DOCSLIB.ORG

Reintroducing Beavers to England 89 Characteristics of Candidate Release Sites 89 What Next? 90 13

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reintroducing Beavers to England 89 Characteristics of Candidate Release Sites 89 What Next? 90 13 Natural England Commissioned Report NECR002 The feasibility and acceptability of reintroducing the European beaver to England First published 17 March 2009 www.naturalengland.org.uk Introduction Natural England commission a range of reports from external contractors to provide evidence and advice to assist it in delivering its duties. This report was commissioned jointly by Natural England and the People‟s Trust for Endangered Species. The views in the report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Natural England. Background The beaver Castor fiber is a native species that It is important for Natural England: was hunted to extinction in Britain, probably by the 16th Century. Recently, there has been to understand the benefits and drawbacks of considerable interest in reintroducing it, both to beaver reintroductions; restore lost biodiversity and because of the to consider to what extent the beaver may be contribution it could make to river and wetland able to help deliver wider river and wetland management. The European Habitats & Species restoration objectives; and Directive also requires Member States to to understand the challenges that the consider the reintroduction of extinct native presence of the beaver may bring. species. The purpose of this report is to help Natural The beaver has been widely reintroduced England: across Europe and there is a considerable body of evidence arising from these projects. As the lead delivery body for the England Biodiversity Strategy - develop a view on the In 2008 the Scottish Executive issued a licence feasibility and desirability of beaver for a trial reintroduction of beavers to Knapdale, reintroductions in England and what Argyll. These are expected to be released in contribution beavers might make to national 2009. In Wales a feasibility study is under way. habitat restoration targets. In England there are captive beavers in large As the licensing authority - prepare itself for enclosures in five places around the country. making a decision when it receives an It seems likely that Natural England will receive application to release beavers into the wild in an application for a licence to release beavers England. into the wild within the next few years. This At the time of publication, Natural England‟s would be considered in the context of the Board has not considered its position on beaver International Union for Conservation of Nature‟s reintroductions. This report will contribute to that Guidelines for Reintroductions and the debate. reintroductions policy adopted by the conservation agencies in the UK. Specific background information would also be required. Natural England Project Manager - Tony Mitchell-Jones, Northminster House, Peterborough, PE1 1UA Contractor - Professor John Gurnell (Consortium Leader), School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary, University of London, London E1 4NS Keywords - Beaver, Castor fiber, reintroduction, ecology, habitat, legal status, history, feasibility Further information This report can be downloaded from the Natural England website: www.naturalengland.org.uk. For information on Natural England publications contact the Natural England Enquiry Service on 0845 600 3078 or e-mail [email protected]. ISSN 2040-5545 The feasibility and acceptability of reintroducing the European beaver to England Report prepared for: Natural England and the People‟s Trust for Endangered Species By J. Gurnell1, A.M. Gurnell2, D. Demeritt2, P.W.W. Lurz3, M.D.F. Shirley3, S.P. Rushton3, C.G. Faulkes1, S. Nobert2 & E.J. Hare1 1 School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 4NS 2 Department of Geography, King‟s College London, The Strand, London WC2R 2LS 3 Centre for Life Sciences Modelling (CLSM), University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU 2008 Project Details Project manager Dr A J Mitchell-Jones, Evidence Team, Natural England J Nelson, Chief Executive, People‟s Trust for Endangered Species Contractor Dr J Gurnell, School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 4NS Acknowledgments We warmly thank Derek Gow (Derek Gow Consultants, Devon), Peter Smith (Wildwood Trust, Kent), Ken West (Wildwood Trust, Kent), John McAllister (Kent Wildlife Trust) and Simon Pickering (Cotswold Water Park) for showing us their captive beavers and for discussing beavers and beaver management with us. We should like to thank Tony Sainsbury for commenting on Chapter 7, Peter Smith (Wildwood Trust, Kent) for information about import licensing and quarantine, and Wendy Finlay for proof reading large parts of the report. We are also grateful to Neal Armour Chelu, Bryony Coles, Peter Holmes, Mark Robinson, Jonathan Spencer, Jonathan Reynolds, and Charlie Wilson for their thoughts, and all those who contributed to the survey of stakeholders views reported in Chapter 9. Last we should like to thank the members of the England Beaver Steering Group: Jill Nelson (PTES), Nida Al-Fulaij (PTES), Tony Mitchell-Jones (NE), Chris Mainstone (NE) and Alastair Driver (EA). The project was funded by Natural England and the People‟s Trust for Endangered Species. i Contents 1. Introduction 1 Summary 1 Background 1 Why reintroduce beavers? 