 4 Saye’s horseshoe ST466538 Hole Greater 2 horseshoe

- 26 - Determining Reasons for Designation 4.46 This site in south-west England was selected on the basis of the size of population represented (3% of the UK greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum population) and its good conservation of structure and function, having both maternity and hibernation sites. This site contains an exceptionally good range of the sites used by the population, comprising two maternity sites in lowland north Somerset and a variety of cave and mine hibernation sites in the Mendip Hills.

4.47 The top five feeding areas for greater horseshoe bats include:

• pasture with cattle as single stock or part of mixed stock (38.6%); • ancient semi natural woodland (16.6%); • pastures with stock other than cattle (10.3%); • meadows grazed by cattle in the autumn (9.4%); and • other meadows and broadleaved woodland (4.9%). (Duverg ė & Jones, 1994)

4.48 These habitats are not used according to the fore listed proportions throughout the year but change with the seasons. Woodlands and pasture adjoining wood are used in spring and early summer. As summer progresses, feeding switches to areas further away and tends to be fields used for grazing cattle and other types of stock. Meadows that have been cut and where animals are grazing are also used. (Ransome, 1996)

4.49 Within 1 kilometre of the roost the presence of permanent grazed pasture is critical for juvenile greater horseshoe bats. A high density of grazing animals should be present giving high presence of dung. Within the remainder of the roost foraging range grazing regimes can be more flexible provided adequate pasture is available. Longer swards benefit the larvae of noctuid moths. (Ransome, 1996)

4.50 A balance of woodland and pasture of about 50% and 50% provides optimum resources for greater horseshoe bats. Grassy rides and glades in woodland increase the range of food and provide opportunity or perch hunting. (Ransome, 1996; Bontadina et al, 2002)

4.51 A tall thick hedgerow is a very efficient way of producing a maximum level of insect prey using a minimum land area and important creators of physical conditions that enhance insect concentrations and reduce wind speeds for economical hunting flight. Larger hedgerows are required for commuting and also foraging by greater horseshoe bats. Continuous lines of vegetation of sufficient height and thickness to provide darkness when light levels are still relatively high are needed for commuting bats. (Ransome, 1996)

4.52 ‘Hostile’ habitats for greater horseshoe bats are arable and urban areas (Ransome, 1997)

4.53 Greater horseshoe bats travelling away from the roost towards foraging grounds do so along distinct flight paths, which are strictly adhered too. Paths may change during the summer season as foraging switches from woodland to pasture. Up to three main flight paths radiating in different directions can be used by a single colony, with varying proportions of

- 27 - the colony using different ones through a single summer, possibly as different foraging areas become profitable. The majority of flight paths (about 70%) run along the edges of woods, woodland rides or tall hedges, only rarely crossing open fields. Open fields are crossed only after dusk on dark nights, when they will fly fast and head for cover. They travel about 1 metre away from vegetation edges. (Ransome, 1996)

4.54 Greater horseshoe bats will cross gaps in flight lines of up to 12 to 15 meters but these are not crossed unless dark (Billington, 2000). They are averse to streetlights and artificial lighting Billington, 2000; Outen, 2002; Bat Conservation Trust/Institute of Lighting Engineers n/d).

4.55 The limestone caves of the Mendips provide a range of important hibernation sites for lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros . The Cheddar Complex component site supports a number of possible bat hibernacula and a single maternity roost. The maternity roost is located in the show caves. At Wookey Hole the roost site is located off the show caves.

4.56 Lesser horseshoe bats hibernate between September/October and April/May although they remain active and will forage when temperatures are above 5°C. Many lesser horseshoes hibernate in an alternative site to their summer roost sites, using caves, tunnels, mines or cellars where temperatures are below 11°C and with high humidity. Hibernation sites often contain few in number. (Bat Conservation Trust, 2003)

4.57 Lesser Horseshoe Bats forage in winter during warmer weather. They use similar habitats to those used in the summer months - that of woodland and particularly over pasture. (Boye & Dietz, 2005) In England radio tracking of bats revealed that they foraged on average to a maximum distance of 1.2 kilometres from the hibernation site. One bat travelled to an absolute maximum distance of 2.1 kilometres. The winter foraging range appears to be approximately half the area covered in the summer months. (Bat Conservation Trust/BMT Cordah, 2005)

4.58 The attributes that measures the condition of the horseshoe bat roosts in caves are the state of entrance, the security of the entrance, external conditions, lack of disturbance and use by bats

4.59 The Cheddar Complex and Wookey Hole component sites support a wide range of semi-natural habitats including Semi-natural dry grasslands and scrubland facies: on calcareous substrates ( Festuco-Brometalia ). The principal community present is CG2 Festuca ovina – Avenula pratensis grassland that occurs on rock ledges and on steep slopes with shallow limestone soil, especially in the dry valleys and gorges and on the south- facing scarp of the Mendips. The site is also important for the large number of rare plants, which are associated with Carboniferous limestone habitats. These include dwarf mouse-ear Cerastium pumilum , Cheddar pink Dianthus gratianopolitanus and rock stonecrop Sedum forsterianum , which occur on rocks, screes, cliffs and in open grassland. Transitions to and mosaics with limestone heath, calcareous screes, scrub and Tilio-Acerion forests are a particular feature of the Cheddar complex part of the site.

4.60 The attributes that measure the condition of the feature are the extent of the habitat, the sward composition and the sward structure.

- 28 - 4.61 The main block of Tilio-Acerion forest , listed on the SAC citation , is at King’s and Urchin’s Woods located in North Somerset outside the AONB.

4.62 Caves not open to the public are selected as features of the SAC as they provide important hibernation sites for greater and lesser horseshoe bats .

Table 9: North Somerset and Mendip Bats Key Environmental Conditions

Qualifying features Key environmental conditions to support site integrity

Horseshoe bats Undisturbed roosts

Roost conditions maintained

Appropriate management of vegetation at roost entrances

Maintenance and connectivity of habitats used as flight lines on and off site

Feeding areas

Semi-natural dry grasslands and Sward structure and composition scrubland facies on calcareous substrates Absence of negative indictor species

Caves not open to the public Pressure from human activity above and below ground

Management of overlying land and catchment

4.63 With regard to the natural habitats and/or species for which the site has been designated avoid the deterioration of the qualifying natural habitats and the habitats of qualifying species, and the significant disturbance of those qualifying species, ensuring the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes a full contribution to achieving Favourable Conservation Status of each of the qualifying features.

