DOCSLIB.ORG

English Nature Research Report 95

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
English Nature Research Report 95 6 INDICATOR SPECIES The idea that a group of species can be used as indicators to assess and monitor environmental quality and change is a simple and attractive one and has been successful in a number of cases. The range of species is considerable and they can be used in a variety of ways. The first group are those which are used to describe and classify communities. A good example of this is phytosociolagy, the National Vegetation Classification for instance. Here an assemblage of species is used to distinguish one community from another. Further sub-divisions of the main community and the relationships between vegetation types can be defined by considering the presence and absence of other (indicator) species. A second group of species is used to assess quality and to monitor environmental change. Perhaps the best example of this is provided by freshwater communities which are used to assess river water quality. Here there have been three approaches; first. a simple biotic index in which the differential responses of species to a pollutant is used to asses quality. Secondly, diversity indices (species richness and equitability) provides a more refined approach. Finally, the most detailed approach relates community structure to environmental variables (RIVPACS) to provide target communities against which physical and chemical stresses can be assessed. The group of indicator species which are used to identify ancient woodland or to date hedgerows is similar to a biotic index. In these cases persistence and susceptibility to disturbance are the variables which determine the presence or absence of these species. Finally there are species which have a high conservation value. The value is recognised in various listings. Red lists and RDBs are examples although strictly they are mainly with threatened species, not those of conservation value as such. The presence of one or more of these species at a site gives it a high conservation value. Sites may be valued both as examples of particular biotopes and as places where certain rare or notable species occur. Generally indicator species have certain characteristics. They are taxonomically and ecologically highly diversified. They are restricted to the habitat, and are easy to bbserve, identify and to sample. Above all, they must show a direct and predictable response to change. The heathland indicators used by Moore (1962) were primarily chosen to assess the effects of isolation. On isolated heaths, which were in general smaller than the less isolated, the chance of extinction was higher and the possibility of recolonization reduced. Hence, as Moore showed, fewer heathland species occurred on the isolated heaths than on the others. What are the possibilities of developing a set of indicator species far heathland? First, there is little need to develop a list to describe and classify the vegetation. Secondly, those species which are rare and notable and which can be used to assign conservation value are well known. However, ta draw up a list of species which can be used to assess habitat quality is more difficult. For this last named objective to be met it is likely that an examination of diversity or community structure will be required, in effect developing an approach similar to RIVPACS. Indicator species are used to 20 FIGURE 19 Frequency diagrams of the distribution of records for both heath and generalist species. The three categories are; 0 = No heathland within the 4ha'square; 1 = less than 50% of the square heathland; 2 = 50% or more of the square heathland. Ch-bpicm tmdlm pynfiosomanyrphula 60 50 g: F 20 10 0 0 1 I 2 c11 c11 Pl*us agus 0 1 2 0 1 i Cll c11 3- !m- I? w- 7 0 1 I I 0 1 2 Cll Lgataagilis LacataViVipara 25 M 5 0 1 3 0 1 2 c11 c11 assess quality and change where these themselves are difficult to measure. Howeverl when it becomes difficult to record community structure it may be simpler to measure habitat quality directly. To some extent this must be the case for heathland as it will be simpler to inspect the vegetation than to record the presence of indicator species, especially if these are invertebrate animals. Invertebrates which are easy to collect are often difficult to sort and identify. When indicator species work well they indicate changes which are otherwise difficult to observe, such as a pulse of a pollutant in a river or a very long period without disturbance in a woodland. In conclusion we suggest that lists of species of possible value as indicators on heathland be assembled and an attempt made to develop a set of species useful in assessing habitat quality. This is likely to be a prolonged and iterative process. 21 7 ACKNOWLEDGmS We are grateful to the Dorset Environmental Records Centre for their collaboration in extracting and supplying records for the Dorset Heathlands. We are particularly grateful to Richard Surry (Keeper of Records) and Brim Edwards . The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, South-west Region supplied records of heathland birds and we are grateful to Dr Mark Robbins assembling these records and preparing them. 22 8 REFERENCES Chapman, S.B., Clarke, R.T. & Webb, N.R. 1989. The survey and assessment of heathland in Dorset for conservation. Biological Consemation, 47* 137-152. Chapman, S.B. & Rose, R.J. 1994. Changes in the distribution of Erica ciliaris L. and Erica x watsonii Benth. in Dorset 1963-1987. Watsonia. 