4 Literature 4 Aim and objectives 5 The report 6 2. Habitat requirements and population densities 8 Summary 8 Colonisation of new habitat 8 Habitat requirements 9 Water 9 Food and foraging 10 Grouping of habitat features 11 Density of established beaver populations 12 3. Beavers dams, hydrogeomorphological ecosystem effects and British rivers 18 Summary 18 Building dams and dens 19 Environmental conditions encouraging dam construction 21 Environmental effects 22 Hydrology, geomorphology and chemistry 23 Beavers and the river continuum 25 Beavers and British river types 26 4. The effects of beavers on plants and animals 30 Summary 30 Introduction 31 Plants 31 Animals 32 Invertebrates 32 Fish 35 Amphibians 38 Reptiles 38 Birds 39 Mammals 44 5. The identification of suitable regions for candidate reintroduction sites in England 47 Summary 47 Habitat requirements for reintroduced beavers 47 ii A preliminary GIS analysis of habitat suitability within England 49 Where next? 49 6. Beaver reintroductions to England: the legal position by Tony Mitchell-Jones, Natural England 54 Summary 54 Introduction 54 Legislation covering the possession of beavers and their release into the wild. 54 Possession 54 Release 55 Other legislative considerations 55 The legislative position of released beavers and beaver management 55 Current domestic legislation 55 The Habitats Directive 56 Beaver management 56 7. Parasites, mortality and quarantine and release of beavers 58 Summary 58 Parasites and disease 58 Post-release mortality in beavers 60 Quarantine and licenses 61 Release protocols 62 8. Phylogeographic history of European beaver populations and identification of suitable source populations for reintroduction 63 Summary 63 Introduction 63 Taxonomy 64 Genetic diversity and phylogenetic relationships 65 Summary and recommendations for source populations for UK introductions 68 9. Public perceptions and stakeholder responses 69 Summary 69 Introduction 69 Attitudes and perceptions of the general public 69 Views of key stakeholders and interest groups 70 Perceived benefits of beaver reintroductions 72 Stakeholder concerns 72 Conclusions and recommendations 75 10. The financial costs and benefits of reintroducing beavers 76 Summary 76 Introduction 76 Financial benefits 76 Cost-benefit analysis 79 11. Beaver management 82 iii Summary 82 Introduction 82 Flood control 82 Riparian zone management 83 Repellents and wire fencing 84 Traffic collisions 84 Animal control 84 Culling beavers 84 Live-trapping and netting 84 Fertility control 85 The effectiveness of control 85 Methods used to manage beavers in Europe 85 Management and the reintroduction programme 86 12. Beaver reintroductions to England 88 Summary 88 Mammal introductions and reintroductions 88 Key points concerning reintroducing beavers to Britain 89 Reintroducing beavers to England 89 Characteristics of candidate release sites 89 What next? 90 13. References 92 iv Executive Summary This review considers the technical feasibility, and ecological and social desirability of reintroducing European beavers Castor fiber to England and follows on from the recent decision by the Scottish Parliament to reintroduce beavers into Knapdale, Scotland in 2009. The particular objectives are: To review the ecology of beavers with respect to potential benefits of the ecosystem services they may provide and the possible ecological risks of their reintroduction. To define criteria for identifying candidate reintroduction sites. To identify the most appropriate source populations for potential reintroduction to England. To assess stakeholder concerns regarding reintroducing beavers. To identify actions and mechanisms that would maximise the benefits and eliminate or control any risks related to reintroductions. To make recommendations for further work that would be required to develop and implement a reintroduction programme, if this is considered desirable. Beavers are large (15 – 38 kg in weight), semi-aquatic rodents that live in rivers, streams, ditches, lakes and wetland areas. At one time they were widespread and common in Europe, but by 1900 they had been lost completely from large parts of their native ranges, including the United Kingdom, as a result of hunting and habitat loss. However, since
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Elkhorn Slough Estuary
    A RICH NATURAL RESOURCE YOU CAN HELP! Elkhorn Slough Estuary WATER QUALITY REPORT CARD Located on Monterey Bay, Elkhorn Slough and surround- There are several ways we can all help improve water 2015 ing wetlands comprise a network of estuarine habitats that quality in our communities: include salt and brackish marshes, mudflats, and tidal • Limit the use of fertilizers in your garden. channels. • Maintain septic systems to avoid leakages. • Dispose of pharmaceuticals properly, and prevent Estuarine wetlands harsh soaps and other contaminants from running are rare in California, into storm drains. and provide important • Buy produce from local farmers applying habitat for many spe- sustainable management practices. cies. Elkhorn Slough • Vote for the environment by supporting candidates provides special refuge and bills favoring clean water and habitat for a large number of restoration. sea otters, which rest, • Let your elected representatives and district forage and raise pups officials know you care about water quality in in the shallow waters, Elkhorn Slough and support efforts to reduce question: How is the water in Elkhorn Slough? and nap on the salt marshes. Migratory shorebirds by the polluted run-off and to restore wetlands. thousands stop here to rest and feed on tiny creatures in • Attend meetings of the Central Coast Regional answer: It could be a lot better… the mud. Leopard sharks by the hundreds come into the Water Quality Control Board to share your estuary to give birth. concerns and support for action. Elkhorn Slough estuary hosts diverse wetland habitats, wildlife and recreational activities. Such diversity depends Thousands of people come to Elkhorn Slough each year JOIN OUR EFFORT! to a great extent on the quality of the water.