Subject to natural change, to maintain or restore:

• The extent and distribution of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species; • The structure and function (including typical species) of qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species; • The supporting processes on which qualifying natural habitats and habitats of qualifying species rely; • The populations of qualifying species; • The distribution of qualifying species within the site.

- 29 - Ecological Zone of Influence 4.64 For greater horseshoe bats a buffer of 6 kilometres around the maternity roost site areas are formed. Starting with the roost site the likely habitat used by greater horseshoe bats is digitised based on radio tracking data produced in 1999 for the Cheddar Complex component of the SAC (Jones & Billington, 1999). This process is further analysed using aerial photographic interpretation and available habitat data. See Figure 2.

4.65 Similarly lesser horseshoe bat roosts are mapped using data on roost size to determine the distance buffered. Hibernation roosts are buffered by 1.2 kilometres based on winter time radio tracking. This forms the EZI for lesser horseshoe bats with roosts located in the SAC.

4.66 The unimproved calcareous grasslands are sensitive to changes in air quality. The habitat therefore may be influenced outside the SAC by dust and air pollution resulting from issues set out in Chapter 3. Air pollution from traffic may have eutrophication effects, which would impact on species composition in the sward. 200 metres is the distance from a road where nitrogen deposition is expected to occur in the Habitat Regulations Assessment of the draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West (2006). Bignall et al, (2004) consider that 150 metres air quality returns to background levels. The greater distance is used, as a precautionary approach is required.

Vulnerability 4.67 There is concern regarding loss of bat foraging areas. (Natural England). Problems are known to exist with recreational cavers in some of the caves used as hibernacula by bats. Natural England is working with the owners of these caves in order to minimise disturbance at critical times of the year. Further breeding roosts are believed to occur in the Cheddar area and steps are being taken to identify these. The bat population will potentially be at risk until these are discovered.

4.68 There are significant management problems associated with both the grassland and woodland elements of the SAC. Maintaining appropriate grazing levels is a problem. Currently under grazing is a problem on some of the grassland. Low levels of grazing are resulting in scrub invasion and the development of secondary woodland. There is also a problem with invasive and inappropriate species, such as gorse and bracken in the grassland.

- 30 - Figure 2: Horseshoe Bat Ecological Zone of Influence in the Mendip Hills AONB

- 31 - Chew Valley Lake SPA

Qualifying Features • Anas clypeata ; Northern shoveler (Non-breeding)

Component Sites 4.69 The component sites for the Chew Valley SPA are:

• Chew Valley Lake SSSI

Site Condition 4.70 Based on the tables for the equivalent Site of Special Scientific Interest the condition of the affected components, by % of site, is as follows:

Table 10: Chew Valley Lake Site Condition (1 st June 2013) SAC Favourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Unfavourable Destroyed, component recovering no change declining part site destroyed Chew Valley 100 0 0 0 0 Lake

Determining Reasons for Designation 4.71 The site consists of an expanse of open water (the largest artificial freshwater lake in South West England) with peripheral areas of reedbed, carr, woodland and neutral grassland. The sparse submerged vegetation is composed largely of pondweed species Potamogeton spp and water crowfoots Ranunculus spp . The site is an internationally important staging post for migratory birds, especially waders, terns, warblers and hirundines. The grasslands and reedbeds are critical autumn feeding grounds for reed warblers Acrocephalus scirpaceus and sedge warblers A. schoenobaenus , and the lake is one of the most important inland waters in Britain for wintering wildfowl. Chew Valley Lake supports good populations of shoveler Anas clypeata (for which it is designated a SPA), gadwall Anas strepera, and nationally important numbers of teal Anas crecca and tufted duck Aythya fuligula . Other species over-wintering include goldeneye Bucephala clangula , wigeon Anas penelope , snipe Gallinago gallinago , lapwing Vanellus vanellus and redshank Tringa totanus .

4.72 With regard to the individual species and/or assemblage of species for which the site has been classified avoid the deterioration of the habitats of the qualifying features, and the significant disturbance of the qualifying features, ensuring the integrity of the site is maintained and the site makes a full contribution to achieving the aims of the Birds Directive.

Subject to natural change, to maintain or restore:

• The extent and distribution of the habitats of the qualifying features; • The structure and function of the habitats of the qualifying features;

- 32 - • The supporting processes on which the habitats of the qualifying features rely; • The populations of the qualifying features; • The distribution of the qualifying features within the site.

Table 11: Chew Valley Lake Key Environmental Conditions

Operational Criteria Feature Attribute Target Feature Extent - No net decrease from Open Water Shoveller Area (ha) reference level.

Water depth - No net decrease of water

Extensive <25cm depth during the winter shallows season

Food availability - No significant reduction in Abundance of presence and abundance of aquatic food species (including e.g. invertebrates, Hydrobia, seeds) in relation to insects and plant reference levels. material

Disturbance in No significant displacement of roosting and birds attributable to human feeding area distribution in day time roosting and feeding area

Ecological Zone of Influence 4.73 The shoveler is a dabbling duck, feeding with their bills just submerged under water and sieving for zooplankton and small invertebrates. They often feed in groups close together. The feeding method is best suited to shallow, well vegetated inland waters. (Hayman & Burton, 1976) In winter shovelers are found on inland marshes, small lakes and pools, and around the fringes of reservoirs (Holden & Cleeves, 2002).

4.74 Guillemain et al, 2000, suggest that food abundance is of crucial importance for winter habitat selection by shovelers, and that even the sites with abundant foods in autumn may not be able to sustain large concentrations of shoveler through an entire winter. Zooplankton levels are crucial.

