Reconnecting people and nature in Nidderdale

Data collection methods and habitat suitability modelling

Prepared for Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

By

Dr. Anna Berthinussen & Professor John Altringham

March 2016

Contents Summary ...... 3 1 Introduction ...... 4 1.1 Overview ...... 4 1.2 Habitat Suitability Modelling ...... 4 1.3 Aims of the report ...... 5 2 Species selected for the project ...... 6 2.1 Species for survey ...... 6 2.2 Species for Habitat Suitability Modelling (HSM) ...... 9 3 Data collection methods ...... 12 3.1 Survey sites ...... 12 3.2 Survey requirements ...... 13 3.2.1 Surveyors ...... 13 3.2.2 General equipment ...... 14 3.2.3 Training ...... 15 3.3. Detailed survey methods ...... 16 3.3.1 Aquatic mammals ...... 16 3.3.2 Farmland birds ...... 16 3.3.3 River birds ...... 17 3.3.4 Wading birds (breeding) ...... 17 3.3.5 Woodland birds ...... 17 3.3.6 Reptiles ...... 18 3.3.7 Amphibians ...... 18 3.3.8 Bumblebee ...... 19 3.3.9 Dragonfly ...... 19 3.3.10 Butterflies and day-flying moths ...... 19 3.3.11 Nocturnal moths ...... 20 3.3.12 Flowering plants ...... 20 3.3.13 Flowering plants: mountain grassland ...... 20 3.3.14 Nocturnal birds ...... 21 4. Habitat Suitability Modelling methods ...... 22 4.1 HSM detailed methods ...... 22 4.2 Delivery of HSM ...... 23 References ...... 25 Appendix 1. Full species list with brief rationale for inclusion/rejection ...... 29 Appendix 2. Equipment list for surveys ...... 34 Appendix 3. Quotes for habitat data ...... 35

2

Summary

 Fifty species have been prioritised for survey in Nidderdale AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) that meet the criteria specified for the project. All species are known to be present in the area and are of high national and/or local conservation concern. Bioindicator and flagship species have also been included. All species are suitable for survey by citizen scientists and naturalists with simple and relatively inexpensive survey techniques.

 The fifty species have been divided into 13 groups for systematic survey by transects or fixed point surveys (aquatic mammals, farmland birds, river birds, woodland birds, wading birds, reptiles, amphibians, bumblebee, dragonfly, butterflies and day-flying moths, nocturnal moths, flowering plants and flowering mountain grassland plants), as well as one group to be recorded by anecdotal sightings only (nocturnal birds).

 A systematic sampling design was used to select study sites in Nidderdale AONB. Surveys will be conducted within or close to 24 x 1 km2 survey squares evenly distributed across the AONB. Surveys will be repeated in each square twice each year during the three years of the project. Exact survey locations and the specific survey methods used will be appropriate to each group of species to be surveyed. Some additional flexibility will be needed on survey locations for full depth and breadth of public engagement but this will not compromise data quality. Detailed methods have been adapted from national monitoring programmes. Anecdotal records for all species will also be encouraged.

 A total of 1,872 individual surveys will be carried out by an estimated 624 volunteers (although the use of professional surveyors for some of the surveys may reduce this number). Training on species identification will be required in the form of six half day training events and three full day training events each year, to be delivered by experts and experienced trainers.

 Ten species have been selected for Habitat Suitability Modelling (HSM). All are species are of high conservation concern and considered to be appropriate for the modelling process. Costs for the habitat data required for modelling have been provided and the modelling methods and suggested delivery timetable outlined.

3

1 Introduction

1.1 Overview

The ‘Reconnecting Nature and People in Nidderdale’ project aims to involve the local community to gather valuable data on species and habitats of key conservation concern in the Nidderdale AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty). This will fill large gaps that currently exist in natural heritage data and allow future conservation programmes to be targeted to where they are needed most and will have the greatest impact.

The project aims to collect ecological data records and report on the status of 50 species that are of conservation concern. These data will feed into existing datasets and create a reliable baseline that can be used for future monitoring and conservation planning. The data for 10 of these species will be used to generate Habitat Suitability Models (HSM) and fine resolution habitat suitability maps, which will inform Species Recovery Action Plans to deliver conservation on a landscape scale across Nidderdale AONB.

1.2 Habitat Suitability Modelling

Habitat suitability modelling (HSM) is a relatively new and revolutionary scientific technique that is used in ecological studies to assess the quality of habitat for a species and highlight suitable habitats within a study area. The models are produced from a complex procedure using advanced statistics. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are used to combine species records with environmental variables, such as habitat and topography. These data are then entered into a modelling program called MaxEnt, which predicts the geographical distribution of a species based on the environmental conditions at locations where the species is known to occur (Phillips et al. 2006). Models are tested and simplified using statistical validation tests to produce a final model containing only environmental variables with the highest predictive power. Fine resolution habitat suitability maps can then be produced to display predictions of how suitable an area is for a species. This is shown by a Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) ranging from 0 (unsuitable habitat) to 1 (highly suitable habitat).

Habitat suitability maps provide an excellent visual tool for decision-making by conservationists and planners, and highlight areas where conservation efforts should be targeted. Habitat creation and enhancement can be focussed on these optimum sites, or connectivity between suitable sites can be improved to encourage (re)colonisation of unoccupied habitats. The maps can also be used to identify areas suitable for reintroductions, or to predict the effects of developments or habitat modifications. Maps for multiple species can be overlaid to identify hotspots of biodiversity (e.g. Figure 1) and deliver multi-species conservation plans on a landscape scale.

Local habitat suitability models and maps have been successfully developed by the University of Leeds team for bats and wading birds for the Yorkshire Dales (including Nidderdale), the North York Moors and the Lake District (e.g. Bellamy et al. 2012, 2013, Bellamy & Altringham 2015, Bradter et al. 2013). The maps are being used to support conservation management. The HSM and action plan for bats for Nidderdale AONB has led to conservation work including tree planting and improved woodland management to enhance habitat for bats and reduce the problem of habitat fragmentation.

4

Figure 1. Bat habitat suitability map for the Yorkshire Dales National Park and the Nidderdale AONB, showing the probable number of species to be found.

1.3 Aims of the report

The aim of this report is to:

 Prioritise the list of 50 species to be surveyed  Identify 10 species suitable for HSM  Identify data collection methods and the requirements for equipment, volunteers and training  Identify methods and delivery timetable for HSM

5

2 Species selected for the project

2.1 Species for survey

In order to identify a shortlist of 50 species for survey, the Section 41 (S41, NERC 2006) list of priority species (with additional suggestions from local naturalists and experts) was used as a starting point. This extensive list was narrowed down by assessing each species according to the following criteria:

 Current, known regional distribution Species were selected that are known to be present within Nidderdale AONB. This information was obtained by consulting with the relevant naturalist groups, trusts and charities, record centres and the appropriate partner groups1, and through searches of naturalists’ publications and the scientific literature.

 Level of conservation concern, nationally and locally Species of key conservation concern are of interest for the project as the aim is to collect baseline data for long term monitoring and to generate targeted conservation plans. During shortlisting, the species that are most threatened both nationally and locally were given priority, unless other exceptional reasons to survey existed (e.g. bioindicator or flagship species, discussed below). Species of national conservation concern were considered to be those that are listed as priority species under the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) (BRIG 2007), and Section 41 (S41) of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006). Where species were not assigned to either of these lists, national conservation status was also reviewed by looking at other taxon-specific lists such as the Birds of Conservation Concern 4 (Eaton et al. 2015), The Vascular Plant Red Data List for Great Britain (Cheffings & Farrell 2005), and Butterfly Conservation designations (Fox et al. 2015). Species of local conservation concern included priority species in the National Character Area Countryside Stewardship Scheme (NCA CSS) (Natural England et al. 2015), and those that are considered to be rare, restricted or declining in the local area as determined through consultation with Nidderdale AONB staff and local experts.

 The availability of existing datasets There is a limit to the amount of data that can be collected during the three years of the project. It is therefore important that existing datasets are used to the full. The availability of existing datasets was determined by consulting with the relevant local, regional and national organisations. These datasets will need to be filtered to ensure that the datasets used in the project are accurate and reflect current distributions.

 Skills required for survey and the suitability for citizen science The majority of species must be suitable for survey by volunteers and through citizen science. Species will be selected to fit into one of several categories: (1) Species suitable for largely untrained volunteers, such as families on walks. These will be the more obvious and easily identified species; (2) Species that can be identified by interested members of the public with varying degrees of training. Training courses will be an integral part of the project, to increase public involvement and create a new generation of skilled and interested locals; (3) Species that will be surveyed by the existing network of skilled amateur and professional naturalists. In addition to structured surveys, members of the public will also be encouraged to report anecdotal sightings of all species, which will increase public engagement.

1 Partner groups include North and East Yorkshire Ecological Data Centre, Wharfedale Naturalists, Harrogate Naturalists, Yorkshire Naturalists Union, Yorkshire Dales Farmer Network, Yorkshire Wildlife Trust, Yorkshire Dales Rivers Trust, Nidderdale Plus, Natural England, Environment Agency, Yorkshire Water, Harrogate Borough Council, and North Yorkshire County Council. 6

 Practicality of survey Although not a necessity, it is useful to have access to existing established survey methods that can be followed or adapted, particularly to contribute to regional and national databases. National monitoring programmes and existing survey methods were therefore researched and reviewed during the selection process. Survey methods must be relatively easy to follow without extensive training, and survey equipment must be available and relatively inexpensive. Priority was also given to groups of species that can be surveyed simultaneously to maximise the amount of data collected and maintain surveyor interest.

 Suitability for Habitat Suitability Modelling (HSM) At least 10 species in the final list must be suitable for HSM in order to generate Species Recovery Action Plans. These species should be of high conservation priority and susceptible to conservation management. We will focus on specialist species with narrow habitat preferences - a common trait in threatened species – as they can generally be modelled with smaller datasets than generalists. It must also be possible to accurately identify, record and map the habitat variables preferred by these species, since this information is essential to the HSM process. This is discussed in section 2.2 below.

 Suitability for conservation management All of the species surveyed should be susceptible to some form of conservation management. The aim is to monitor species in the long term and implement conservation actions where they are needed, and also to monitor the success of conservation actions.

 Inclusion of bioindicator and/or flagship species Bioindicator species will be particularly valuable as they are representative of many other species and provide an indication of the health of ecosystems and the environment. These species are sensitive to environmental change and will provide an early warning that conservation interventions may be required. Flagship species are popular, iconic and often distinctive species that help to raise awareness and stimulate public interest, such as the barn owl, kingfisher and emperor moth. These species will be important for public engagement.