    [Show full text]
  • Countryside Jobs Service Weekly® the Original Weekly Newsletter for Countryside Staff First Published July 1994
    Countryside Jobs Service Weekly® The original weekly newsletter for countryside staff First published July 1994 Every Friday : 14 June 2019 News Jobs Volunteers Training CJS is endorsed by the Scottish Countryside Rangers Association and the Countryside Management Association. Featured Charity: Canal and River Trust www.countryside-jobs.com [email protected] 01947 896007 CJS®, The Moorlands, Goathland, Whitby YO22 5LZ Created by Anthea & Niall Carson, July ’94 Key: REF CJS reference no. (advert number – source – delete date) JOB Title BE4 Application closing date IV = Interview date LOC Location PAY £ range - usually per annum (but check starting point) FOR Employer Main text usually includes: Description of Job, Person Spec / Requirements and How to apply or obtain more information CJS Suggestions: Please check the main text to ensure that you have all of the required qualifications / experience before you apply. Contact ONLY the person, email, number or address given use links to a job description / more information, if an SAE is required double check you use the correct stamps. If you're sending a CV by email name the file with YOUR name not just CV.doc REF 1370-ONLINE-28/6 JOB Development Officer / Senior Development Officer - Ecologist BE4 30/6/19 LOC SOLIHULL PAY YES FOR SOLIHULL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL Fixed term contract to 31/3/22. Our Conservation of the Historic Environment, Landscape Architecture, Urban Design and Ecology Team provides professional and technical advice on heritage, landscape, design, and ecology issues. The team is also responsible for the designation and management of Solihull’s 23 Local Nature Reserves and the delivery of externally funded projects.
    [Show full text]
  • 2. Concentrations and Movements of Waterbirds with Potential to Spread Avian Influenza
    2. Concentrations and movements of waterbirds with potential to spread Avian Influenza 2.1 Introduction 2.1.1 Waterbird numbers, distribution and key sites The International Waterbird Census (IWC), Coordinated by Wetlands International and its predecessor organization, IWRB, was established in Europe and West Asia in 1967 and in Africa in 1990. Every year in January, over 20 million waterbirds are counted in the Western Palearctic, and up to 10 million in Subsaharan Africa by a network of about 14,000 largely voluntary waterbird counters (Gilissen et al. 2002, Dodman & Diagana 2003). The use of standardized methods and recording forms and modern computer software ensures that a continental-scale time series of data on waterbird numbers, distribution and population trends is available as the scientific basis of waterbird conservation (e.g. Wetlands International 2002, 2005 Delany et al. 2005). Counts are conducted in January because this is when many waterbird species congregate conspicuously at a relatively small number of sites where they can be readily counted. The January count is supplemented in Subsaharan Africa by a second annual count in July, and there are plans for additional counts throughout Europe, Africa and Asia, in March-April and September-October, to collect information from sites important during migration. 2.1.2 Interpretation of IWC data More than 100 countries now participate in IWC around the world. The Census is coordinated at National Level by a wide variety of organisations and institutes and there are differences in approach which should be borne in mind when interpreting the resulting count data. The census is site-based, and defining sites in a standard way is problematic.