4.75 Breeding shovelers are likely to be disturbed by the proximity of road traffic and could be displaced by an average of 65metres (20 – 265 metres) at levels of 5000 vehicles per day and by 320 metres (90 – 1030 metres) at levels of 50000 vehicles per day (Reijnen et al, 1996). Wintering shovelers are also likely to be disturbed by recreational activity (Evans & Warrington, 1997)

4.76 Shovelers from Chew Valley Lake commute between the site, Blagdon Lake and Cheddar Reservoir to exploit changing feeding conditions. However, detailed studies of such movements have not been undertaken. Nor have studies of arriving and departing migrants. In some years the numbers at Cheddar can be high, but it depends on factors such as water level and weed

- 33 - growth. (pers. comm. John Martin, Natural England)

4.77 The EZI for shoveler ducks is considered to be determined by a buffer around the lake of 65 metres based on the likelihood of disturbance events. Flight activity between water bodies is unlikely to be affected except by the placement of wind turbines along commuting corridors.

Vulnerability 4.78 Chew Valley Lake is a large freshwater reservoir. The lake supplies drinking water to the city of Bristol and surrounding area. Large numbers of people use the area for recreational activities including trout fishing, sailing and walking. A zoning scheme minimises any adverse impacts on the wildlife of the area. The site is owned and managed by Bristol Water Plc. They have successfully implemented a nature conservation strategy for the site.

4.79 There are currently no issues related to water abstraction. The site is in favourable condition with no problems identified. However, Natural England advised that there might be potential problems with failure to meet Total Phosphate targets. The Environment Agency advised that most sources of nutrient pollution are likely to be diffuse and agricultural.

- 34 - 5. Other Relevant Plans or Projects

5.1 Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive requires a HRA of ‘…any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect there on, either individually or in combination with other plan or projects’. Therefore it is necessary to identify plans and projects that may have ‘in-combination’ affecting the Nature 2000 sites, which are the focus of this assessment.

5.2 The assessment of significant effects for mineral’s policies and consultation areas needs to take account of the impact in combination with other plans and projects. For Natura 2000 sites where it is unlikely that the Management Plan on its own will require a stage 2 Appropriate Assessment in relation to that site, it has been necessary to consider whether ‘in-combination’ effects are likely to result in an Appropriate Assessment being required.

5.3 The guidance states that only those that are considered most relevant should be collected for ‘in combination’ testing - an exhaustive list could render the assessment exercise unworkable. The following plans or strategies are considered to have potential effects and therefore have been included within the assessment.

Table 12: Assessment of Plans and Projects for In-Combination Effects

Plan or Project Implications for Management Plan Somerset Local New housing resulting from policy in Local Plans or Core Strategies Authorities’ Local Plans or could have in-combination effects from increased traffic generated Core Strategies by development and that generated by tourist traffic where it is close to Natura 2000 sites. The A38 runs within 200 metres of the Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC.

There are potential recreational effects on Natura 200 sites from new housing development. This is most likely to occur at the Mendip Woodlands SAC.

Water abstraction from new housing and other development may affect groundwater.

Somerset Forward Major infrastructure schemes are concentrated within Taunton and Transport Plan other policies work towards a reduction of traffic using roads. There is a Freight Strategy, which directs HGV traffic onto certain routes through the County. There could be in-combination effects where these routes run within 200 metres of sensitive Natura 2000 sites. The A38, a strategic freight route, runs within 200 metres of the Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC.

Somerset Rights of Way Potential in combination effects as the plan seeks to improve the Improvement Plan 2006 existing rights of way network which may result in trampling and / or disturbance to cited species. The Plan contains no policy with regard to these effects on wildlife.

Somerset Waste Core There is unlikely to be in combination effects from policy in the Strategy Somerset Waste Core Strategy as growth is likely to be focussed in Zones which generally lie outside minerals producing areas.

- 35 - Plan or Project Implications for Management Plan Brue, Axe and North The strategies set out in the CAMS identify that water is limited in Somerset Streams this region and that additional abstraction in Mendip will not be Catchment Abstraction permitted unless necessary. The Cheddar Yeo rises in the Mendip Management Strategy Hills but any additional abstraction is unlikely to have a negative impact on the Somerset Levels and Moors SPA/ Ramsar.

Bristol Avon Catchment The strategies set out in the CAMS identify that there is no water Abstraction Management available in the Mells and Somerset Frome Rivers. Water is limited Strategy in this region and that additional abstraction in Mendip will not be permitted unless necessary. Any additional abstraction could have a negative impact on the Chew Valley Lake SPA.

- 36 - 6. Analysis of the draft Management Plan

Introduction

6.1 The Management Plan overarches local authority administrative boundaries and the plans and strategies produced by these bodies. It identifies what is necessary to conserve and enhance the Mendip Hills landscape within the AONB boundaries. The Management Plan seeks to influence local authority local plans and strategies.

6.2 Every objective and associated action is assessed against each of the qualifying features for the Natura 2000 sites that have been identified. Many actions will have a neutral effect on each site feature and are therefore not detailed any further within this report as they would not have any significant effect on a Natura 2000 site.

6.3 “Significant” is interpreted as an effect likely to adversely affect a Natura 2000 site’s integrity. “Integrity” is described in ODPM Circular 06/2005: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation as ' the site’s coherence, ecological structure and function across its whole area that enables it to sustain the habitat, complex of habitats and/or the levels of populations of species for which it was classified ' (ODPM Circular 06/2005, para. 20).

6.4 Significance will vary from site to site according to conservation sensitivities and magnitude of the potential impact. Assessment is triggered by likelihood not certainty in line with precautionary principle (European Communities, 2000). Therefore, the assessment considers whether effects are ‘likely’ and ‘significant’ and not every conceivable effect or fanciful possibility. The Waddensee tests are used:

• Would the effect undermine the conservation objectives for the site? • Can significant effects be excluded on the basis of objective information?

6.5 Significant effects are also determined in-combination with other plans or projects and take account of cumulative effects.

Management for Nature Conservation Purposes

6.6 Although the Mendip Hills AONB Management Plan does not specifically support management measures for conservation purposes on Natura 2000 sites Action BG1.2 states the intention to improve SSSI condition from recovering to favourable condition in partnership with landowners and Natural England. All Natura 2000 sites are also SSSIs.