During the selection process, species were divided into groups that could be surveyed simultaneously e.g. species occupying similar habitats and requiring similar survey approaches. Species were then prioritised within each taxonomic/survey group to ensure that a range of taxa were represented in the final species list. Species were prioritised as either a) suitable/meet majority of criteria, (b) possible/meet some criteria, or (c) unsuitable/meet few criteria. The full prioritised list with a brief rationale for species selection or exclusion has been provided in Appendix 1.

The 50 species prioritised as being most suitable for the project are shown in Table 1 and have been divided into 14 distinct survey groups. All species in the final list are suitable for survey by citizen scientists and naturalists and will be surveyed primarily with systematic data collection methods (with the exception of the freshwater animals survey group which will be subject to a specialist recording scheme, and nocturnal birds which will be surveyed by anecdotal sightings only). However, to maximise public engagement, anecdotal data can also be accepted and collection will be encouraged. All species are of high national and/or local conservation concern with the exception of several more common species, which were retained as flagship species (e.g. barn owl), bioindicator species (e.g. garden bumblebee and golden-ringed dragonfly), because Nidderdale AONB contains important habitats for the species (e.g. emperor moth, short-eared owl, spring sandwort and mountain pansy), and also to maintain surveyor morale and interest by including distinctive species that may be more frequently recorded (e.g. marbled white butterfly).

7

Table 1. The 50 species prioritised for survey

Species Conservation status Survey group / method

Water vole (Arvicola amphibious) UK BAP; S41 Aquatic mammals – river Otter (Lutra lutra) UK BAP; S41 transects

Cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) UK BAP; S41; Red list (BoCC4)

Skylark (Alauda arvensis) UK BAP; S41; Red list (BoCC4) Farmland birds – farmland Song thrush (Turdus philomelos) UK BAP; S41; Red list (BoCC4) transects Linnet (Carduelis cannabina) UK BAP; S41; Red list (BoCC4)

Lesser redpoll (Carduelis cabaret) UK BAP; S41; NCA CSS; Red list (BoCC4)

Barn owl (Tyto alba) Green list (BoCC4) (flagship species) Nocturnal birds – anecdotal Short-eared owl (Asio flammeus) Amber list (BoCC4), important habitat in NAONB sightings

Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis) Amber list (BoCC4)

Dipper (Cinclus cinclus) Amber list (BoCC4) River birds – river transects

Grey Wagtail (Motacilla cinerea) Red list (BoCC4)

Lapwing (Vanellus vanellus) UK BAP; S41; NCA CSS; Red list (BoCC4)

Curlew (Numenius arquata) UK BAP; S41; NCA CSS; Red list (BoCC4)

Snipe (Gallinago gallinago) NCA CSS, Amber list (BoCC4) Wading birds (breeding) – upland farmland and Redshank (Tringa totanus) NCA CSS, Amber list (BoCC4) moorland transects Golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria) Amber list (BoCC4)

Dunlin (Calidris alpina) Amber list (BoCC4)

Tree pipit (Anthus trivialis) UK BAP; S41; NCA CSS; Red list (BoCC4)

Wood warbler (Phylloscopus sibilatrix) UK BAP; S41; NCA CSS; Red list (BoCC4) Woodland birds – woodland Spotted flycatcher (Muscicapa striata) UK BAP; S41; NCA CSS; Red list (BoCC4) transects Pied flycatcher (Ficedula hypoleuca) NCA CSS; Red list (BoCC4)

Lesser spotted woodpecker (Dendrocopos minor) UK BAP; S41; Red list (BoCC4)

Adder (Vipera berus) UK BAP; S41

Grass snake (Natrix natrix) UK BAP; S41 Reptiles – basking/refugia Slow worm (Anguis fragilis) UK BAP; S41 surveys

Common lizard (Lacerta zootoca vivipara) UK BAP; S41

Great crested newt (Triturus cristatus) UK BAP; S41 Amphibians – pond surveys Common toad (Bufo Bufo) UK BAP; S41

Garden bumblebee (Bombus hortorum) Common nationally & locally (bioindicator species) Bumblebee – transects

Golden-ringed dragonfly (Cordulegaster boltonii) Nationally common, locally scarce Dragonfly – river transects

8

Table 1 continued

Species Conservation status Survey group / method

Wall (Lasiommata megera) UK BAP; S41; Butterfly Conservation priority: High

Green hairstreak (Callophrys rubi) Butterfly Conservation priority: Medium

Marbled white (Melanargia galathea) Butterfly Conservation priority: Low Common nationally & locally (important habitat in Butterflies & day-flying Emperor Moth (Saturnia pavonia) AONB) moths - transects

Speckled Yellow (Pseudopanthera macularia) Common nationally, uncommon in NAONB Wide national distribution but small discrete Clouded Buff (Diacrisia sannio) colonies, uncommon in NAONB Argent & Sable (Rheumaptera hastata) UK BAP; S41

Pale eggar (Trichiura crataegi) UK BAP; S41

Square spotted clay (Xestia stigmatica) Important population in NAONB Nocturnal moths – light V-moth (Macaria wauaria) UK BAP; S41 trapping Ghost (Hepialus humuli) UK BAP; S41

Grey mountain carpet (Entephria caesiata) UK BAP; S41

Marsh stitchwort (Stellaria palustris) UK BAP; S41

Fine leaved sandwort (Minuartia hybrida) UK BAP; S41 Flowering plants - transects Burnt orchid (Neotinea ustulata) UK BAP; S41

Fly orchid (Ophrys insectifera) UK BAP; S41

Near threatened (VPRDL), important habitat in Spring sandwort (Minuartia verna) NAONB Flowering plants: mountain Mountain pansy (Viola lutea) Vulnerable (VPRDL), important habitat in NAONB grassland - transects Frog orchid (Dactylorhiza viridis) UK BAP; S41 UK BAP = UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BRIG 2007) S41 = Section 41 Species of Principal Importance in England (National Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006) BoCC4 = Birds of Conservation Concern 4 (Eaton et al. 2015) NCA CSS priority = Natural Character Area Countryside Stewardship priority species (Natural England et al. 2015) Butterfly Conservation priority = taken from http://butterfly-conservation.org and based on Fox et al. (2015) NAONB = Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty VPRDL = The Vascular Plant Red Data List for Great Britain (Cheffings & Farrell 2005)

2.2 Species for Habitat Suitability Modelling (HSM)

We have selected 10 species from the list in Table 1 that will be most suitable for HSM (see Table 2). The species were selected following a review of the academic literature on both HSM and species conservation management, as well as through consultation with Nidderdale AONB staff.

All 10 species are of high conservation concern and susceptible to conservation management with known conservation interventions that can be implemented in Nidderdale AONB. They are specialist species with a narrow range of habitat preferences and are likely to be present in sufficient number to collect the data required for modelling. We recommend a minimum of 100 records per species, but successful models have been made with fewer (e.g. Hernandez et al. 2006, Wisz et al. 2008). HSM or other species distribution modelling techniques have been successfully applied previously for the species or a species within the same genus, and all have habitat preferences that can be accurately mapped with available datasets. Some species

9 on the original survey list have particularly specific fine-scale habitat requirements that would be difficult to map and model within the scope of this project (e.g. flowering plants and butterflies).

It should also be possible to monitor the abundance (as opposed to simple presence) of all 10 species to monitor the success of conservation actions in the long term. For some species, HSM would be possible but more labour intensive methods would be required to produce data on abundance for long term monitoring (e.g. great crested newt, common toad and nocturnal moths).

There are more birds on the list than any other taxonomic group, but this is representative of the large number of bird species that are threatened in the UK, and birds are particularly well suited to HSM.

HSM is a complex procedure and model performance is difficult to predict. If, for any reason, it is not possible to accurately model habitat suitability for any of the 10 species selected, it will be possible to run models for any other species found to be abundant enough within the same survey group. Species within a survey group will require similar habitat variables for modelling and the general data collection methods used will mean that the data collected for any species should be suitable for HSM (as long as sufficient records are collected across a range of habitats).

Although habitat suitability models will only be developed for 10 species as part of this project, the records collected for all other species will be invaluable. They will significantly improve our knowledge of the distribution and relative abundance of a wide range of important species, and can be used for mapping and long term monitoring as well as a tool for public engagement and education. The data collected for most other species will also be suitable for modelling at a later date (see above).

10

Table 2. Details of the 10 species selected for Habitat Suitability Modelling Species Conservation General habitat Important Examples of previous Conservation management status requirements habitat variables habitat models? Water vole UK BAP; S41 Still/slow moving River, vegetation, Bonesi et al. (2002); Substantial evidence exists for successful water vole habitat management (e.g. Strachan (Arvicola amphibious) waterways, steep banks for soil and land Fedriani et al. (2002) et al. 2011), and measures could be integrated with existing riparian conservation burrowing and tall riparian cover data, programmes within NAONB vegetation for food/cover disturbance Otter UK BAP; S41 Waterways and banks with River, vegetation Loy et al. (2009); Substantial habitat management advice available for otter (e.g. Environment Agency (Lutra lutra) nearby trees and and land cover Cianfrani et al. (2010) 1999), and measures could be integrated with existing riparian conservation vegetation cover for resting data, disturbance programmes within NAONB Skylark UK BAP; S41; Open habitats - cereal Soil, vegetation Chamberlain et al. Substantial evidence for skylark habitat management (e.g. Peterson 2007; Koleček et al. (Alauda arvensis) Red list crops, rough grassland, and land cover (1999); Petit et al. 2015; Kuiper et al. 2015). Incorporate into agri-environment schemes being developed (BoCC4) moorland. Avoids tall data, disturbance (2003); Bayliss et al. with farmers across NAONB vegetation (2005) Song thrush UK BAP; S41; Dense hedgerows, native Vegetation, soil, Hewson et al. (2011) Habitat management advice available (RSPB 2006a). Incorporate into agri-environment (Turdus philomelos) Red list woodland, damp ground woodland, schemes being developed with farmers across NAONB (BoCC4) especially grazed pasture hedgerow and land cover data Grey Wagtail Red list Fast flowing upland rivers River, soil, Rushton et al. (1994); Little evidence for specific grey wagtail conservation, but general river habitat (Motacilla cinerea) (BoCC4) and streams, lakes, rocky vegetation and Buckton & Ormerod restoration would benefit this species (and other river birds). Could be incorporated areas, trees/broadleaved land cover data (1997); Vaughan & into existing riparian habitat enhancement programmes and measures built into woodland Ormerod (2005) applications for Water Capital Grants under Countryside Stewardship Lapwing UK BAP; S41; Open upland habitats, bare Soil, vegetation Bayliss et al. (2005); Substantial habitat management advice available (e.g. RSPB 2006c; Peterson 2009). The (Vanellus vanellus) Red list ground/short turf with and land cover Bradter (2010) field-by-field approach to management of wader habitat through the Upper Nidderdale (BoCC4) good visibility, damp data, disturbance Landscape Partnership would enable progress to be made with Lapwing, as would ground and wetlands involvement in agri environment scheme development Curlew UK BAP; S41; Moorland, moorland edge, Soil, vegetation Bayliss et al. (2005); Substantial habitat management advice available (RSPB 2006b; Jensen & Lutz 2007). As (Numenius arquata) Red list meadows, damp or wet and land cover Bradter (2010) above, and results could also feed into planned work with RSPB and others in the (BoCC4) terrain with dry areas data Northern Upland Chain Local Nature Partnership Lesser spotted UK BAP; S41; Tall closed canopy Woodland, Charman et al. (2010); Recent research into habitat requirements by the RSPB could inform management woodpecker Red list woodland, predominantly vegetation and Delahaye et al. (2010); plans (Charman et al. 2010; Charman et al. 2012). Could be built into existing work (Dendrocopos minor) (BoCC4) oak, low cover of shrubs, land cover data Hewson et al. (2011); relatively easily e.g. practical management of ASNW, agri environment schemes and deadwood for nesting Charman et al. (2012) commercial woodland management Adder (Vipera berus) UK BAP; S41 Light soils, heathland, Soil, vegetation, Brady & Phillips (2012), Recommendations available (e.g. Edgar et al. 2010). Results could feed into existing moorland, grassland, land cover and other Vipera species work with owners, managers and gamekeepers on land that contains suitable habitat in woodland edges and rides, aspect data e.g. Santos et al. (2006) NAONB sunny areas close to cover Golden-ringed Locally scarce Heathland, upland River, soil, Other odonata species Recommendations for habitat management available (British Dragonfly Society 1993). dragonfly moorland, small acidic vegetation and e.g. Rouquette & Results could feed into existing work with owners and managers on land that contains (Cordulegaster streams, good water land cover data Thompson (2005); suitable habitat in NAONB boltonii) quality Balzan (2012) UK BAP = UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BRIG 2007), S41 = Section 41 Species of Principal Importance in England (National Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006), BoCC4 = Birds of Conservation Concern 4 (Eaton et al. 2015), NAONB = Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty 11