20, (in press). Gilpin, M.E. & Hanski, I. 1991. Netapopulation Dynamics: Empirical and Theoretical Investigations. Academic Press, London. MacArthur, R. H, & Wilson, E.O. 1967. The Theory of Island Biogeography. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Wan, A. & Pearman, D. no date. Endangered Wildttfe in Dorset. Dorset Environmental Records Centre. Dorchester. Moore, N.W. 1962. The heaths of Dorset and their conservation, Journal of Ecology, 50. 369-391 Prendergast, E.D.V. 1991. The Dragonflies of Dorset. Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society, Dorchester. Prendergast E.D.V. & Boys, J.V. 1983. The Birds of’Darsst. David & Charles, Newton Abbot. Ratcliffe, D.A. 1977. A Nature Conservation Review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Spellerberg, I.F. 1991. Biageographical basis of conservation. In Spellerberg, I.F., Goldsmith, F.B. & Morris, M.G. (eds). The Scientific Ranagernent of Temperate Communities for Conservation. Blackwell Scientific Publications. Qxfwrd. Thornas, J.A. & Webb, N.R. 1984. Butterflies of Dorset. Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society, Dorchester. Webb, N.R. 1990. Changes an the heathlands of Dorset, England, between 1978 and 1987. Biological Consermation, 51, 273-286. Webb. N.R. & Haskins. L.E. 1980. An ecological survey of heathlands in the Poole Basin, Dorset, England in 1978. Biological Conservation, 17, 281-296. Webb, N.R. & Hopkins, P.J. 1984. Invertebrate diversity on fragmented Calluna-heathland. Journal of Applied Ecology, 21, 921-933. Webb, N.R. & Vermaat, A.B. 1990. Changes in vegetation diversity on remnant heathland fragments. BZoZogicaZ Conservation, 53, 253-264. 23 INSTITUTE OF TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY (NATURAL ENVIRONMENT RESEMCH COUNCIL) Project T08079LI English Nature/NERC Contract Habitat Fragmentation and Weathland Species: Supplementary Report N R Webb Fumebrook Research Station Wareham Dorset BA20 SAS CONTENTS Page SUMMARY 3 1 INTRODUCTION 4 2 A rmRTHER STUDY OF THE STATUS OF 5 WORE'S INDICATOR SPECIES 3 SPECIES OF POSSIBLE USE As INDICATORS 12 3.1 Introduction 12 3.2 Heathland spiders 12 3.3 Lepidoptera 13 3.4 Ground beetles 19 3.5 Herniptera - Heteroptera 19 3.6 Orthoptera and related Orders 21 3.7 Heathland plants 21 GENERAL POINTS ON INDICATOR SPECIES 24 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 25 6 REF"CES 26 2 SUMMARY 1. As a result of additional data becoming available, a further analysis of the occurrence of eight heathland indicator species in 1960 and at the present time has been made. 2. This analysis shows little change from the overall pattern reported by Webb & Rose (1994). The largest heaths still contain all 8 indicator species. There have been Losses from the smaller isolated heaths with the generalist species showing marked declines. The smaller heaths tend to be more dynamic, both losing and gaining species. 3. Lists of species of possible use as indicators are presented. These cover spiders, butterflies and moths, ground beetles, bugs and plants. 3 1 INTRODUCTION In the previous report (Webb & Rose 1994) an analysis was made of the occurrence of eight heathland species in relation to patch size and isolation. The eight species chosen were those used by Moore (1962). The repetition of Moare's exercise confirmed his finding that where heaths were more isolated they tended to lack characteristic species, In addition, the prediction made by Moore that the small and isolated heaths would continue to lose heathland species was confirmed. Moore used only eight indicator species all of which were animals. It is of interest to consider what other species could be used both to examine the effects of fragmentation and isolation and also to assess habitat quality. This supplementary report presents details of some further analyses. First. because additional data are now available. the basic exercise has been repeated and secondly, a wider range of species, mostly invertebrates, has been examined with a view to developing a set of heathland indicator species. 2 A FURTHER STUDY OF THE STATUS OF MOORE'S INDICATOR SPECIES Webb & Rose (1994) presented a table (Table 4) comparing the presence between 19-59-60 and 1980-93 of Moore's 8 heathland indicator species on twelve heathlands. This comparison was made almost entirely from records available from the Dorset Environmental Records Centre. Since that comparison was made, a number of other records have been located. First, it was realised that the 1980-93 records were deficient particularly for the Common and Sand Lizards.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Methods and Work Profile