Analysis of Policy in the draft Management Plan

6.7 Table 11 analyses the policies in the objectives and actions of the Management Plan and gives an assessment of its potential impact on Natura 2000 / Ramsar sites. Those actions that have a potential significant effect are

37 highlighted in Orange in the ‘Comment’ column. Objectives and Actions updated from July 2013 are highlighted in bold text.

Table 13: Objective and Action Analysis

Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected L1 Promote appropriate L1.1 Create a stronger and None predicted None No significant management to ensure that more integrated approach to the effect likely the distinctive Mendip Hills Mendip Hills natural AONB landscape is environment through maintained and enhanced mechanisms like Local Nature Partnerships and a Nature Improvement Area Partnership L2 Provide opportunities to L2.1 Organise rural skills None predicted None No significant acquire and develop skills training events effect likely required to care for and promote the landscape and its special qualities.

L2.2 Extend links with colleges, None predicted None No significant youth organisations and land effect likely managers to develop and run training events/programmes

L3 Increase awareness and L3.1 Update the Mendip Hills None predicted None No significant appreciation of the AONB Landscape Character effect likely purposes of designation Assessment (LCA) by and the special qualities of collating the existing LCAs to the AONB form one comprehensive document. L3.2 Produce an AONB None predicted None No significant Sensitivity Map effect likely

L3.3 Complete Cheddar None predicted None No significant landscape character effect likely assessment and or sensitivity study.

L3.4 Develop and maintain None predicted None No significant Mendip Hills AONB web site effect likely with appropriate information

L4 Increase awareness of L4.1 Promote Greentraveller’s None predicted None No significant the benefits of supporting Mendip Hills AONB online guide effect likely. The local products and services Green that help conserve and Travellers website lists enhance the landscape. places to stay and visit 3

3 http://www.greentraveller.co.uk/

38 Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected BG1 Ensure that there is no BG1.1 Ensure local input to None predicted None No significant net loss of characteristic update of National Character effect likely habitats and species. Areas and respond to any implications.

BG1.2 Build on improvements in None predicted None No significant Sites of Special Scientific effect likely and Interest (SSSI) condition to date is likely to by moving SSSI land from improve condition of Recovering to Favourable component condition sites to Favourable Conservation Status within designated site boundaries BG2 Promote a landscape BG2.1 Pursue a locally None predicted None No significant scale approach to the determined Nature effect likely conservation and expansion Improvement Area for the of coherent and resilient Mendip Hills NCA and AONB. ecological networks within and adjoining the AONB. BG2.2 Demonstrate best None predicted None No significant practice by the use of pilots and effect likely case studies

BG2.3 Support farmers and None predicted None No significant land managers to extend land in effect likely the Mendip Hills covered by agri-environment schemes.

BG2.4 Seek to influence None predicted None No significant agricultural support payment effect likely reviews by responding to government thinking on agricultural support payments

BG3 Increase awareness BG3.1 Promote ecological None predicted None No significant and monitoring of the network information available effect likely biodiversity resource of the for the Mendip Hills in an easily Mendip Hills AONB so that accessible form it is sufficiently understood to continue to guide the successful conservation of the characteristic habitats and species.

39 Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected BG4 promote a holistic BG4.1 Pursue a Mendip Hills None predicted None No significant approach to implementing NIA for the Mendip Hills NCA effect likely the AONB Management area incorporating Management Plan objectives, National Plan objectives and NCA Character Area Statements opportunities of Opportunity and a local determined Nature Improvement Area’s objectives. BG5 Recognise and BG5.1 Organise annual Mendip None predicted None No significant celebrate geological sites Rocks! festival effect likely and features of the Mendip Hills AONB to ensure the successful conservation both of the geology and wildlife habitat they provide. BG5.2 Implement Discovering Disturbance to North Possible Black Down ‘what lies beneath’ roosting bats Somerset significant school and youth group caving and Mendip effecting activity/learning programme. Bats SAC roosting horseshoe bats. Specific cave locations are not specified BG5.3 Develop a Geodiversity None predicted None No significant Action Plan to identify and effect likely implement priorities for the conservation of geological features.

BG6 Increase awareness of BG6.1 Linked with BG5.2 None predicted None No significant the Mendip Hills geology, produce information on the effect likely particularly cave systems in importance of the Mendip Hills although note relation to the importance geology in providing a water the action is linked to one they play in water resource that may have a management and water significant effect supply.

H1 Improve the recording, H1.1 identify opportunities for None predicted None No significant interpretation and people to learn about and visit effect likely understanding of all aspects cultural heritage assets- sites, of the AONBs historic monuments, buildings, environment to ensure local landscapes communities and visitors enjoy a rich experience of H1.2 Forge better connections None predicted None No significant the sense of place. to heritage materials held in effect likely collections outside the AONB

40 Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected H1.3 Raise awareness amongst None predicted None No significant communities about how to effect likely access and learn about cultural heritage

H2 Increase awareness and H2.1 Develop Mendip Rocks! None predicted None No significant communicate the framework for research, effect likely significance of the high interpretation and management quality historic environment of extraction industries and of the Mendip Hills AONB. cave exploration.

H2.2 Work with communities to Disturbance Mendip Potential promote, develop and deliver and habitat Limestone significant community events across the degradation Grasslands effect. Action is AONB. SAC not location specific. It is Mendip assumed that Woodlands Chew Valley SAC Lake SPA has a Management North Plan which Somerset would control and Mendip potential Bats SAC adverse impacts from such events H2.3 Publish English Heritage None predicted None No significant Mendip Hills AONB Publication effect likely

H3 Promote appropriate H3.1 Work with local None predicted None No significant management of sites, communities to develop and effect likely structures and landscapes deliver externally funded designated for their community based projects international, national, regional or local importance in the historic environment H3.2 Use a range of tools e.g. None predicted None No significant to ensure no further los of planning permissions, effect likely heritage assets. management agreements, grant aid and conservation initiatives to deliver positive conservation.