    [Show full text]
  • Everglades Ridge, Slough, and Tree Island Mosaics: Year 2 Annual Report Michael S
    Florida International University FIU Digital Commons SERC Research Reports Southeast Environmental Research Center 2010 Everglades Ridge, Slough, and Tree Island Mosaics: Year 2 Annual Report Michael S. Ross Southeast Environmental Research Center & Department of Earth and Environment, Florida International University James B. Heffernan Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University Jay P. Sah Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International University Pablo L. Ruiz Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International University Adam A. Spitzig Southeast Environmental Research Center, Florida International University See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/sercrp Part of the Earth Sciences Commons, and the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Ross, Michael S.; Heffernan, James B.; Sah, Jay P.; Ruiz, Pablo L.; Spitzig, Adam A.; and Isherwood, Ewan, "Everglades Ridge, Slough, and Tree Island Mosaics: Year 2 Annual Report" (2010). SERC Research Reports. 100. http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/sercrp/100 This work is brought to you for free and open access by the Southeast Environmental Research Center at FIU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in SERC Research Reports by an authorized administrator of FIU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Michael S. Ross, James B. Heffernan, Jay P. Sah, Pablo L. Ruiz, Adam A. Spitzig, and Ewan Isherwood This report is available at FIU Digital Commons: http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/sercrp/100 Year 2 Annual Report: Everglades Ridge, Slough, and Tree Island Mosaics Date of Submission: By: Michael S. Ross, Southeast Environmental Research Center & Department of Earth and Environment, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th ST, Miami, FL 33199 Tel 305-348-1420; Fax 305-348-4096; Email: [email protected] James B.
    [Show full text]
  • Watsonville Sloughs Hydrology Study
    Watsonville Sloughs Hydrology Study Prepared For: Santa Cruz Resource Conservation District Prepared by: In collaboration with: February 14, 2014 WATSONVILLE SLOUGHS HYDROLOGY STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................................... 1 Data Collection Program ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Hydrologic modeling ................................................................................................................................................. 5 1 OBJECTIVES AND TECHNICAL APPROACH ........................................................................................ 8 1.1 Format of this Report ................................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Project Funding ............................................................................................................................................ 8 1.3 Study Objectives ........................................................................................................................................... 8 1.4 Work Plan ................................................................................................................................................... 10 1.5 Acknowledgments .....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ensuring That Tests of Conservation Interventions Build on Existing Literature
    Title Ensuring tests of conservation interventions build on existing literature Authors Sutherland, WJ; AlvarezCastañeda, ST; Amano, T; Ambrosini, R; Atkinson, P; Baxter, JM; Bond, AL; Boon, PJ; Buchanan, KL; Barlow, J; Bogliani, G; Bragg, OM; Burgman, M; Cadotte, MW; Calver, M; Cooke, SJ; Corlett, RT; Devictor, V; Ewen, JG; Fisher, M; Freeman, G; Game, E; Godley, BJ; Gortázar, C; Hartley, IR; Hawksworth, DL; Hobson, KA; Lu, M; MartínLópez, B; Ma, K; Machado, A; Maes, D; Mangiacotti, M; McCafferty, DJ; Melfi, V; Molur, S; Moore, AJ; Murphy, SD; Norris, D; Oudenhoven, APE; Powers, J; Rees, EC; Schwartz, MW; Storch, I; Wordley, C Date Submitted 2020-09-02 Ensuring that tests of conservation interventions build on existing literature William J. Sutherland1 , Sergio Ticul Alvarez-Castañeda2, Tatsuya Amano3, Roberto Ambrosini4, Philip Atkinson5, John M Baxter6, Alexander L. Bond7, Philip J Boon8, Katherine L Buchanan9, Jos Barlow10, Giuseppe Bogliani11 , Olivia M. Bragg12, Mark Burgman13, Marc W. Cadotte14, Michael Calver15, Steven J. Cooke16, Richard T. Corlett17, Vincent Devictor18, John G Ewen19, Martin Fisher20, Guy Freeman21, Edward Game22, Brendan J. Godley23, Christian Gortázar24, Ian R. Hartley25, David L Hawksworth26, Keith A. Hobson27, Ming-Lun Lu28, Berta Martín-López29, Keping Ma30, Antonio Machado31, Dirk Maes32, Marco Mangiacotti33, Dominic J. McCafferty34, Victoria Melfi35, Sanjay Molur36, Allen J. Moore37, Stephen D. Murphy38, Darren Norris39, Alexander P.E. van Oudenhoven40, Jennifer Powers41, Eileen C. Rees42, Mark W. Schwartz43, Ilse Storch44 and Claire Wordley1 1 Conservation Evidence, Conservation Science Group, Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, David Attenborough Building, Cambridge CB2 3QZ, UK 2. Therya, Sergio Ticul Alvarez-Castañeda, Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, La Paz, BCS 23096, México 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Drought Contingency Plan May 1, 2021 – September 30, 2021