    REVIEW OF THE KNOWN AND POTENTIAL BIODIVERSITY IMPACTS OF PHYTOPHTHORA AND THE LIKELY IMPACT ON ECOSYSTEM SERVICES JANUARY 2011 Simon Conyers Kate Somerwill Carmel Ramwell John Hughes Ruth Laybourn Naomi Jones Food and Environment Research Agency Sand Hutton, York, YO41 1LZ 2 CONTENTS Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 8 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 13 1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................ 13 1.2 Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 15 2. Review of the potential impacts on species of higher trophic groups .................... 16 2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 16 2.2 Methods ............................................................................................................................. 16 2.3 Results ............................................................................................................................... 17 2.4 Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 44 3. Review of the potential impacts on ecosystem services .......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Phase 1 Report, July 1999 Monitoring Heathland Fires in Dorset
    MONITORING HEATHLAND FIRES IN DORSET: PHASE 1 Report to: Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions: Wildlife and Countryside Directorate July 1999 Dr. J.S. Kirby1 & D.A.S Tantram2 1Just Ecology 2Terra Anvil Cottage, School Lane, Scaldwell, Northampton. NN6 9LD email: [email protected] web: http://www.terra.dial.pipex.com Tel/Fax: +44 (0) 1604 882 673 Monitoring Heathland Fires in Dorset Metadata tag Data source title Monitoring Heathland Fires in Dorset: Phase 1 Description Research Project report Author(s) Kirby, J.S & Tantram, D.A.S Date of publication July 1999 Commissioning organisation Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions WACD Name Richard Chapman Address Room 9/22, Tollgate House, Houlton Street, Bristol, BS2 9DJ Phone 0117 987 8570 Fax 0117 987 8119 Email [email protected] URL http://www.detr.gov.uk Implementing organisation Terra Environmental Consultancy Contact Dominic Tantram Address Anvil Cottage, School Lane, Scaldwell, Northampton, NN6 9LD Phone 01604 882 673 Fax 01604 882 673 Email [email protected] URL http://www.terra.dial.pipex.com Purpose/objectives To establish a baseline data set and to analyse these data to help target future actions Status Final report Copyright No Yes Terra standard contract conditions/DETR Research Contract conditions. Some heathland GIS data joint DETR/ITE copyright. Some maps based on Ordnance Survey Meridian digital data. With the sanction of the controller of HM Stationery Office 1999. OS Licence No. GD 272671. Crown Copyright. Constraints on use Refer to commissioning agent Data format Report Are data available digitally: No Yes Platform on which held PC Digital file formats available Report in Adobe Acrobat PDF, Project GIS in MapInfo Professional 5.5 Indicative file size 2.3 MB Supply media 3.5" Disk CD ROM DETR WACD - 2 - Phase 1 report, July 1999 Monitoring Heathland Fires in Dorset EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Lowland heathland is a rare and threatened habitat and one for which we have international responsibility.
    [Show full text]
  • The 14Th European Heathlands Workshop
    NICOLAUS COPERNICUS UNIVERSITY SCIENTIFIC SOCIETY IN TORUN THE 14TH EUROPEAN HEATHLANDS WORKSHOP Heathlands of protected and military training areas in Northern Poland Poland 2015 1 2 NICOLAUS COPERNICUS UNIVERSITY SCIENTIFIC SOCIETY IN TORUN THE 14TH EUROPEAN HEATHLANDS WORKSHOP Heathlands of protected and military training areas in Northern Poland Marshal of the Kujawsko-Pomorskie Piotr Całbecki Co-organizers and sponsors of the conference: National Forests The "Bory Tucholskie" The "Bory Tucholskie" National Park Biosphere Reserve 3 4 NICOLAUS COPERNICUS UNIVERSITY SCIENTIFIC SOCIETY IN TORUN THE 14TH EUROPEAN HEATHLANDS WORKSHOP Heathlands of protected and military training areas in Northern Poland SHORT ABSTRACTS PROGRAM 21-27 June 2015 Toruń, Poland 5 Contact: Chair of Geobotany and Landscape Planning, Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Lwowska 1, PL-87-100 Toruń, Poland, e-mail: [email protected] The Main Organizers Faculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, Nicolaus Copernicus University Scientific Society in Torun Scientific Committee of 14th Heathland Workshop Isabel Alonso, dr Natural England, UK Leonor Calvo, prof. dr University of Leon, Spain Bernard Clément, prof. dr University of Rennes, France Gert de Blust, dr INBO, prof. dr Research Institute for Nature and Forest, Belgium, President of the Network Anita Diaz, dr Bournmouth University, UK Anna Filbrandt-Czaja, dr NCU Toruń, Poland Herbert Diemont, dr Alterra, Wageningen, The Netherlands Werner Haerdtle, prof. dr Leuphana University of Lüneburg, Germany Jacek Herbich, prof. dr University of Gdańsk, Poland Peter Emil Kaland, prof. dr Uniwersity of Bergen, Norway Andrzej Nienartowicz, prof. dr NCU, Toruń, Poland Inger Kappel Schmidt, prof. Kopenhagen University, Denmark Henk Siepel, prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Somerset's Ecological Network