R1 Maintain, improve and R1.1 Continue to promote None predicted None No significant promote public access and Mendip Hills AONB effect likely. quiet recreational activities Partnerships ‘ Code of Conduct Code of with measures to ensure for managing recreational and Conduct refers to potential access for all in accordance fundraising events in the impacts on with the purposes of AONB Mendip Hills AONB’ SSSIs

41 Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected designation. R1.2 Continue to deliver None predicted None No significant Conserving Black Down project effect likely to repair and restore heavily eroded paths

R1.3 Deliver planned network Habitat Mendip Potential effect improvements through Rights of degradation Limestone of habitat Way Improvement Plans and Grasslands trampling from Green Infrastructure SAC improved access Strategies Mendip Woodlands SAC

North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC

R1.4 Manage, maintain and Habitat Mendip Potential effect promote the Strawberry Line, degradation Limestone of habitat The Mendip Way and Grasslands trampling from Limestone Link routes as key SAC increased recreational recreational routes into the Mendip activity AONB. Woodlands SAC

North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC

R1.5 Respond to development Habitat Mendip Potential effect of 1SW Cycle Adventure project degradation Limestone of habitat as a as means to promote Grasslands trampling from cycling activity in SW protected SAC increased recreational landscapes Mendip activity Woodlands SAC

North Somerset and Mendip Bats SAC

42 Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected R2 Support the R2.1 Continue to work with None predicted None No significant development of tourism and Greentraveller Ltd to ensure effect probable. day visits that benefits the online guide is effective It is assumed local economy, conserves that the online guide refers to and enhances the Mendip landscape and improves products and understanding of the services and Mendip Hills. not to access routes. Greentraveller’s Mendip Hills needs to be explained further in the Management Plan. R2.2 Annually review and None predicted None No significant reprint Mendip Hills AONB effect likely Visitor Guide

R2.3 identify specific tourism None predicted None No significant business needs and develop effect likely solutions

R3 Develop and promote R3.1 Provide up to date None predicted None No significant greater use of more information on sustainable effect likely sustainable methods of travel to and within the AONB travel to and around the direct to visitors and businesses AONB for enjoyment and to provide to their visitors. recreation. R4 Support healthy R4.1 Build partnerships with None predicted None No significant lifestyles by encouraging Health and Well Being Boards effect likely more people to use the to identify and coordinate Mendip Hills for opportunities sustainable outdoor activities N1 Recognise the benefits N1.1 Ensure that all relevant None predicted None No significant and relevance of the AONB strategies and plans reflect the effect likely as a valuable source of importance of the AONBs ecosystem services, natural services and benefits economic and health benefits N1.2 Develop and or identify None predicted None No significant training resources to enable effect likely parish councils and volunteers to gain a better understanding of ecosystem services and use through existing volunteering/ Young Ranger and parish council activities.

43 Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected N2 Promote conservation of N2.1 Implement and monitor the None predicted None No significant water resources and North and Mid Somerset and effect likely enhance water quality, the Bristol Avon Catchment taking measures to reduce Flood Management Plans low flows and flooding by appropriate management and use. N3 Promote sustainable N3.1 Continue to implement None predicted None No significant management of soils in catchment sensitive farming for effect likely accordance with best the Somerset Levels and Moors practice to minimise erosion and North Somerset Moors and water pollution and Sensitive Farming Priority maximise resilience to Catchments drought. N3.2 Continue BW Metaldehyde None predicted None No significant project to reduce use of effect likely pesticides containing Metaldehyde.

LM1 Support sustainable LM1.1 Maximise opportunities None predicted None No significant farming to ensure it to respond to and influence the effect likely remains as the principle Government’s thinking on land and contributes to agricultural support payments in maintaining the special particular seeking a financial qualities of the AONB return for provision of ecosystems services.

LM2 Support and promote LM2.1 Carry out a survey to None predicted None No significant rural land management that identify Calamanarian grassland effect likely conserves and enhances and current state natural resources, including biodiversity, landscape character the historic environment and aids public awareness and enjoyment of the Mendip Hills AONB.

LM3 Promote a sustainable LM3.1 Promote the Woodland None predicted None No significant woodland economy that Trusts ‘Community Woodland effect likely enhances the Mendip Hills Network’ providing information AONB woodlands and on community woodland wider landscape provides management and ownership wood fuel and local community opportunities. LM3.2 Promote the Woodland None predicted None No significant Trust's effect likely a) free community and school planting packs - weblink: http://www.woodlandtrust.org .uk/en/take-part/plant- trees/Pages/priority.aspx

44 Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected LM3.3 Promote the Woodland Habitat Loss Mendip The action is Trust's MOREwoods scheme, Limestone not locational to help and facilitate Grasslands and planting landowners to plant trees - SAC could potentially incur the loss of weblink: North limestone http://www.woodlandtrust.org Somerset grasslands .uk/en/planting- and Mendip woodland/funding-and- Bats SAC planting-grants/woodland- trust- grants/Pages/default.aspx

LM3.4 Monitor ash trees for None predicted None No significant Chalara fraxinea and report effect likely and communicate information as appropriate

LM4 Influence the use, LM4.1 Apply the ecological None predicted None No significant restoration and after use of approach to restoration as set effect likely all quarries to minimise the out in the SCC Somerset impact on the landscape Minerals Plan for the Mendips and to be compatible with Hills NCA the purposes of the AONB designation.

D1 Working with local D1.1 Establish robust detailed None predicted None No significant planning authorities, policies in Local Plans and in effect likely ensure that development Neighbourhood Plans which in the AONB and its support the purposes of setting, is of a nature, AONB designation. scale, location and design that meets community need without D1.2 Review the Partnership None predicted None No significant compromising the special Dark Skies Statement to take effect likely qualities of the Mendip account of revised data and Hills AONB sensitivity studies .