3 Data collection methods

The majority of survey methods used to collect data for this project must be suitable for citizen science, with simple and easy to follow protocols. Each survey must not be too time-consuming as volunteers will need to fit their input around work and other commitments. We also want to encourage uptake by as many members of the public as possible.

Multiple species will be surveyed simultaneously in survey groups. This will vastly reduce the number of individual surveys (and volunteers) required to collect the data. However, survey effort must be sufficient to collect enough data to provide a useful baseline for all 50 survey species across Nidderdale AONB, and to produce habitat suitability models for 10 species. A sufficient number of sites must also be surveyed to collect data that is representative of the whole study area.

3.1 Survey sites

A systematic sampling design will underpin data collection. This is a commonly used sampling strategy in ecology in which survey sites are evenly and regularly distributed across the area to be studied. This provides good coverage of the whole study area and makes the data more suitable for modelling.

A grid of 25 km2 squares was aligned with the Ordnance Survey grid. At the centre of each grid, a 1 km2 square was selected as the survey site (see Figure 2). This results in 24 independent survey sites across Nidderdale AONB that are 5 km apart (centre to centre). Each survey site will be visited twice per year (over the three years of the project) to conduct surveys for each survey group. This number of sites/surveys should provide sufficient data and a representative sample across the whole AONB. This survey strategy will also be compatible with many national monitoring schemes that use similar methods, in which 1 km2 survey sites are selected from a larger grid on a map.

Figure 2. A relief map of Nidderdale AONB showing the 1 km2 survey sites and the 25 km2 grid used in site selection. Contains OS data © Crown copyright [and database right] (2016).

12

Within each survey square, individual surveys will be carried out for each of the 13 survey groups that will be subject to systematic survey. Specific methods and survey locations will be appropriate to each survey group (see detailed survey methods in section 3.3). Survey sites may need to be repositioned in some cases, e.g. to avoid access problems, if the original square does not contain appropriate habitat or is outside of the range of the survey species, or to avoid survey squares that have already been surveyed by other monitoring programs whose data can be included in the project. The neighbouring square immediately to the north of the original square should be checked for suitability, followed by the next neighbouring square to the north- east, moving clockwise around the original square until a suitable study site is located. Some flexibility around survey location and the routes walked can also be accommodated to create practical and enjoyable walks for volunteers.

In addition to systematic surveys, anecdotal records will also be encouraged for all species. These records can be added to the database and will be used in modelling whenever possible. This will also help to engage the public and get more people involved.

No. of surveys: 24 sites to be visited twice each year for each of the 13 survey groups = 624 individual surveys per year = 1,872 total surveys

3.2 Survey requirements

The specific survey methods for each survey group were developed by reviewing existing survey guidelines and recommendations, and adapting these for the purpose of this project based on experience and ecological knowledge. Survey methods are appropriate to the species within each survey group but are generally based on collecting data along walked transects or at fixed points or plots. We have tried to include some interesting and novel survey approaches where possible to stimulate public interest. The detailed approach for each survey group is given in section 3.3 below. We have provided details of ideal weather conditions and timing in which to conduct surveys and observe each group of species but there will often be some flexibility in this as long as particularly adverse conditions are avoided (e.g. strong winds and heavy rain). We have also suggested the length of each transect route and provided a guide as to how long each survey may take, but again this is flexible and can be adapted to suit each volunteer. Although surveyors will be asked to focus on specific species, they will also be encouraged to note down incidental sightings of other species that may be present in the habitat they are surveying, for example, river birds may be spotted during aquatic mammal surveys and vice versa.

3.2.1 Surveyors

Volunteers will be encouraged to commit to completing the two repeat surveys for a site/survey group each year (and subsequent years if possible). Volunteers will become familiar with the site and survey methods, making data collection more efficient and reducing the need for training. Estimates for the number of volunteers required to complete all surveys are given below. Professional ecologists may be contracted to carry out some of the surveys, particularly those requiring specialist skills (e.g. amphibians, reptiles, flowering plants) which would reduce the number of volunteers required.

No. of volunteers = 24 per year per survey group (based on volunteers carrying out repeat surveys) = 312 per year = 624 total (based on retaining 50% of the volunteer base each year)

13

3.2.2 General equipment

The general equipment listed below will be required for most surveys. Any specialist equipment required for a specific survey group is listed in the detailed methods in section 3.3. A complete, collated equipment list with recommended specifications is provided in Appendix 2. Volunteers will be encouraged to use their own basic equipment where possible (e.g. cameras, smart phones, binoculars, stationary, gloves etc.) but a supply of field work equipment will be purchased to lend out to volunteers, and that can be utilised for ongoing long term survey work. The budget should allow for some attrition of equipment during the project.

 GPS device or smartphone with GPS app (e.g. OS locate or Gridpoint GB) This will improve the accuracy of records but is not essential. Locations can be marked on a large scale Ordnance Survey map and later georeferenced e.g. using www.gridreferencefinder.com

 Printable colour Ordnance Survey maps of survey sites Required for volunteers to locate and navigate their specific survey sites, and also for recording observations for those that do not have access to GPS. Maps will be provided online for volunteers to print as required. Some printing costs should be budgeted for as not all volunteers will have access to printers

 Recording forms Also to be provided online, but include in budget for printing as above

 Colour identification guides To be produced and provided online for reference and for volunteers to print as required. Hard copies should also be distributed during training events

 Stationary e.g. pens/pencils, rulers, clipboards, notepads Volunteers to provide own. Could also provide promotional stationary at training events

 Camera / camera phone For photographing observations when unsure of identification. Volunteers are likely to have their own (not essential as training will be given)

 Binoculars x 20 pairs Volunteers may have their own. Purchase a supply that can be loaned out for surveys

 Thermometer/anemometer x 25 For checking weather conditions are suitable for survey

 Hand lenses x 25 For close inspection of plants, field signs etc.

 Gloves x 25 pairs To provide protection during some surveys (aquatic mammal and reptile surveys)

14

3.2.3 Training

All training should take place at an appropriate venue, e.g. the Nidderdale AONB offices in Pateley Bridge, or at a nearby accessible site within Nidderdale AONB if training in the field is required. Volunteers will be provided with a training pack containing appropriate resources such as instructions, colour identification guides, risk assessments, contact details etc. A website will also be developed with downloadable training resources.

Training for surveys will be made up of two components:

1. Survey induction All surveyors will be given a survey induction prior to starting survey work. They will be briefed on the basic survey and data reporting methods, as well as health and safety and lone working advice, access to sites and landowner permission and any other technical issues. This will be provided by the project conservation officer who will provide support on these matters throughout the project.

2. Identification skills If required, training will also be provided on species identification or any more complex survey methods specific to each survey group. This will be provided by a specialist in the subject and/or an experienced trainer. Training materials will include colour photographs and drawings, videos and/or specimens, and a field visit if required, and will be developed in consultation with the relevant trainers. Existing training resources will be made use of as much as possible, such as identification guides developed for national monitoring programmes.

The amount of identification training required will differ for each survey group, but can be split into four broad categories:

Level 1. No formal identification training required - the species is distinctive and well known. ID guides will be provided with colour photos/drawings and ‘what to look out for’ information.

Level 2. Some formal instruction is required – the species is fairly distinctive but could be confused with other species, or identification of field signs is also required. A half day training course is recommended.

Level 3. Significant formal instruction is required – the species is likely to be less well-known and difficult to identify or locate, or there are more complex survey protocols to follow that will require additional training. A one day training course is recommended.

Level 4. Experienced naturalists or professional surveyors only.

15

3.3. Detailed survey methods

3.3.1 Aquatic mammals

Species: water vole (Arvicola amphibius), otter (Lutra lutra)

Survey methods will be similar to those used for the National Water Vole Monitoring Programme (PTES 2015). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 500 m transect will be walked along one bank of a waterway and signs/sightings (e.g. droppings/spraints, latrines, food remains and nests/burrows) of water vole and otter will be recorded using a GPS device or map. Surveyors will also be encouraged to record signs/sightings of American mink (Mustela vison), as this invasive species has been responsible for declines in water vole populations (e.g. Woodroffe et al. 1990; Barreto et al. 1998). Surveys should be conducted in May at any time of day (but not during or within two days of heavy rainfall), and repeated in June each year. Each transect will take approximately 45 min to 1 hour to complete.

The aquatic mammal surveys could be supplemented with camera trap surveys at a selection of sites. Aquatic mammals, such as otter, can be elusive and it would be good to capture video recordings of these species to show volunteers in order to stimulate/maintain interest and promote the project.