    Somerset’s Ecological Network Mapping the components of the ecological network in Somerset 2015 Report This report was produced by Michele Bowe, Eleanor Higginson, Jake Chant and Michelle Osbourn of Somerset Wildlife Trust, and Larry Burrows of Somerset County Council, with the support of Dr Kevin Watts of Forest Research. The BEETLE least-cost network model used to produce Somerset’s Ecological Network was developed by Forest Research (Watts et al, 2010). GIS data and mapping was produced with the support of Somerset Environmental Records Centre and First Ecology Somerset Wildlife Trust 34 Wellington Road Taunton TA1 5AW 01823 652 400 Email: [email protected] somersetwildlife.org Front Cover: Broadleaved woodland ecological network in East Mendip Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 2. Policy and Legislative Background to Ecological Networks ............................................ 3 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 3 Government White Paper on the Natural Environment .............................................. 3 National Planning Policy Framework ......................................................................... 3 The Habitats and Birds Directives ............................................................................. 4 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 ..................................
    [Show full text]
  • England Biodiversity Indicators 2020
    4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance England Biodiversity Indicators 2020 This documents supports 4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance Technical background document Fiona Burns, Tom August, Mark Eaton, David Noble, Gary Powney, Nick Isaac, Daniel Hayhow For further information on 4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance visit https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/england-biodiversity-indicators 1 4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance Indicator 4a. Status of UK priority species: relative abundance Technical background document, 2020 NB this paper should be read together with 4b Status of UK Priority Species; distribution which presents a companion statistic based on time series on frequency of occurrence (distribution) of priority species. 1. Introduction The adjustments to the UK biodiversity indicators set as a result of the adoption of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity (including the Aichi Targets) at the 10th Conference of Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity mean there is a need to report progress against Aichi Target 12: Target 12: By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained. Previously, the UK biodiversity indicator for threatened species used lead partner status assessments on the status of priority species from 3-yearly UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) reporting rounds. As a result of the devolution of biodiversity strategies to the UK's 4 nations, there is no longer reporting at the UK level of the status of species previously listed by the BAP process. This paper presents a robust indicator of the status of threatened species in the UK, with species identified as conservation priorities being taken as a proxy for threatened species.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Different Mowing Regimes on Butterflies and Diurnal Moths on Road Verges A
    Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 29.2 (2006) 133 Effect of different mowing regimes on butterflies and diurnal moths on road verges A. Valtonen, K. Saarinen & J. Jantunen Valtonen, A., Saarinen, K. & Jantunen, J., 2006. Effect of different mowing regimes on butterflies and diurnal moths on road verges. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation, 29.2: 133–148. Abstract Effect of different mowing regimes on butterflies and diurnal moths on road verges.— In northern and central Europe road verges offer alternative habitats for declining plant and invertebrate species of semi– natural grasslands. The quality of road verges as habitats depends on several factors, of which the mowing regime is one of the easiest to modify. In this study we compared the Lepidoptera communities on road verges that underwent three different mowing regimes regarding the timing and intensity of mowing; mowing in mid–summer, mowing in late summer, and partial mowing (a narrow strip next to the road). A total of 12,174 individuals and 107 species of Lepidoptera were recorded. The mid–summer mown verges had lower species richness and abundance of butterflies and lower species richness and diversity of diurnal moths compared to the late summer and partially mown verges. By delaying the annual mowing until late summer or promoting mosaic–like mowing regimes, such as partial mowing, the quality of road verges as habitats for butterflies and diurnal moths can be improved. Key words: Mowing management, Road verge, Butterfly, Diurnal moth, Alternative habitat, Mowing intensity. Resumen Efecto de los distintos regímenes de siega de los márgenes de las carreteras sobre las polillas diurnas y las mariposas.— En Europa central y septentrional los márgenes de las carreteras constituyen hábitats alternativos para especies de invertebrados y plantas de los prados semi–naturales cuyas poblaciones se están reduciendo.