D1.3 Ensure that the None predicted None No significant ‘Agricultural Building Design effect likely. The Guidelines for the Mendip Hills objective AONB (2013)’ and ‘ Guidelines includes for the protection and for horse related development enhancement of for the Mendip Hills AONB biodiversity (2012)’ are applied in all appropriate cases. D1.4 Support and facilitate local None predicted None No significant planning authorities working effect likely together to achieve consistency and good practice in the consideration of planning applications

45 Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected D1.5 Provide landscape advice None predicted None No significant for planners to encourage effect likely. It is opportunities to be taken to assumed that enhance the distinctive the structural connectivity of landscape and other qualities of features in the the Mendip Hills AONB landscape, including its ecosystem services important for the movement of horseshoe bats would be taken into account in giving advice D1.6 Monitor development in None predicted None No significant the Mendip Hills AONB effect likely identifying any trends that require addressing

D2 Working with local D2.1 Highways authorities will None predicted None No significant highways authorities, seek to minimise the impact of effect likely ensure that the special road schemes including although qualities of the AONB are signage, junction design, traffic Objective D2 is not specific with fully respected in the calming measures and lighting. regard to planning, design, provision sensitive wildlife and management of all and their types of transport and habitats 4 it does associated infrastructure. not promote road schemes in itself

4 Greater horseshoe bats will cross gaps in flight lines of up to 12 to 15 meters but are not crossed unless dark (Billington, 2000).For lesser horseshoe bats gaps as little as 10 metres could prevent movement along a flight line (Schofield et al, 2002; Brinkmann et al, 2003). Horseshoe bats are a species of bat which is sensitive to artificial lighting, such as from street lamps (Outen, 2002; Bat Conservation Trust /Institute of Lighting Engineers, 2008). Stone et al (2009) has shown that lesser horseshoe bats are disrupted from flying along hedgerows by introduced artificial light levels above 0.5 Lux. It was also found that continued disruption increased the effect, i.e. lesser horseshoe bats do not become habituated to the presence of artificial lighting. This would therefore permanently affect their behaviour possibly having a significant effect on use of flight lines accessing feeding areas. Lacking evidence to the contrary it assumed that greater horseshoe bats react in the same way.

46 Objective Action Potential Natura 2000 Comment Impact on sites Natura 2000 Potentially Sites Affected D3 Encourage reduction in D3.1 Promote position None predicted None No significant Carbon emissions within statements and guidance on effect likely. the AONB through renewable energy Action is to reducing energy provide a position consumption, applying statement on energy conservation renewable measures, encouraging energy. more sustainable patterns of development, and utilising renewable energy generation technologies that are of an appropriate type and scale for their siting. D4 Ensure issues of D4.1 Encourage and support None predicted None No significant importance for the parish councils producing effect likely management of the AONB Neighbourhood Plans and other landscape a re fully reflected local plans to address in strategies and plans importance of landscape produced by other agencies and local communities. P1 Increase the P1.1 Continue to develop None predicted None No significant opportunities for partnership projects and joint effect likely volunteering and the range working including the Mendip of people participating, to Rocks! festival, Black Down benefit the environment, Project, peoples well being and the local communities in and around the AONB P2 Encourage the P2.1 Continue the Mendip Hills None predicted None No significant involvement of local people AONB Volunteer task effect likely and the wider community in programme the Management of the AONB. P2.2 Identify local projects None predicted None No significant through Parish Plans and other effect likely parish council led consultation

P2.3 Support projects None predicted None No significant appropriate to a protected effect likely landscape and that assist delivery of the AONB Management plan

P3 Promote the Mendip PA3.1 Support development of None predicted None No significant Hills as an educational facilities and projects that effect likely resource for all ages and provide educational resources encourage sharing of e.g. Mendip Hills AONB Young research and learning Rangers, Wells and Mendip tools Museum, Farmlink, Charterhouse Centre, Somerset Earth Science Centre

47

Analysis of Potential Significant Effects on Features of Natura 2000 Sites

Summary 6.8 The following table summarises the features of Natura 2000 sites that are potentially affected by actions in the draft Management Plan which have been identified in orange in Table 13. These are then further analysed in the following sections.

Table 14: Summary of Potential Effects Feature Site Potential Objective / Action Significant Effect Greater and Mendip Disturbance BG5.2 Implement Discovering Black Down ‘what Lesser Limestone to Roosting lies beneath’ school and youth group caving Horseshoe Grasslands Bats activity/learning programme Bats SAC

North Somerset & Mendip Bats SAC

Woodland Mendip Habitat H2.2 Work with communities to promote, and Limestone Degradation develop and deliver community events across Grassland Grasslands or Loss the AONB. Habitats SAC R1.3 Deliver planned network improvements Mendip through Rights of Way Improvement Plans Woodlands SAC

North Somerset R1.4 Manage, maintain and promote the and Mendip Strawberry Line, The Mendip Way and Bats SAC Limestone Link routes as key recreational routes into the AONB.

R1.5 Respond to development of 1SW Cycle Adventure project as a as means to promote cycling activity in SW protected landscapes

Grassland Mendip Habitat Loss LM3.3 Promote the Woodland Trust's Habitats Limestone MOREwoods scheme, to help and facilitate Grasslands landowners to plant trees - weblink: SAC http://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/en/planting- woodland/funding-and-planting- North grants/woodland-trust- Somerset grants/Pages/default.aspx and Mendip Bats SAC

48 Greater and Lesser Horseshoe Bats

Disturbance to roosting bats 6.9 Action BG5.2 is to implement ‘Discovering Black Down’ ‘what lies beneath’, a school and youth group caving activity/learning programme. There are horseshoe bat hibernation roost sites within caves on the north facing slopes of Blackdown in Burrington Combe and to the west. Although the caves are not within the designated SAC it is likely that they support greater and / or lesser horseshoe bats that are part of the North Somerset and Mendip Bats / Mendip Limestone Grasslands SAC populations.

6.10 The Action does not identify the caves that would be used or the period of the activity. Goatchurch Cavern is already being used by schools and youth organisations 5. Goatchurch Cavern, Sidcot Swallet and Avelines Hole are recognised as traditional novice caves but as well in Pierre's Pot, Lionels Hole, Rod's Pot and Reads Cavern are also used 6.