Training: Level 2 (half day training event). The survey species require some instruction for confident identification, and training will be needed to identify field signs.

Specialist equipment: Camera traps x 5 to be rotated around different sites (e.g. Acorn Ltl 5210a scouting camera)

3.3.2 Farmland birds

Species: cuckoo (Cuculus canorus), skylark (Alauda arvensis), song thrush (Turdus philomelos), linnet (Carduelis cannabina), lesser redpoll (Carduelis cabaret)

Survey methods will be adapted from the Breeding Bird Survey (BTO 2015). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 1 km transect will be walked to include different farmland habitats. The transect route will follow public footpaths along field boundaries, through farmyards and across open fields. Sightings of the farmland bird species and any calls heard will be recorded using a GPS device or map. Each transect route will be repeated twice during the breeding season each year (once in mid-April to mid-May, and again in mid-May to late June, with surveys at least 4 weeks apart). Each transect should commence ideally between 6 and 7 am and no later than 9 am. Weather conditions with heavy rain, poor visibility and/or strong winds should be avoided. Each transect will take approximately 45 min to 1 hour to complete. Surveys may also be repeated in winter between the beginning of November and the end of February. Winter surveys should be carried out on calm, dry days with good visibility, and avoiding the first and last hours of daylight. This is a good time to survey flocks of finch species such as linnet and lesser redpoll, and would help to maintain volunteer interest throughout the year.

Training: Level 3 (one day training event) or use professional surveyors. Experience/training is needed to spot and reliably identify these species.

16

3.3.3 River birds

Species: kingfisher (Alcedo atthis), dipper (Cinclus cinclus), grey wagtail (Motacilla cinerea)

Survey methods will be similar to those used for the Waterways Breeding Bird Survey (BTO 2014). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 1 km transect will be walked along one bank of a river or canal and sightings of the three river bird species will be recorded using a GPS device or map. Each transect route will be repeated twice per year, once in early April to mid-May, and again in mid-May to late June (with surveys at least 4 weeks apart). Each transect should commence ideally between 6 and 7 am and no later than 9 am. Weather conditions with heavy rain, poor visibility and/or strong winds should be avoided. Each transect will take approximately 45 min to 1 hour to complete.

Training: Level 1 (no formal training). The survey species are distinctive and easy to identify.

3.3.4 Wading birds (breeding)

Species: lapwing (Vanellus vanellus), curlew (Numenius arquata), Snipe (Gallinago gallinago), Redshank (Tringa totanus), Golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria), Dunlin (Calidris alpina)

Survey methods will be adapted from the Breeding Waders of English Upland Farmland survey methods (BTO 2016) and the Breeding Bird Survey (BTO 2015). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 1 km transect will be walked to encompass upland farmland (or ‘in bye’ land) and moorland. The transect route will follow public footpaths along field boundaries and across fields/open ground. Sightings of lapwing and curlew and any calls heard will be recorded using a GPS device or map. Each transect route will be repeated twice during the breeding season each year (four weeks apart between 1st April to 31st May, and 1st June to 15th July). Each transect should commence ideally between 6 and 7 am and no later than 9 am. The surveys must be carried out in fine weather conditions with good visibility, wind speeds below 18 mph and with less than 10% snow cover on the ground. Each transect will take approximately 45 min to 1 hour to complete.

Training: Level 2 (half day training event). Some instruction is required for identifying and locating the survey species.

3.3.5 Woodland birds

Species: tree pipit (Anthus trivialis), wood warbler (Phylloscopus sibilatrix), spotted flycatcher (Muscicapa striata), pied flycatcher (Ficedula hypoleuca), lesser spotted woodpecker (Dendrocopos minor)

Survey methods will be based on the Breeding Bird Survey (BTO 2015). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 1 km transect will be walked to incorporate woodland habitats. The transect route will follow public footpaths through woodland, along woodland edge and through open habitats between patches of woodland. Sightings of the woodland bird species and any calls heard will be recorded using a GPS device or map. Smart phone compatible bird call identification software will be trialled to assist in species identification (e.g. Bird Song Id Automatic Recognition & Reference - Birds of the British Isles, www.isoperla.co.uk/BirdSongId). Each transect route will be repeated twice during the breeding season each year (once in early April to mid-May, and again in mid-May to late June, with surveys at least 4 weeks apart). Each transect should commence ideally between 6 and 7 am and no later than 9 am. Weather conditions with heavy rain, poor visibility and/or strong winds should be avoided. Each transect will take approximately 45 min to 1 hour to complete.

17

Training: Level 4 (experienced or professional surveyors only). The survey species can be difficult to locate and identify especially within a cluttered woodland setting.

3.3.6 Reptiles

Species: adder (Vipera berus), grass snake (Natrix natrix), slow worm (Anguis fragilis), common lizard (Lacerta Zootoca vivipara)

Survey methods will be adapted from the National Amphibian and Reptile Recording Scheme (NARRS 2013a). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 1 km transect route will be mapped to incorporate suitable reptile habitat e.g. moorland and heathland, rough tussocky or long grass and bramble, edge habitats and sunny sheltered locations. The route will be visited at least four weeks prior to the survey and 10 artificial refugia laid in appropriate and undisturbed locations along the route. The transect route will then be walked on two separate occasions (in April and May) each year with visual searches for basking reptiles and checks of artificial and pre-existing refugia along the way. Surveys should be carried out between 11 am and 3 pm in sunny or partially cloudy weather with air temperatures of 10 - 20˚C. Sunny conditions after rain or dull overcast weather are optimum. Strong wind, heavy rain and extended periods of hot, dry weather should be avoided. Each survey will take approximately 1 - 2 hours to complete.

Training: Level 3 (one day training event) or use professional surveyors. Reptiles can be secretive and cryptic, some prior knowledge and skill is required to spot them.

Specialist equipment: Artifical refugia e.g. corrugated iron, roofing felt, bitumen-based roofing sheets, rubber car mats, plastic sheeting, carpet (size approx. 0.5 m2)

3.3.7 Amphibians

Species: great crested newt (Triturus cristatus), common toad (Bufo Bufo)

Survey methods will be adapted from the National Amphibian and Reptile Recording Scheme (NARRS 2013b) and the PondNet Common Toad and Frog volunteer surveys (Freshwater Habitats Trust 2016). Within each 1 km2 survey square, two pond sites will be surveyed. Two daytime visits will be made to pond sites each year in March or April and May. During both visits, the perimeter of the pond will be walked and observations of common toad (or spawn strings) and great crested newts will be made. An average pond should take approximately 45 min to survey. During the second visit in May, water samples will be taken from 20 different locations around the pond to be tested for environmental DNA (eDNA). This is a relatively new survey technique that allows rapid and reliable (99% effective) testing for the presence of great crested newt. Water samples are sent off to a laboratory to be tested for great crested newt DNA shed into the water from skin, faeces, eggs etc. This is an exciting new method that should stimulate public interest. It is also significantly less labour-intensive than traditional methods which involve searching for great crested newts at night with torches during multiple repeat surveys.

Training: Level 3 (one day training event) or use professional surveyors. Common toad is easy to identify, but some training will be required to identify great crested newt. Strict protocols must be followed when collecting eDNA samples and training will be required for this. Surveyors also need to be briefed on the importance of decontaminating boots and equipment between visits to ponds in different survey squares to reduce the risk of spreading diseases or non-native species.

Specialist equipment: eDNA kits x 144 (e.g. Available from fera https://greatcrestednewts.co.uk/shop/) 18

3.3.8 Bumblebee

Species: garden bumblebee (Bombus hortorum)

Survey methods will be adapted from the Bumblebee Conservation Trust’s volunteer BeeWalk (Bumbleebee Conservation Trust 2016). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 1 km transect route will be walked to incorporate a range of habitat types (e.g. grassland, woodland, farmland, heathland and moorland) including flower-rich habitat that is likely to be suitable for bees. Any sightings of garden bumblebees should be recorded using a GPS device or marked on a map. The transect route will be walked on two separate occasions between March and October. Transects should be conducted between 11 am and 5 pm in warm, sunny and still weather conditions. Each survey will take approximately 45 min to 1 hour to complete.

Training: Level 2 (half day training event). Some instruction will be required to reliably distinguish the survey species from other bumblebee species.

3.3.9 Dragonfly

Species: golden-ringed dragonfly (Cordulegaster boltonii)

Survey methods will be adapted from the British Dragonfly Society methodology for monitoring important sites (British Dragonfly Society 2015). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 500 m transect will be walked along a stream (or several shorter streams) with suitable habitat e.g. upland acidic streams with fairly uniform habitat, heathland and moorland. Sightings of the golden-ringed dragonfly will be recorded using a GPS device or map. Each transect route will be repeated twice during the main flight period each year (in June, July or August and at least 2 weeks apart). Transects should ideally be carried out between 10 am and 4 pm in sunny weather with less than 60% cloud cover and temperatures of at least 17˚C. Rain and strong winds should be avoided. Each survey will take approximately 45 min to 1 hour to complete.

Training: Level 1 (no formal training). Distinctive species.

3.3.10 Butterflies and day-flying moths

Species: butterflies – wall (Lasiommata megera), green hairstreak butterfly (Callophrys rubi), marbled white butterfly (Melanargia galathea); day-flying moths - emperor moth (Saturnia pavonia), speckled yellow moth (Pseudopanthera macularia), clouded buff moth (Diacrisia sannio), argent and sable moth (Rheumaptera hastata)

Survey methods will be adapted from the Wider Countryside Butterfly Survey (Butterfly Conservation / CEH / BTO 2012). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 1 km transect will be walked to include a range of habitat types suitable for butterflies and day-flying moths (including woodland, moorland and grassland etc.). Sightings of each species will be recorded using a GPS device or map. Each transect will be repeated in May and July to include the main flight period for each species. Transects should ideally be carried out between 10:45 am and 3:45 pm in dry, warm (over 13˚C when sunny or 17˚C when overcast) weather conditions with wind speeds below 18 mph. Each survey will take approximately 45 min to 1 hour to complete.

Training skills: Level 2 (half day training event). Most are distinctive species, but some training may be required for reliable identification. Also make use of experienced naturalists as much as possible for this category.

19

3.3.11 Nocturnal moths

Species: pale eggar (Trichiura crataegi), square spotted clay (Xestia stigmatica), v-moth (Macaria wauaria), ghost (Hepialus humuli), grey mountain carpet (Entephria caesiata)

There are no national monitoring programmes using systematic survey for nocturnal moths. Survey methods will be adapted from Spalding & Parsons (2004). Within each 1 km2 survey square, four light traps will be deployed in different habitats (e.g. open woodland, woodland edge, open grassland, moorland) at least 100 m apart. Traps will be placed in open but sheltered habitats and along habitat boundaries. Traps will be lit at dusk and left until shortly after dawn the following morning when moths will be extracted from the traps, identified and counted. Surveys should be repeated in June and August to include the main flight periods for each species. Trapping should be carried out on mild, cloudy, still nights with no moon.