    [Show full text]
  • 135. Dorset Heaths Area Profile: Supporting Documents
    National Character 135. Dorset Heaths Area profile: Supporting documents www.naturalengland.org.uk 1 National Character 135. Dorset Heaths Area profile: Supporting documents Introduction National Character Areas map As part of Natural England’s responsibilities as set out in the Natural Environment White Paper,1 Biodiversity 20202 and the European Landscape Convention,3 we are revising profiles for England’s 159 National Character Areas North (NCAs). These are areas that share similar landscape characteristics, and which East follow natural lines in the landscape rather than administrative boundaries, making them a good decision-making framework for the natural environment. Yorkshire & The North Humber NCA profiles are guidance documents which can help communities to inform West their decision-making about the places that they live in and care for. The information they contain will support the planning of conservation initiatives at a East landscape scale, inform the delivery of Nature Improvement Areas and encourage Midlands broader partnership working through Local Nature Partnerships. The profiles will West also help to inform choices about how land is managed and can change. Midlands East of Each profile includes a description of the natural and cultural features England that shape our landscapes, how the landscape has changed over time, the current key drivers for ongoing change, and a broad analysis of each London area’s characteristics and ecosystem services. Statements of Environmental South East Opportunity (SEOs) are suggested, which draw on this integrated information. South West The SEOs offer guidance on the critical issues, which could help to achieve sustainable growth and a more secure environmental future.
    [Show full text]
  • Additions, Deletions and Corrections to An
    Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society No. 36 (2012) ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND CORRECTIONS TO AN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST OF THE IRISH BUTTERFLIES AND MOTHS (LEPIDOPTERA) WITH A CONCISE CHECKLIST OF IRISH SPECIES AND ELACHISTA BIATOMELLA (STAINTON, 1848) NEW TO IRELAND K. G. M. Bond1 and J. P. O’Connor2 1Department of Zoology and Animal Ecology, School of BEES, University College Cork, Distillery Fields, North Mall, Cork, Ireland. e-mail: <[email protected]> 2Emeritus Entomologist, National Museum of Ireland, Kildare Street, Dublin 2, Ireland. Abstract Additions, deletions and corrections are made to the Irish checklist of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera). Elachista biatomella (Stainton, 1848) is added to the Irish list. The total number of confirmed Irish species of Lepidoptera now stands at 1480. Key words: Lepidoptera, additions, deletions, corrections, Irish list, Elachista biatomella Introduction Bond, Nash and O’Connor (2006) provided a checklist of the Irish Lepidoptera. Since its publication, many new discoveries have been made and are reported here. In addition, several deletions have been made. A concise and updated checklist is provided. The following abbreviations are used in the text: BM(NH) – The Natural History Museum, London; NMINH – National Museum of Ireland, Natural History, Dublin. The total number of confirmed Irish species now stands at 1480, an addition of 68 since Bond et al. (2006). Taxonomic arrangement As a result of recent systematic research, it has been necessary to replace the arrangement familiar to British and Irish Lepidopterists by the Fauna Europaea [FE] system used by Karsholt 60 Bulletin of the Irish Biogeographical Society No. 36 (2012) and Razowski, which is widely used in continental Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Forsthaus Prösa“
    Heideprojekt im NSG „Forsthaus Prösa“ - Schmetterlingsmonitoring - Fotos: I. Rödel Rangsdorf, Januar 2011 Heideprojekt im NSG „Forsthaus Prösa“ - Schmetterlingsmonitoring - Auftraggeber : NaturSchutzFonds Brandenburg Lennéstraße 74 14471 Potsdam Bearbeitung : Natur & Text in Brandenburg GmbH Friedensallee 21 15834 Rangsdorf Tel. 033708 / 20431 [email protected] Dipl. Ing. Ingolf Rödel Rangsdorf, 28. Januar 2011 Inhaltsverzeichnis 1 Anlass und Aufgabenstellung 1 2 Schmetterlinge als Bioindikatoren zur naturschutzfachlichen Beurteilung von Heidebiotopen 1 3 Kenntnisstand über die Schmetterlingsfauna märkischer Heidegebiete 2 4 Methodik 3 4.1 Spezifische Anforderungen 3 4.2 Erfassungsmethode 3 4.3 Termine 4 4.4 Probeflächen 7 5 Ergebnisse 8 5.1 Gesamtergebnis der Bestandsaufnahmen 8 5.2 Die nachgewiesenen Heideschmetterlinge 9 5.2.1 Dyscia fagaria (Heidekraut-Fleckenspanner) 9 5.2.2 Xestia agathina (Heidekraut Bodeneule) 10 5.2.3 Lycophotia molothina (Graue Heidekrauteule) 11 5.2.4 Dicallomera fascelina (Ginster-Streckfuß) 12 5.2.5 Plebeius argus (Argus-Bläuling) und Plebeius idas (Ginster-Bläuling) 13 5.2.6 Rhagades pruni (Heide-Grünwidderchen) 14 5.2.7 Rhyparia purpurata (Purpurbär) 15 5.2.8 Saturnia pavonia (Kleines Nachtpfauenauge) 15 5.2.9 Lycophotia porphyrea (Porphyr-Eule) 17 5.2.10 Xestia castanea (Ginsterheiden-Bodeneule) 17 5.2.11 Anarta myrtilli (Heidekrauteulchen) 18 5.2.12 Clorissa viridata (Steppenheiden-Grünspanner) 19 5.2.13 Eupithecia nanata (Heidekraut-Blütenspanner) 19 5.2.14 Pachycnemia hippocastanaria (Schmalflügeliger