6.11 Hibernating bats are unable to move quickly; it may take up to an hour for a bat to become warm enough to be fully active, and once the arousal process is started it is often irreversible. Bats have limited fat reserves to survive the winter period and each arousal uses a considerable amount of energy – possibly enough for ten days hibernation. Awakenings scheduled by their own internal rhythms or stimulated by natural conditions can be accommodated, but it is not easy to make up weight lost in winter. Any unplanned awakenings, for example by human disturbance, such as from increased body heat and the light from torches, increase the risk of fat reserves running out before the winter is over. With little prospect of replenishing these reserves, the bat may die through starvation or at least fail to recover sufficiently from hibernation to breed successfully. 7

6.12 Greater horseshoe bats have been recorded in Read’s Cavern, Goatchurch Canyon, Foxes Hole, Aveline’s Hole and Elephant Hole with a maximum count of 4 bats up to 2003. Lesser horseshoe bats have been recorded in most of the other caves in Burrington Combe and Read’s Cavern, Goatchurch Canyon, Foxes Hole. Again the roosting numbers are low. Many of these caves are used by cavers on a regular basis. Some are secured others are completely open. It is likely that the impact caving is having on the bats is not known. However, populations of horseshoe bats appear to be stable or increasing. (Pers. comm. Bob Corns, Natural England)

6.13 It is considered that the ‘Discovering Black Down’ ‘what lies beneath’ action to implement a caving activity programme is likely to be regulated and led by experienced cavers aware of the location of roosting sites and issue of disturbance bats. Also it is considered that the number of roosting horseshoe bats is likely to be low (<5). No horseshoe bat maternity roosts are known in Burrington Combe. Paragraph 3.2.17 of the draft Management Plan states that cave systems need to be protected from ‘inappropriate recreational use’.

6.14 Therefore the effect of sporadic disturbance is unlikely to affect the maintenance of horseshoe bat populations and it is considered that there would be no significant effect.

5 http://caveclimb.com/ 6 http://www.mendipcavinggroup.org.uk/sections/caving/caves.html 7 http://british-caving.org.uk/conservation/batsunderground.pdf

49

6.15 However, it is recommended that the following text be added to the end of paragraph 3.2.17:

‘… and inappropriate recreational use, and where use disturbs roosting bats.’

Woodland and Grassland Habitats

Habitat degradation and loss 6.13 Habitat deterioration or loss due to a combination of increased leisure use and tourist visits through walking or cycling. A number of actions (H2.2; R1.3; R1.4; and R1.5) proposed in the Management Plan would encourage access to potentially sensitive habitats occurring within SACs.

6.14 Habitat deterioration or loss of grassland habitat occurs from trampling. Although common pasture herbs are more resilient sensitive species disappear on and besides paths and this effect can extend up to 50 metres either side. This is exacerbated by nitrogen enrichment from dog fouling and impacts are greater on steep slopes. Four hundred passages a year could result in 50% loss of habitat quality along those rights of way. (Penny Anderson Associates, 2009)

6.15 In woodland habitat deterioration and loss occurs from trampling with passages as low as 40 -50/year eliminating species particularly species of low productivity and especially ancient woodland flora; lichens and some mosses (Penny Anderson Associates, 2009). This effect exacerbated by nitrogen enrichment from dog fouling (Footprint Ecology, 2009).

6.16 Another action which may result in habitat loss to limestone grassland is through promoting the Woodland Trust’s MOREwoods scheme, to help and facilitate landowners to plant trees.

6.17 However, it is the stated objective of the Management Plan under BG1 to ensure no net loss of characteristic habitats and species and Action BG1.2 states the intention to move SSSI from ‘recovering’ to ‘favourable’ condition. It is therefore assumed that the objective will not be met unless the AONB takes action to protect sensitive habitats from increased visitor pressure or direct habitat loss.

6.18 It is considered that there would be no significant effect as a result of these Objectives and Actions (H2.2; R1.3; R1.4; and R1.5) due to the counteracting effect of BG1.2 and its associated targets.

6.19 However, it is also recommended that a paragraph be added to the Issues section of 3.4 Recreation, Access and Tourism highlighting the problem the increased potential for habitat degradation or loss due to increased access to sensitive wildlife habitats.

50 7. Conclusion

7.1 It is considered by the Mendip Hills AONB that the draft Management Plan 2014 – 2019 is unlikely to have a significant effect on the conservation objectives of the Natura 2000 sites assessed.

7.2 It is also considered that a Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment will not be required.

51 References

Bat Conservation Trust. 2003. Lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros. London: The Bat Conservation Trust.

Bat Conservation Trust. 2005. A Review and Synthesis of Published Information and Practical Experience on Bat Conservation within a Fragmented Landscape . Cardiff: The Three Welsh National Parks, Pembrokeshire County Council, Countryside Council for Wales

Bignall, K., Ashmore, M. & Power, S. 2004. The ecological effects of diffuse air pollution from road transport . English Nature Research Report No. 580. Peterborough: English Nature.

Billington, G. 2000a. Radio tracking study of greater horseshoe bats at Mells, Frome, Somerset. English Nature Research Report No. 403. Peterborough: English Nature.

Billington, G. 2000b. Combe Down Greater Horseshoe Bats: Radio Tracking Study . Bath: Bath & North East Somerset Council.

Bontadina, F., Schofield, H. & Naef-Daenzer, B. 2002. Radio-tracking reveals that lesser horseshoe bats (Rhinolophus hipposideros) forage in woodland. J. Zool. Lond. (2002) 258, 281-290 .

Boye, Dr. P. & Dietz, M. 2005. English Nature Research Reports Number 661: Development of good practice guidelines for woodland management for bats . Peterborough: English Nature.

Department for Communities and Local Government. 2006. Planning for the Protection of European Sites: Appropriate Assessment Under The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 20006 – Guidance for Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents . DCLG, London

Dodd, A.M., Cleary, B. E., Dawkins, J. S. Byron, H. J., Palframan, L. J. & Williams, G. M. 2007. The Appropriate Assessment of Spatial Plans in England. Sandy: Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

Duverg ė, P. L. & Jones, G. 1994. Greater Horseshoe Bats - Activity, foraging behaviour and habitat use. British Wildlife Vol. 6 No 2

Entwhistle, A. C., Harris, S., Hutson, A. M., Racey, P. A., Walsh, A., Gibson S. D., Hepburn, I. & Johnston, J. 2001. Habitat management for bats: A guide for land managers, landowners and their advisors. JNCC, Peterborough.