Training: Level 2 (half day training event). All are distinctive species, but some training may be required for reliable identification. Make use of experienced naturalists as much as possible for this survey group.

Specialist equipment: Battery powered moth traps e.g. Heath traps, egg boxes and plastic pots. Make use of traps owned by local naturalists and purchase a supply to supplement this e.g. 12 traps. Traps can be rotated between survey sites on different nights to reduce the demand for equipment.

3.3.12 Flowering plants

Species: marsh stitchwort (Stellaria palustris), fine leaved sandwort (Minuartia hybrida), burnt orchid (Neotinea ustulata), fly orchid (Ophrys insectifera)

Survey methods will be adapted from Plantlife’s Wildflower Count (Plantlife 2013). Within each 1 km2 survey square, a 1 km transect route will be walked to include a range of appropriate habitats for the flowering plant species e.g. wetland, grassland, woodland and artificial habitats such as quarries, roadsides, field margins. Each flowering plant species should be searched for within an area 2 m each side of the path, and any sightings recorded using a GPS device or map. Each plot will be surveyed twice per year once in May and again in July (with surveys 6 to 8 weeks apart). Each survey will take approximately 45 min to 1 hour to complete.

Training: Level 4 (experienced or professional surveyors only). Some plants within this category can be difficult to locate and/or identify.

3.3.13 Flowering plants: mountain grassland

Species: spring sandwort (Minuartia verna), mountain pansy (Viola lutea), frog orchid (Dactylorhiza viridis)

Methods will be the same as those described above for the flowering plants survey group. However, surveys will be carried out later in the year during July and August (at least 4 weeks apart) and transect routes will focus more on upland areas.

Training: Level 2 (half day training event). All are distinctive species except for frog orchid which will require some instruction for locating and identifying. Make use of existing naturalists as much as possible for this survey group.

20

3.3.14 Nocturnal birds

Species: barn owl (Tyto alba), short-eared owl (Asio flammeus)

Both nocturnal bird species are difficult to survey systematically. Members of the public will therefore be asked to report anecdotal sightings of these species. An awareness campaign could be used to encourage this, and information provided on what to look out for and how to report sightings. Both species are distinctive and easy to identify. Gamekeepers could also report sightings of short-eared owl as grouse shooting estates within Nidderdale AONB are likely to be a stronghold for this species.

21

4. Habitat Suitability Modelling methods

Habitat Suitability Models (HSM) will be produced for the 10 target species listed in Table 2. This will involve preparing species records and the relevant environmental and habitat data in GIS, and then running models in MaxEnt (http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~schapire/maxent, Phillips et al. 2006) with appropriate settings to produce validated predictive multi-scale models and maps. An ecologist and experienced modeller must be used for this, as both knowledge of the ecology of the target species and experience of the complex modelling procedure are required.

4.1 HSM detailed methods

Species records: All species occurrence records must be entered into a GIS database, accurately georeferenced, and prepared for modelling in MaxEnt. Existing datasets will need to be filtered before use according to their reliability, accuracy and date of collection.

Habitat data: The habitat data that are likely to be required for modelling the 10 target species are listed in Table 3. The raw digital data must be obtained in the correct format and then manipulated and processed in GIS to produce gridded environmental layers as required by MaxEnt (with the appropriate spatial extent, pixel size and data format). GIS data must also be ground-truthed using recent aerial photographs. The selection of appropriate environmental variables must be based on expert knowledge of the habitat requirements of each species and previous habitat suitability or species distribution models. This should include nonscalar variables (such as distance to features) and variables at multiple spatial scales appropriate to each species (e.g. percentage cover and density of features).

Modelling procedure: Models should be run in MaxEnt with appropriate settings for each dataset. Sampling bias, residual spatial autocorrelation, model overfitting and multicollinearity must be checked and accounted for in all models. A univariate approach should be used to investigate the importance of single variables at different spatial scales, and a multivariate approach to allow interactions between variables to be considered. Model pruning should be carried out using appropriate statistical validation tests to produce a final model containing environmental variables with the highest predictive power.

Outputs: A full report must be produced detailing the specific methods and modelling procedure used for each species, and providing the full results of the final models including variable composition and contribution, response curves and model statistics. Fine resolution habitat suitability maps must be produced for the whole of Nidderdale AONB for each species. The maps will be used to make broad recommendations for species conservation management.

22

Table 3. Habitat/environmental data requirements for Habitat Suitability Modelling

Environmental Data source Description Cost* variable Broad habitat classes Land Cover map (2007) Land cover data with 23 habitat classes £524.55 + VAT for first Centre of Ecology & derived from satellite imagery based on UK year, plus annual Hydrology (CEH) Biodiversity Action Plan broad habitat classes. renewal fee of Available as a vector dataset (ESRI® Shapefile £374.55 + VAT format) with 25 m resolution (see Appendix 3) Detailed habitat data – These data will need to Detailed vegetation data corresponding to TBC National Vegetation be generated NVC can be generated from satellite images Classification (NVC) (e.g. Bradter et al. 2011) Tree & hedgerow National Tree Map Location, height and canopy/crown extents for Supplied by Bluesky: mapping individual trees over 3 m in height. Accuracy > £6868.80 + VAT for 3 90 % canopy coverage. Supplied as a shapefile year licence paid (SHP) of polygons/points upfront, including updates (see Appendix 3) River data OS Mastermap Water Detailed and accurate mapping and attribute No cost – use existing Network information (including river flow, gradient and licence width) for watercourses of Great Britain. Available in vector format (GML) Altitude, aspect and OS Terrain 5 The most consistent and accurate height No cost – use existing slope product available. Digital Terrain Model licence available as ASCII grid with 5 m resolution Various – ponds, OS Mastermap Highly accurate detailed large-scale digital No cost – use existing buildings, roads, topography layer database with over 400 million manmade and licence footpaths etc. natural features. Available in vector format as themed layers Soil type NATMAP soilscapes - 30 distinct soil types at a 1:250,000 scale Total for both National soilscapes datasets: £375 + VAT map Cranfield Soil and for 3 year licence AgriFood Institute (see Appendix 3) (CSAI) Soil moisture NATMAP Wetness – 6 distinct soil wetness classes at a 1:250,000 National soil wetness scale map (CSAI) *based on digital data supply for an area of approx. 1300 km2 encompassing the Nidderdale AONB and a 5 km buffer (required for modelling). Prices are correct as of March 2016. Details of quotes are provided in Appendix 3.

4.2 Delivery of HSM

We recommend that HSM is performed after completion of surveys each year, as the results may be used to inform changes to survey methods or survey effort that may be required to improve the models. Reporting on preliminary results will also help to maintain interest throughout the project.

Suggested timescale and delivery:

2016-2017  Obtain habitat data and process to produce the multiscale environmental layers required for HSM for 10 species, prior to end of 2017 surveys (September 2017) – 8 weeks  Collate and process occurrence records for 10 species collected from 2017 surveys – 4 weeks  Run preliminary HSM with 2017 survey data for 10 species – 8 weeks  Produce preliminary report to provide feedback for 2018 surveys (alterations to survey methods/effort may be required) – 2 weeks

23

2017-2018  Collate and process occurrence records for 10 species collected from 2018 surveys – 4 weeks  Run preliminary HSM with 2017 & 2018 survey data for 10 species – 8 weeks  Produce preliminary report to provide feedback for 2019 surveys (alterations to survey methods/effort may be required) – 2 weeks

2018-2019  Collate and process occurrence records for 10 species collected from 2019 surveys – 4 weeks  Run final HSM with all survey data for 10 species – 8 weeks  Post processing, output interpretation and figure presentation for 10 final models – 2 weeks  Produce final report to include habitat suitability maps and recommendations for 10 species – 4 weeks

Total: 54 weeks work approx.

24

References

Balzan, M. V. (2012) Associations of Dragonflies (Odonata) to Habitat Variables within the Maltese Islands: A Spatio-Temporal Approach. Journal of Insect Science 12, 1-18.

Barreto, G. R., Rushton, S. P., Strachan, R. & Macdonald, D. W. (1998) The role of habitat and mink predation in determining the status and distribution of water voles in England. Animal Conservation 1: 129-137.

Bayliss, J. L., Simonite, V. & Thompson, S. (2005) The use of probabilistic habitat suitability models for biodiversity action planning. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 108, 228-250.

Bellamy, C., Torsney, A., Brown, E., Glover, A. & Altringham, J. (2012) Bat foraging habitat suitability maps for the Yorkshire Dales National Park. University of Leeds, UK.

Bellamy, C. C. (2012) Predictive modelling of bat-habitat relationships on different spatial scales. PhD thesis, University of Leeds, UK.

Bellamy C. C., Scott C. D. & Altringham J. D. (2013) Multiscale, presence-only habitat suitability models: fine resolution models for eight bat species. Journal of Applied Ecology 50, 892-901.

Bellamy C. C. & Altringham J. D. (2015) Predicting species distributions using record centre data: multi-scale modelling of habitat suitability for bat roosts. PLoS ONE 10(6): e0128440.

Bonesi, L., Rushton, S. & Macdonald, D. (2002) The combined effect of environmental factors and neighbouring populations on the distribution and abundance of Arvicola terrestris. An approach using rule- based models. Oikos 99, 220-230.

Bradter, U. (2010) The distribution of upland breeding waders at multiple spatial scales. PhD thesis, University of Leeds, UK.

Bradter, U., Thom, T. J., Altringham, J. D., Kunin, W. E. & Benton, T. G. (2011) Prediction of National Vegetation Classification communities in the British uplands using environmental data at multiple spatial scales, aerial images and the classifier random forest. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48, 1057-1065.

Bradter U, Kunin W. E., Altringham J. D., Thom T. J., Benton T. G. (2013) Identifying appropriate spatial scales of predictors in species distribution models with the random forest algorithm. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 4, 167-174.

Brady, L. & Phillips, M. (2012) Developing a 'Habitat Suitability Index' for reptiles. Arc Research Report 12/06.

BRIG (2007) (Biodiversity Reporting and Information Group) (ed. Maddock, A.) UK Biodiversity Action Plan; Report on the Species and Habitat Review [online]. UK Biodiversity Partnership. Available: http://www.ukbap.org.uk/bapgrouppage.aspx?id=112.