    State Water Project and Central Valley Project Drought Contingency Plan May 1, 2021 – September 30, 2021 Table of Contents I. Current Hydrologic Conditions ...........................................................................................................4 A. Water Quality ................................................................................................................................. 6 B. SWP and CVP Upstream Reservoir Storage .................................................................................7 C. Biology ..........................................................................................................................................7 i. Salmonids ..................................................................................................................................7 ii. Delta Smelt ................................................................................................................................8 iii. Longfin Smelt .............................................................................................................................9 II. SWP and CVP Operational Considerations .....................................................................................10 A. Health and Safety Requirements ................................................................................................. 10 B. Fish and Wildlife Protections .......................................................................................................10 C. Regulatory and Senior Water
    [Show full text]
  • What's on at WWT Wetland Centres February 2020
    What’s On at WWT Wetland Centres February 2020 Arundel https://www.wwt.org.uk/wetland-centres/arundel/ WWT Arundel, Mill Road, Arundel, West Sussex, BN18 9PB World Wetlands Day Sunday 2 February Free activities with admission https://www.wwt.org.uk/wetland-centres/arundel/whats-on/world-wetlands-day-1/5526 Celebrate wetlands on a historic Ramsar Boat Safaris, a special walk & talks or fun family activities about about amazing wetlands. We stay open until 5.30pm to watch for the Marsh Harrier roost. Nest Box Know How walks Saturday 8 – Sunday 9 February 11.00 or 15.00 Free with admission (sign up on the day) https://www.wwt.org.uk/wetland-centres/arundel/whats-on/nest-box-know-how- walks/5527 See the variety of nest boxes our wardens use onsite and discover who uses them on Nest Box Know How walks. Ask for advice for bringing the birds to your yard, just in time for National Nestbox week. Check out the boxes and feeders on sale in our shop. South East Puddle Jumping Championship Saturday 15 – Sunday 23 February Competition times 11.00 and 14.30. Practice puddles open all day Participation in all Southeast Puddle Jumping Championship activities is included in your admission price https://www.wwt.org.uk/wetland-centres/arundel/whats-on/soth-east-puddle-jumping- championship/5598 Put on your wellies, get out into nature and have a splashing time! Our puddle jumping championships are the perfect rainy day activity. It's fun for all the family, not just the kids – grown-ups can join in the championships too! Grown-ups, unleash your inner child, release every day stress and get splashing.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Planning Implications
    DRAFT 4 City of Goleta, California May 2004 BACKGROUND REPORT NO. 24 Hydrology and Water Quality INTRODUCTION This background report describes the hydrological characteristics of the City of Goleta. The City of Goleta’s hydrological features consist of creeks and associated flood plains, ponds, wetlands, and the Ocean. While this report provides an overview of these resources, other reports examine particular areas or issues in the City in greater depth. These reports include Ellwood Mesa Open Space Plan and the related Environmental Impact Report; Comstock Homes Development and Ellwood Mesa Open Space Plan, March 2004, Goleta Slough Ecosystem Management Plan, December 1997, and Water Quality Analysis Report, County of Santa Barbara, December 2003. PLANNING IMPLICATIONS Since hydrological features shape the land forms of an area, these features contribute to the physical character of the community. Hydrological forces create these land forms through processes such as erosion and flooding. These processes in turn pose constraints and hazards for use and development. Water, as the basis for all life, creates the environment for the community’s biological resources and ecology. Modification of the hydrological system, either by physical alteration or by change in water quality, will affect these biological systems. The potential of adverse impacts associated with development is an important constraint on how land might be used, developed or managed. Water and its quality affects other aspects of the quality of life since water is the basis of many recreational activities. City of Goleta, California XXIV-1 General Plan Report: Hydrology GENERAL TOPOGRAPHY AND DRAINAGE The City of Goleta is situated in the western portion of the Goleta Valley.