    [Show full text]
  • Final Project Report
    1. Contestant profile . Contestant name: Elena Buhaciuc-Ionita . Contestant occupation: Researcher . University / Organisation S.C.E.C.B. NATURA-Z . Number of people in your team: 4 2. Project overview Title: Quarry ecosystems sustainability. Key species identification and local conservation status increase Contest: (Research/Community) Research Quarry name: Baita-Craciunesti 1/3 Abstract Although a quarry is represented by industrial activities, being itself an ecosystem with specific environmental factors values, it is not separated by the surrounding ecosystems. As the species know no borders, between the quarry and the surroundings exists connective "green channels”. This channels are used by key species for supply and energy exchange between the quarry and the surroundings. In order to be sustainable a quarry management needs to maintain this connections at optimal levels. Therefore, there are three steps to follow: 1. An inventory of the key species present at the quarry level and in the surroundings. 2. The conservation status assessment of the key species.3. Adopting a set of measures in order to increase the conservation status of the identified key species. Following this three steps will bring a real visibility over the quarry ecosystem functioning in connection with natural habitats. Therefore we have identified 71 mushroom species, 3 lichens species, 3 moss species, 3 fern species, 77 superior plant species, 24 day butterfly species, 32 night butterfly species, 72 other invertebrate species, 7 amphibian species, 5 reptile species, 29 bird species (6 day raptors, 2 night raptors, 20 other species), 9 large mammal species, 4 small insectivore mammal species, 7 small rodent mammal species, 9 bat species.
    [Show full text]
  • Database of Irish Lepidoptera. 1 - Macrohabitats, Microsites and Traits of Noctuidae and Butterflies
    Database of Irish Lepidoptera. 1 - Macrohabitats, microsites and traits of Noctuidae and butterflies Irish Wildlife Manuals No. 35 Database of Irish Lepidoptera. 1 - Macrohabitats, microsites and traits of Noctuidae and butterflies Ken G.M. Bond and Tom Gittings Department of Zoology, Ecology and Plant Science University College Cork Citation: Bond, K.G.M. and Gittings, T. (2008) Database of Irish Lepidoptera. 1 - Macrohabitats, microsites and traits of Noctuidae and butterflies. Irish Wildlife Manual s, No. 35. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin, Ireland. Cover photo: Merveille du Jour ( Dichonia aprilina ) © Veronica French Irish Wildlife Manuals Series Editors: F. Marnell & N. Kingston © National Parks and Wildlife Service 2008 ISSN 1393 – 6670 Database of Irish Lepidoptera ____________________________ CONTENTS CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................................1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................2 The concept of the database.....................................................................................................................2 The structure of the database...................................................................................................................2
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulations Assessment by Dorset Council
    Habitats Regulations Assessment by Dorset Council Portland Neighbourhood Plan June 2019 CONTENTS 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 2. HRA Screening ........................................................................................................................... 3 3. Appropriate Assessment .......................................................................................................... 11 Direct Land-Take.......................................................................................................................... 11 Construction related activities ..................................................................................................... 12 Recreational pressure .................................................................................................................. 12 Water resources and water quality .............................................................................................. 14 Air quality .................................................................................................................................... 15 4. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 17 Appendix A: Portland Neighbourhood Plan (Submission Draft Plan) Habitats Regulations Assessment (dated April 2019, produced by AECOM) ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]