British Dragonfly Society (1993) Managing habitats for dragonflies. Under revision. Available: http://www.british-dragonflies.org.uk/content/habitat-conservation.

British Dragonfly Society (2015) Methodology for monitoring important dragonfly sites. Available: http://www.british-dragonflies.org.uk/sites/british- dragonflies.org.uk/files/docs/BDS%20methodology%20for%20monitoring%20important%20dragonfly%20sit es.pdf.

25

BSBI / CEH / Plantlife / JNCC (2015) National Plant Monitoring Scheme (NPMS) Field survey guidance notes. Botanical Society of Britian & Ireland / Centre for Ecology & Hydrology / Plantlife / Joint Nature Conservation Commitee. Available: http://www.npms.org.uk/sites/www.npms.org.uk/files/PDF/NPMS%20Guidance%20Notes_WEB_0.pdf.

BTO (2015) Breeding Bird Survey (BBS): Survey instructions. Available: http://www.bto.org/sites/default/files/u16/downloads/forms_instructions/BBS-Instructions-2015- online.pdf.

BTO (2016) Breeding Waders of English Upland Farmland (BWEUF) 2016: Survey methods. Available: http://www.bto.org/file/337840/download?token=71MUKJZj.

BTO (2014) Waterways Breeding Bird Survey (WBBS): Instructions. Available: http://www.bto.org/sites/default/files/u22/downloads/WBBS%20Instructions%202014.pdf.

Buckton, S. T. & Ormerod, S. J. (1997) Use of a new standardized habitat survey for assessing the habitat preferences and distribution of upland river birds. Bird Study 44, 327-337.

Bumbleebee Conservation Trust (2016) BeeWalk guidelines. Available: https://bumblebeeconservation.org/images/uploads/BeeWalkPack2016.pdf.

Butterfly Conservation / CEH / BTO (2012) Wider Countryside Butterfly Survey: Guidance for surveys. Butterfly Conservation / Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) / British Trust for Ornithology (BTO). Available: http://www.ukbms.org/Downloads/Wider_Countryside/WCBS%20guidance%202012.pdf.

Chamberlain, D. E., Wilson, A. M., Browne, S. J. & Vickery, J. A. (1999) Effects of habitat type and management on the abundance of skylarks in the breeding season. Journal of Applied Ecology 36, 856-870.

Charman, E. C., Smith, K. W., Dodd, S., Gruar, D. J. & Dillon, I. A. (2012) Pre-breeding foraging and nest site habitat selection by Lesser Spotted Woodpeckers Dendrocopos minor in mature woodland blocks in England. Ornis Fennica 89, 182-196.

Charman, E. C., Smith, K. W., Gruar, D. J., Dodd, S. & Grice, P. V. (2010) Characteristics of woods used recently and historically by Lesser Spotted Woodpeckers Dendrocopos minor in England. Ibis 152, 543-555.

Cheffings, C. M. & Farrell, L. (eds.) Dines, T. D., Jones, R. A., Leach, S. J., Mckean, D. R., Pearman, D. A., Preston, C. D., Rumsey, F. J. & Taylor, I. (2005). The Vascular Plant Red Data List for Great Britain. Species Status 7: 1-116. Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee.

Cianfrani, C., Le Lay, G., Hirzel, A. H. & Loy, A. (2010) Do habitat suitability models reliably predict the recovery areas of threatened species? Journal of Applied Ecology 47, 421-430.

Delahaye, L., Monticelli, D., Lehaire, F., Rondeux, J. & Claessens, H. (2010) Fine-scale habitat selection by two specialist woodpeckers occuring in beech and oak-dominated forests in southern Belgium. Ardeola 57, 339- 362.

Eaton, M. A., Aebischer, N. J., Brown, A. F., Hearn, R. D., Lock, L., Musgrove, A. J., Noble, D. G., Stroud, D. A. & Gregory, R. D. (2015) Birds of Conservation Concern 4: the population status of birds in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. British Birds 108. Available: britishbirds.co.uk/wp- content/uploads/2014/07/BoCC4.pdf.

Edgar, P., Foster, J. & Baker, J. (2010) Reptile Habitat Management Handbook. Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, Bournemouth, UK.

26

Environment Agency (1999) Otters and river habitat management. Second Edition. Environment Agency, Bristol, UK.

Fedriani, J. M., Delibes, M., Ferreras, P. & Román, J. (2002) Local and landscape habitat determinants of water vole distribution in a patchy Mediterranean environment1. Ecoscience 9, 12-19.

Fox, R., Brereton, T. M., Asher, J., August, T. A., Botham, M. S., Bourn, N. A. D., Cruickshanks, K. L., Bulman, C. R., Ellis, S., Harrower, C. A., Middlebrook, I., Noble, D. G., Powney, G. D., Randle, Z., Warren, M. S. & Roy, D. B. (2015) The State of the UK’s Butterflies 2015. Butterfly Conservation and the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Wareham, Dorset, UK.

Freshwater Habitats Trust (2016) PondNet Common Toad and Frog surveys. Available: http://freshwaterhabitats.org.uk/projects/pondnet/survey-options/frogandtoad/.

Hernandez, P. A., Graham, C. H., Master, L. L. & Albert, D. L. (2006) The effect of sample size and species characteristics on performance of different species distribution modeling methods. Ecography 29, 773-785.

Hewson, C. M., Austin, G. E., Gough, S. J. & Fuller, R. J. (2011) Species-specific responses of woodland birds to stand-level habitat characteristics: The dual importance of forest structure and floristics. Forest Ecology and Management 261, 1224-1240.

Jensen, F. P. & Lutz, M. (2007) Management plan for Curlew (Numenius arquata) 2007-2009. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.

Koleček, J., Reif, J. & Weidinger, K. (2015) The abundance of a farmland specialist bird, the skylark, in three European regions with contrasting agricultural management. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 212, 30-37.

Kuiper, M. W., Ottens, H. J., Ruijven, J., Koks, B. J., Snoo, G. R. & Berendse, F. (2015) Effects of breeding habitat and field margins on the reproductive performance of Skylarks (Alauda arvensis) on intensive farmland. Journal of Ornithology 156, 557-568.

Loy, A., Carranza, M. L., Cianfrani, C., D’Alessandro, E., Bonesi, L., Di Marzio, P., Minotti, M. & Reggiani, G. (2009) Otter Lutra lutra population expansion: assessing habitat suitability and connectivity in south-central Italy. Folia Zoologica 58, 309-326.

NARRS (2013a) NARRS Reptile Survey Protocol (v.2013). Available: http://www.narrs.org.uk/documents/NARRS%20Reptile%20Protocol%20v.2013.pdf.

NARRS (2013b) NARRS Amphibian Survey Protocol (v.2013). Available: http://www.narrs.org.uk/documents/NARRS%20Amphibian%20Protocol%20v.2013.pdf.

National Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006) London, HMSO.

Natural England, Forestry Commission & Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs (2015) Countryside Stewardship statement of priorities: Yorkshire Dales (NCA021). Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/countryside-stewardship-statement-of-priorities-yorkshire- dales-nca021.

Peterson, B. S. (2009) Management plan for Lapwing (Vanellus vanellus) 2009-2011. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.

Peterson, B. S. (2007) Management plan for Skylark (Alauda arvensis) 2007-2009. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.

27

Petit, S., Chamberlain, D., Haysom, K., Pywell, R., Vickery, J., Warman, L., Allen, D. & Firbank, L. (2003) Knowledge-based models for predicting species occurrence in arable conditions. Ecography 26, 626-640.

Phillips, S. J., Anderson, R. P. & Schapire, R. E. (2006) Maximum entropy modeling of species geographic distributions. Ecological Modelling 190, 231-259.

Plantlife (2013) Wildflower Count. Plantlife. Available: http://www.plantlife.org.uk/explore_nature/wildflowers_count.

PTES (2015) National Water Vole Monitoring Progamme survey guidelines. Available: https://ptes.org/wp- content/uploads/2015/03/National-Water-Vole-Monitoring-Programme-Survey-Guidelines-2015.pdf.

Rouquette, J. R. & Thompson, D. J. (2005) Habitat associations of the endangered damselfly, Coenagrion mercuriale, in a water meadow ditch system in southern England. Biological Conservation 123, 225-235.

RSPB (2006a) Farming for Birds: Song thrush advisory sheet (England). Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. Available: http://www.rspb.org.uk/forprofessionals/farming/advice/details.aspx?id=204042.

RSPB (2006b) Farming for Birds: Curlew advisory sheet (England). Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. Available: http://www.rspb.org.uk/forprofessionals/farming/advice/details.aspx?id=204042.

RSPB (2006c) Farming for Birds: Lapwing advisory sheet (England). Royal Society for the Protection of Birds. Available: http://www.rspb.org.uk/forprofessionals/farming/advice/details.aspx?id=204042.

Rushton, S. P., Hill, D. & Carter, S. P. (1994) The Abundance of River Corridor Birds in Relation to Their Habitats: A Modelling Approach. Journal of Applied Ecology 31, 313-328.

Santos, X., Brito, J. C., Sillero, N., Pleguezuelos, J. M., Llorente, G. A., Fahd, S. & Parellada, X. (2006) Inferring habitat-suitability areas with ecological modelling techniques and GIS: A contribution to assess the conservation status of Vipera latastei. Biological Conservation 130, 416-425.

Spalding, A. & Parsons, M. (2004) Light trap transects – a field method for ascertaining the habitat preferences of night-flying Lepidoptera, using Mythimna turca (Linnaeus 1761) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) as an example. Journal Of Insect Conservation 8, 185-190.

Strachan, R., Moorhouse, T. & Gelling, M. (2011) Water Vole Conservation Handbook Third edition. Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Oxford, UK.

Vaughan, I. P. & Ormerod, S. J. (2005) METHODOLOGICAL INSIGHTS: Increasing the value of principal components analysis for simplifying ecological data: a case study with rivers and river birds. Journal of Applied Ecology 42, 487-497.

Wisz, M. S., Hijmans, R. J., Li, J., Peterson, A. T., Graham, C. H., Guisan, A. & Group, N. P. S. D. W. (2008) Effects of sample size on the performance of species distribution models. Diversity and Distributions 14, 763- 773.

Woodroffe, G. L., Lawton, J. H. & Davidson, W. L. (1990) The impact of feral mink Mustela vison on water voles Arvicola terrestris in the North Yorkshire Moors National Park. Biological Conservation 51, 49-62.

28

Appendix 1. The full list of 132 species considered for inclusion in the project with a brief rationale for inclusion/rejection (green shading = species selected for the project (n = 50), light grey shading = less suitable species (n = 64), dark grey shading = unsuitable species (n = 18)). The conservation status for birds has been highlighted as red, amber or green according to the Birds of Conservation Concern 4 list (Eaton et al. 2015).