Evans, D. M. & Warrington, S. 1997. The effects of recreational disturbance on wintering waterbirds on mature gravel pit lake near London. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 53, 3, 167-182.

Evink, G. L. 2002. Interaction Between Roadways and Wildlife Ecology: A Synthesis of Highway Practice. Washington D. C.: Transportation Research Board

Footprint Ecology. 2009. Access and Nature Conservation Reconciliation: Supplementary Guidance for England . Peterborough: Natural England.

52 Gilbert, O. & Bevan, D. 1997. The effect of urbanisation on ancient woodlands. British Wildlife 8: 213 -218

Guillemain, M., Fritz, H., & Duncan, P. 2001. The importance of protected areas as nocturnal feeding grounds for dabbling ducks wintering in western France. Biological Conservation, 113, 2002, 183-198

Hanski, I. 1999. Metapopulation Ecology . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hayman, P. & Burton, P. 1976. The Birdlife of Britain. London: Mitchell Beazley Publishers Ltd.

Helldin, J. O. & Seiler, A. 2003. Effects of roads on the abundance of birds in Swedish forest and farmland. Riddarhyttan: Swedish University of Agricultural Science.

Holden, P. & Cleeves, T. 2002. RSPB Handbook of British Birds . London: Christopher Helm.

Hoskin, R. & Tyldesley, D. 2006. How the scale of effects on internationally designated nature conservation sites in Britain has been considered in decision making: A review of authorative decisions . English Nature Research Report No. 704. Peterborough: English Nature.

Jones, Dr. G. & Billington, G. 1999. Radio tracking study of greater horseshoe bats at Cheddar, North Somerset . Peterborough: English Nature.

Knight, T. 2007. The use of landscape features and habitats by the Lesser Horseshoe bat. Ph.D thesis. University of Bristol. (presentation at Horseshoe Bat Conference, Shipham, 2007 )

Knight, T. & Jones, G. 2009. Importance of night roosts for bat conservation: roosting behaviour of the lesser horseshoe bat Rhinolophus hipposideros . Endang. Spec. Res. doi: 10.3354/esr00194

Land Use Consultants. 2005. Going, going, gone? The cumulative effects of land development on biodiversity in England . English Nature Research Report No. 626. Peterborough: English Nature.

Land Use Consultants. 2006. Habitats Regulations Report of the Draft South West Regional Spatial Strategy: Screening Report . Taunton: South West Regional Assembly.

Land Use Consultants. 2008. South West Regional Spatial Strategy Proposed Changes: Habitat Regulations Assessment Final Report. London: Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

Motte, G. & Libois, R. 2002. Conservation of the lesser horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus hipposideros Bechstein, 1800) (Mammalia: Chiroptera) in Belgium. A case study in feeding requirements. Belg. J. Zool., 132 (1): 47-52

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. 2006. Planning for Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – A Guide to Good Practice . London: Her Majesty’s Stationary Office

Outen, A. R. 2002. The ecological effects of road lighting: in Sherwood, B., Cutler D.

53 & Burton J. (eds.) 2002. Wildlife and Roads: The Ecological Impact . London: Imperial College Press.

Penny Anderson Associates. 2009. Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 Part1: Access to the Countryside . Peterborough: Natural England.

Ransome, R. D. 1996. The management of feeding areas for greater horseshoe bats . Peterborough: English Nature.

Ransome, R. D. 1997. The management for greater horseshoe bat feeding areas to enhance population levels : English Nature Research Reports Number 241. Peterborough: English Nature.

Ransome, R. D. 2002. Winter feeding studies on greater horseshoe bats: English Nature Research Reports Number 449. Peterborough: English Nature

Ransome, R. D. 2008. Greater horseshoe bat Rhinolophus ferrumequinum : in Harris, S. & Yalden, D. W. (eds.) 2008. Mammals of the British Isles: Handbook, 4 th Edition . Southampton: The Mammal Society.

Reijnen, M. J. S. M., Veenbaas, G. & Foppen, R. P. B. 1995. Predicting the Effects of Motorway Traffic on Breeding Bird Populations . Delft: Road and Hydraulic Engineering Division and DLO-Institute for Forestry and Nature research.

Rydell, J., Bach, L., Dubourg-Savage, M-J., Green, M. Rodrigues, L. & Hedenström, A 2010. Bat mortality at wind turbines in northwestern Europe. Acta Chiropterologica, 12(2): 261 – 274, 2010 .

Schofield, H. W. 2008. The Lesser Horseshoe Bat Conservation Handbook. Ledbury: The Vincent Wildlife Trust.

Schofield, H., Messenger, J., Birks, J. & Jermyn, D. 2003. Foraging and Roosting Behaviour of Lesser Horseshoe Bats at Ciliau, Radnor . Ledbury: The Vincent Wildlife Trust

Scott Wilson, Levett-Therivel Sustainability Consultants, Treweek Environmental Consultants & Landuse Consultants. 2006. Appropriate Assessment of Plans. Scott Wilson, Levett-Therivel Sustainability Consultants, Treweek Environmental Consultants & Landuse Consultants

Seiler, A. 2002. Effects of Infrastructure on Nature. In: Trocme, M., Cahill, S., De Vries, J. G., et al (eds) COST 341 – Habitat Fragmentation due to transportation infrastructure: The European Review . Luxembourg: Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities,

Stone, E. 2009. The impact of street lighting on lesser horseshoe bats: PhD, University of Bristol. Presented at the South West Bat Conservation Trust Conference, 25 April, 2009 .

Stone, E., Jones, G. & Harris, S. 2009. Street Lighting Disturbs Commuting Bats; in Current Biology 19, 1123-1127. July 14, 2009.

Treweek, J. 1999. Ecological Impact Assessment. Oxford: Blackwell Science UK.

54

55