Common name Latin name Taxon group Survey group Conservation status Reason to reject / include

Water vole Arvicola amphibius Mammals Aquatic mammals UK BAP; S41 Survey water vole and otter together - transects along riverbanks. Good citizen science and HSM candidate Otter Lutra Lutra Mammals Aquatic mammals UK BAP; S41 Survey water vole and otter together - transects along riverbanks. Good citizen science and HSM candidate Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus Mammals Hedgehog UK BAP; S41 Higher equipment costs involved (footprint tunnels) and would require separate survey Harvest mouse Micromys minutus Mammals Harvest mouse UK BAP; S41 Would require separate survey, unsuitable for grouping Red squirrel Sciurus vulgaris Mammals Red squirrel UK BAP; S41 Too rare for structured survey and unlikely to occur throughout much of NAONB Cuckoo Cuculus canorus Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID for average birders Skylark Alauda arvensis Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID for average birders Song thrush Turdus philomelos Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID for average birders Linnet Carduelis cannabina Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID for average birders UK BAP; NCA CSS Priority; Lesser redpoll Carduelis cabaret Birds Farmland birds Easy to ID for average birders S41 Turtle dove Streptopelia turtur Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID for average birders Starling Sturnus vulgaris Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Generalist species found in a broad range of habitats Grey partridge Perdix perdix Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Lots of existing documentation / management advice. Already targeted for conservation Yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Lowland species - limited range in NAONB House sparrow Passer domesticus Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Could be confused with the tree sparrow Tree sparrow Passer montanus Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Difficult to ID - looks like the house sparrow, would require separate expert survey Bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Lower conservation priority than other species within group (amber status) Swift Apus apus Birds Farmland birds Lower conservation priority than other species within group (amber status) Barn swallow Hirundo rustica Birds Farmland birds Lower conservation priority than other species within group (green status) Siskin Carduelis spinus Birds Farmland birds Not a conservation priority relative to other species in this group (green status) UK BAP; NCA CSS Priority; Twite Carduelis flavirostris Birds Farmland birds Very few records, likely to be rare and extinct as breeder in NAONB S41 Yellow wagtail Motacilla flava Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Rare / extinct as breeder in NAONB. Very difficult for beginners UK BAP; NCA CSS Priority; Corn bunting Emberiza calandra Birds Farmland birds Not found / very rare in NAONB S41 Corncrake Crex crex Birds Farmland birds UK BAP; S41 Not found in NAONB

29

Appendix 1 continued

Common name Latin name Taxon group Survey group Conservation status Reason to reject / include

Barn owl Tyto alba Birds Nocturnal birds Iconic species, only recently moved from amber list (2015), low survey effort – public to report sightings Short-eared owl Asio flammeus Birds Nocturnal birds Important habitats in NAONB (upland, moorland and heathland) – public to report sightings Nightjar Caprimulgus europaeus Birds Nocturnal birds UK BAP; S41 Requires specialist survey to record calls, rare in NAONB Kingfisher Alcedo atthis Birds River birds Easy to ID, survey with other river birds along river walks Dipper Cinclus cinclus Birds River birds Easy to ID, survey with other river birds along river walks Sand martin Riparia riparia Birds River birds Lower conservation priority than other species within group (green status) Hen harrier Circus cyaneus Birds Upland birds S41 Rare, experience needed Merlin Falco columbarius Birds Upland birds Rare, experience needed Ring ouzel Turdus torquatus Birds Upland birds UK BAP; S41 Rare, experience needed Black grouse Lyrurus tetrix Birds Upland birds UK BAP; NCA CSS; S41 Reintroductions / rare - already a focus of other conservation projects Lapwing Vanellus vanellus Birds Wading birds UK BAP; NCA CSS; S41 Easy to ID, distinctive well-known species, high conservation status Curlew Numenius arquata Birds Wading birds UK BAP; NCA CSS; S41 Distinctive, well-known species, high conservation status Snipe Gallinago gallinago Birds Wading birds NCA CSS Easy to ID, survey with other wading birds Redshank Tringa totanus Birds Wading birds NCA CSS Easy to ID, survey with other wading birds Golden plover Pluvialis apricaria Birds Wading birds Easy to ID, survey with other wading birds Dunlin Calidris alpina Birds Wading birds Nest in uplands alongside golden plover, therefore can be surveyed together Tree pipit Anthus trivialis Birds Woodland birds UK BAP; NCA CSS; S41 Rare but very specialist species. For experienced birders Wood warbler Phylloscopus sibilatrix Birds Woodland birds UK BAP; NCA CSS; S41 Rare but very specialist species Spotted flycatcher Muscicapa striata Birds Woodland birds UK BAP; NCA CSS; S41 Experienced birders Pied flycatcher Ficedula hypoleuca Birds Woodland birds NCA CSS Experienced birders Lesser spotted Dendrocopos minor Birds Woodland birds UK BAP; S41 Experienced birders (difficult to spot) woodpecker Coccothraustes Hawfinch Birds Woodland birds UK BAP; S41 Elusive species - difficult to survey coccothraustes Redstart Phoenicurus phoenicurus Birds Woodland birds Lower conservation priority than other species within group (amber status) Marsh tit Poecile palustris Birds Woodland birds UK BAP; NCA CS; S41 ID too difficult even for experts Willow tit Poecile montanus Birds Woodland birds UK BAP; NCA CS; S41 Unlikely to occur, and ID too difficult as above Adder Vipera berus Reptiles Reptiles UK BAP; S41 Survey alongside other reptiles - visual and refugia searches in spring, good candidate for citizen science Grass snake Natrix natrix Reptiles Reptiles UK BAP; S41 Survey alongside other reptiles - visual and refugia searches in spring, good candidate for citizen science Slow worm Anguis fragilis Reptiles Reptiles UK BAP; S41 Survey alongside other reptiles - refugia searches, good candidate for citizen science Common lizard Lacerta Zootoca vivipara Reptiles Reptiles UK BAP; S41 Survey alongside other reptiles - visual and refugia searches in spring, good candidate for citizen science

30

Appendix 1 continued

Common name Latin name Taxon group Survey group Conservation status Reason to reject / include

Great crested newt Triturus cristatus Amphibians Amphibians UK BAP; S41 Good citizen science candidate, easy to ID or use eDNA analysis Common toad Bufo Bufo Amphibians Amphibians UK BAP; S41; Good citizen science candidate, easy to ID Common frog Rana temporaria Amphibians Amphibians Not a conservation priority River lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis Fish Freshwater animals UK BAP; S41 Would require expensive specialist survey – costs would be prohibitive Atlantic salmon Salmo salar Fish Freshwater animals UK BAP; S41 Would require expensive specialist survey – costs would be prohibitive European eel Anguilla anguilla Fish Freshwater animals UK BAP; S41 Would require expensive specialist survey – costs would be prohibitive Brook lamprey Lampetra planeri Fish Freshwater animals Would require expensive specialist survey – costs would be prohibitive Brown/sea trout Salmo trutta Fish Freshwater animals UK BAP; S41 Not a local priority species Bullhead Cottus gobio Fish Freshwater animals Would require expensive specialist survey – costs would be prohibitive Ruffe Gymnocephalus cernuus Fish Freshwater animals Would require expensive specialist survey – costs would be prohibitive Austropotamobius Aquatic White-clawed crayfish Freshwater animals UK BAP; S41 Would require expensive specialist survey – costs would be prohibitive pallipes invertebrates Aquatic Pond mud snail Omphiscola glabra Freshwater animals UK BAP; S41 Rare, very small and difficult to ID invertebrates Aquatic Cylindrical whorl snail Truncatellina cylindrica Freshwater animals UK BAP; S41 Rare, very small and difficult to ID invertebrates Garden bumblebee Bombus hortorum Insects Bumblebee Common Easy to spot and ID, good candidate for citizen science, common but useful bioindicator species Easy to spot and ID, good candidate for citizen science, locally scarce, should be suitable habitat in NAONB Golden-ringed dragonfly Cordulegaster boltonii Insects Dragonfly Locally scarce (upland streams) UK BAP; S41; Butterfly Wall Lasiommata megera Insects Butterflies Declining, identification possible with some instruction Conservation: High Butterfly Conservation: Distinctive and easy to ID (moorland edge late April to early June), NAONB contains important habitat Green hairstreak Callophrys rubi Insects Butterflies medium (upland heathland) Butterfly Conservation: Distinctive (grassland mid June - August), outlying populations in NAONB at the edge of the species range. Marbled white Melanargia galathea Insects Butterflies Low Retain to include a more common distinctive species within survey group Dingy skipper Erynnis tages Insects Butterflies UK BAP; S41 Very rare in NAONB and can easily be misidentified Small pearl-bordered Boloria selene Insects Butterflies UK BAP; S41 More difficult to ID, and similar to the pearl-bordered fritillary (grassland and moorland May - June) fritillary Brown argus Aricia agestis Insects Butterflies More difficult to ID - can be confused with female common blue and northern brown argus Dark Green Fritillary Argynnis aglaja Insects Butterflies Can be confused with the wall brown butterfly and would require instruction / experience Small heath Coenonympha pamphilus Insects Butterflies UK BAP; S41 Very widespread in NAONB (on grassy moorland) therefore less of a conservation priority White-letter hairstreak Satyrium w-album Insects Butterflies UK BAP; S41 Difficult to survey and ID, flies around the tops of elm trees Purple hairstreak Neozephyrus quercus Insects Butterflies Difficult to survey as flies around the tops of oak trees

31

Appendix 1 continued

Common name Latin name Taxon group Survey group Conservation status Reason to reject / include

Pale eggar Trichiura crataegi Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID, common/declining, specialist Square-spotted clay Xestia stigmatica Insects Moths - nocturnal Nationally scarce B Important populations in NAONB V-moth Macaria wauaria Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID, important to monitor, specialist (upland only) Ghost Hepialus humuli Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID, specialist (old grasslands) Grey mountain carpet Entephria caesiata Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Declining in area - needs to be monitored, more difficult to ID - training / experience required Figure of eight Diloba caeruleocephala Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Declining specialist species. Flight period not compatible with other species in survey group Oak hook-tip Watsonalla binaria Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Uncommon, at the northern edge of range Garden tiger Arctia caja Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID, generalist Feathered gothic Tholera decimalis Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID, generalist Mouse Amphipyra tragopoginis Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID, generalist Clouded Magpie Abraxas sylvata Insects Moths - nocturnal Easy to ID, local Brindled Ochre Dasypolia templi Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 More difficult to ID, local Blomer's Rivulet Venusia blomeri Insects Moths - nocturnal More difficult to ID, very specialist (wych elm) Dark-barred twin spot Xanthorhoe ferrugata Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 More difficult to ID carpet Knot grass Acronicta rumicis Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 More difficult to ID Light Knot Grass Acronicta menyanthidis Insects Moths - nocturnal More difficult to ID, local/declining, two old records in NAONB Northern Rustic Standfussiana lucernea Insects Moths - nocturnal More difficult to ID, local, very few records in NAONB Lunar Thorne Selenia lunularia Insects Moths - nocturnal More difficult to ID Latticed heath Chiasmia clathrata Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Could be confused with common heath, generalist Grey dagger Acronicta psi Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Difficult to ID, generalist Sallow Cirrhia icteritia Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Could be confused with other sallow species. Common and widespread Shaded broad-bar Scotopteryx chenopodiata Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID, very common and widespread (everywhere) Blood-vein Timandra comae Insects Moths - nocturnal UK BAP; S41 Easy to ID, very common and widespread (everywhere) Emperor Moth Saturnia pavonia Insects Moths - day flying Easy to ID, widespread - retain to include a more common distinctive species (and important habitats) Pseudopanthera Speckled Yellow Insects Moths - day flying Distinctive, uncommon in NAONB macularia Clouded Buff Diacrisia sannio Insects Moths - day flying Distinctive, uncommon in NAONB Argent and Sable Rheumaptera hastata Insects Moths - day flying UK BAP; S41 Nationally scarce B and uncommon in NAONB, more difficult to ID but possible with some training Fox Moth Macrothylacia rubi Insects Moths - day flying Easy to ID, common species - less of a conservation priority Wood Tiger Parasemia plantaginis Insects Moths - day flying Easy to ID, common species - less of a conservation priority Small Argent and Sable Epirrhoe tristata Insects Moths - day flying Uncommon in NAONB, more difficult to ID Heath Rivulet Perizoma minorata Insects Moths - day flying Nationally scarce B and uncommon in NAONB, more difficult to ID 32

Appendix 1 continued

Common name Latin name Taxon group Survey group Conservation status Reason to reject / include

Moonwort Botrychium lunaria Plants Ferns Least Concern (VPRDL) Less of a conservation priority, would require high survey effort (separate survey and difficult to spot) Marsh stitchwort Stellaria palustris Plants Flowering plants UK BAP; S41 Survey by specialist Fine leaved sandwort Minuartia hybrida Plants Flowering plants UK BAP; S41 Survey by specialist Burnt orchid Neotinea ustulata Plants Flowering plants UK BAP; S41 Survey by specialist Fly orchid Ophrys insectifera Plants Flowering plants UK BAP; S41 Easy to spot and ID, good candidate for citizen science Thistle broomrape Orobanche reticulata Plants Flowering plants Near Threatened (VPRDL) Less of a conservation priority than other species within this group (not UK BAP or S41) Pyramidal orchid Anacamptis pyramidalis Plants Flowering plants Less of a conservation priority than other species within this group (not UK BAP or S41) Yellow star of Bethlehem Gagea lutea Plants Flowering plants Least Concern (VPRDL) Less of a conservation priority than other species within this group (not UK BAP or S41) Tower mustard Arabis glabra Plants Flowering plants UK BAP; S41 Too rare Red hemp nettle Galeopsis angustifolia Plants Flowering plants UK BAP; S41 Too rare Pennyroyal Mentha pulegium Plants Flowering plants UK BAP; S41 Too rare Rare spring-sedge Carex ericetorum Plants Flowering plants UK BAP; S41 Too rare Corn buttercup Ranunculus arvensis Plants Flowering plants UK BAP; S41 Rare, associated with agricultural areas / field margins - may require separate survey to other plant species Wild tulip Tulipa sylvestris Plants Flowering plants Too rare and non-native species Flowering plants: Spring sandwort Minuartia verna Plants Vulnerable (VPRDL) Easy to ID with some training and suitable habitats in NAONB mountain grassland Flowering plants: Mountain pansy Viola lutea Plants Near Threatened (VPRDL) Distinctive and suitable habitats in NAONB mountain grassland Flowering plants: Frog orchid Dactylorhiza viridis Plants UK BAP; S41 Survey by specialist mountain grassland Flowering plants: Alpine pennycress Thlaspi caerulescens Plants Least Concern (VPRDL) Less of a conservation priority than other species within this group mountain grassland Lower plants & Slender thread moss Orthodontium gracile Bryophyte UK BAP; S41 Rare and difficult to ID - specialist only fungi Lower plants & Nowell’s limestone moss Zygodon gracilis Bryophyte UK BAP; S41 Very rare, no records found in NAONB, difficult to ID – specialist only fungi Lower plants & Oak polypore Buglossoporus pulvinus Fungi UK BAP; S41 No records in NAONB and very rare fungi Anaptychia ciliaris subsp. Anaptychia ciliaris subsp. Lower plants & Lichen UK BAP; S41 Rare, difficult to ID - specialist only Ciliaris Ciliaris fungi Lower plants & Sap groove lichen Bacidia incompta Lichen UK BAP; S41 Small, difficult to see and identify, requires expert / specialist, very scarce in northern England fungi NAONB = Nidderdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty UK BAP = UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BRIG 2007) S41 = Section 41 Species of Principal Importance in England (National Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006) NCA CSS = Natural Character Area Countryside Stewardship priority species (Natural England et al. 2015) VPRDL = The Vascular Plant Red Data List for Great Britain (Cheffings & Farrell 2005) Butterfly Conservation priority = taken from http://butterfly-conservation.org and based on Fox et al. (2015) 33

Appendix 2.

Complete list of equipment required for surveys:

 GPS device or smartphone with GPS app – volunteers can provide own if wish (not essential)

 Ordnance Survey maps, recording forms and identification guides – budget for printing costs

 Stationary (e.g. pens, pencils, clipboards)

 Camera / camera phone – volunteers can provide own if wish (not essential)

 Binoculars x 20 pairs (e.g. Opticron Adventurer WP 8 x 42 mm)

 Thermometer / anemometer x 25 devices plus spare batteries (e.g. Technoline EA 3010 or similar)

 Hand lenses x 25 items (e.g. Opticron Hand Lens 23mm 10x magnification or similar)

 Protective gloves x 25 pairs (e.g. any gardening gloves)

 Camera traps x 5 (e.g. Acorn Ltl 5210a scouting camera, plus memory cards and batteries)

 Bird call identification apps (e.g. Bird Song Id www.isoperla.co.uk/BirdSongId)

 Artifical refugia – surveyors/volunteers to provide/donate

 eDNA kits x 144 (e.g. https://greatcrestednewts.co.uk/shop/edna-testing-analysis-kit/)

 Battery powered moth traps x 12 plus 12V batteries, chargers and spare light tubes (any portable heath trap e.g. http://www.watdon.co.uk/acatalog/E7585-6W-Heath-trap.html or similar)

 Egg boxes – volunteers to provide/donate

 Plastic insect pots x 100 (e.g. http://www.watdon.co.uk/acatalog/E6057-90mls-clear-round- container.html or similar)

34

Appendix 3.

Quotes for habitat data required for habitat suitability modelling

35

Land Cover Map: NB. As of 1 April 2016, there will be no charge for a contractor’s licence (Caroline Cowan, personal communication, 24 March 2016)

Anna Berthinussen, The Old Workhouse, King Street, Pateley Bridge, Harrogate, North Yorkshire, HG3 5LE.

17th March 2016

Dear Anna,

Quotation for Enquiry LCM 2016-121 version 2

Thank you for contacting the CEH data licensing team. Please find a quotation for your requested dataset below:

Requested Data Dataset Land Cover Map 2007 Vector Geographical extent 1,308 km2 Use type Non-commercial IBU Number of users Unlimited

Licence Fee Data fee* £208.91 Ordnance Survey royalties £15.64 Administration fee £150.00 Data preparation fee*** £150.00 Subtotal £524.55

VAT** £104.91 TOTAL £629.46

*inclusive of all 3rd party royalties with the exception of Ordnance Survey royalties (given separately). **VAT will be charged at the rate ruling at the tax point. ***a data preparation fee (£150 + vat) is charged on all Land Cover Map 2007 vector licences unless the CEH Environmental Information Platform (https://eip.ceh.ac.uk/) has been used to specify the area of data required.

This quotation is based on CEH's standard, one year licence for internal business use only. The licence can be renewed annually. A separate licence is required if you intend to pass the data to a third party contractor. The cost of a contractor’s licence is £150 + VAT.

This quote is valid for 30 days from the date of this letter.

Please advise me if you wish to request a licence agreement.

Yours sincerely,

Caroline Data Licensing Administrator

Email: [email protected] Contacts: Oliver Robertson 01491 692549 or Caroline Cowan 01491 692716 or Jack O’Brien 01491 692567 National Tree Map:

Quotation

Date: 24 March 2016 Quote Reference: QT-69746/1 Quoted By: Charlotte Ballard

Quote For: Anna Berthinussen Quote By: Bluesky International Limited The Old Toy Factory Jackson Street Coalville Leicestershire LE67 3NR Tel: 01530 835685 Fax: 01530 811900

Registered in England & Wales - 4789469

Item Description Price

National Tree 1307sqkm of NTM to cover an area in Nidderdale along with a three year licence fee with a £6,868.80 Map 10% discount for an upfront payment.

National Tree 1307sqkm of NTM to cover an area in Nidderdale one year licence. £3,815.98 Map

National Tree Licecnce fee for 2017 (NTM) including local authority 50% discount. £1,907.99 Map

National Tree Licecnce fee for 2018 (NTM) including local authority 50% discount. £1,907.99 Map

Terms and Conditions:

Please note values included in this quotation exclude VAT.

This quote is valid for 30 days from the above date. If you do not hold an account with Bluesky we will require payment before the goods can be dispatched. For further details on our terms and conditions of trading please visit www.bluesky-world.com/trading Soil data:

Soils Data Enquiry, CSAI's LandIS Quotation Advisory service (15-Mar-2016)

THE AREA IN QUESTION

Size of Area: = 1300 The user selected the option: "You have chosen to extract data to the outline of an ESRI shapefile or MapInfo file with an area of 1300 km2." The prices below relate to a Large Multi-User Licence (6+ users at one address, or multiple addresses, or use by subcontractors). The data is to be used for Bona fide Untargeted Research purposes. This means you are entitled to Royalty-free data. You will only have to pay the Preparation and Administration charges.

DATA SOUGHT

NATMAPsoilscapes : £ 0 NATMAPwetness : £ 0

MULTIPLE YEARS

Licence to last 3 year(s).

ROYALTIES

Total royalties: £0

SUMMARY

Prep and Admin: £375 + VAT Royalty = £ 0 +VAT Total Cost + Prep and Admin fee = £ 375 + VAT

36