    [Show full text]
  • The Use of Subsidence to Estimate Carbon Loss from Deforested and Drained Tropical Peatlands in Indonesia
    Review The Use of Subsidence to Estimate Carbon Loss from Deforested and Drained Tropical Peatlands in Indonesia Gusti Z. Anshari 1,2 , Evi Gusmayanti 1,3 and Nisa Novita 4,* 1 Magister of Environmental Science, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak 78124, Indonesia; [email protected] (G.Z.A.); [email protected] (E.G.) 2 Soil Science Department, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak 78124, Indonesia 3 Agrotechnology Department, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak 78124, Indonesia 4 Yayasan Konservasi Alam Nusantara, DKI Jakarta 12160, Indonesia * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Drainage is a major means of the conversion of tropical peat forests into agriculture. Accordingly, drained peat becomes a large source of carbon. However, the amount of carbon (C) loss from drained peats is not simply measured. The current C loss estimate is usually based on a single proxy of the groundwater table, spatially and temporarily dynamic. The relation between groundwater table and C emission is commonly not linear because of the complex natures of heterotrophic carbon emission. Peatland drainage or lowering groundwater table provides plenty of oxygen into the upper layer of peat above the water table, where microbial activity becomes active. Consequently, lowering the water table escalates subsidence that causes physical changes of organic matter (OM) and carbon emission due to microbial oxidation. This paper reviews peat bulk density (BD), total organic carbon (TOC) content, and subsidence rate of tropical peat forest and drained peat. Data of BD, TOC, and subsidence were derived from published and unpublished sources. We Citation: Anshari, G.Z.; Gusmayanti, found that BD is generally higher in the top surface layer in drained peat than in the undrained peat.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of the Ornithological Interest of Sssis in England
    Natural England Research Report NERR015 A review of the ornithological interest of SSSIs in England www.naturalengland.org.uk Natural England Research Report NERR015 A review of the ornithological interest of SSSIs in England Allan Drewitt, Tristan Evans and Phil Grice Natural England Published on 31 July 2008 The views in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of Natural England. You may reproduce as many individual copies of this report as you like, provided such copies stipulate that copyright remains with Natural England, 1 East Parade, Sheffield, S1 2ET ISSN 1754-1956 © Copyright Natural England 2008 Project details This report results from research commissioned by Natural England. A summary of the findings covered by this report, as well as Natural England's views on this research, can be found within Natural England Research Information Note RIN015 – A review of bird SSSIs in England. Project manager Allan Drewitt - Ornithological Specialist Natural England Northminster House Peterborough PE1 1UA [email protected] Contractor Natural England 1 East Parade Sheffield S1 2ET Tel: 0114 241 8920 Fax: 0114 241 8921 Acknowledgments This report could not have been produced without the data collected by the many thousands of dedicated volunteer ornithologists who contribute information annually to schemes such as the Wetland Bird Survey and to their county bird recorders. We are extremely grateful to these volunteers and to the organisations responsible for collating and reporting bird population data, including the British Trust for Ornithology, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, the Joint Nature Conservancy Council seabird team, the Rare Breeding Birds Panel and the Game and Wildlife Conservancy Trust.
    [Show full text]
  • Elkhorn Slough Tidal Wetland Project Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve Elkhorn Slough Foundation
    Elkhorn Slough Tidal Wetland Project Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve Elkhorn Slough Foundation Management of Tidal Scour and Wetland Conversion in Elkhorn Slough: Partial Synthesis of Technical Reports on Large-Scale Alternatives: Hydrology, Geomorphology, Habitats and Engineering Water Quality June 2010 Note: This is a living document. Forward comments and questions to Bryan Largay: [email protected] The following individuals wrote this document: Bryan Largay, Erin McCarthy The following individuals provided review and comments: Robert Curry, Ed S. Gross, Ken Johnson, Quinn Labadie, Jessie R. Lacy, Erika McPhee Shaw, Kerstin Wasson, and Andrea Woolfolk Management of Tidal Scour and Wetland Conversion in Elkhorn Slough Hydrology, Habitats and Water Quality: Effects of Five Alternatives Overview Project scope Elkhorn Slough, one of the largest coastal estuaries in California and host to over 750 species of plants and animals, is undergoing rapid ecologic change: in 60 years the channel has deepened by 500 percent and hundreds of acres of salt marsh have died back or are deteriorating. The Elkhorn Slough Tidal Wetland Project, a collaborative effort of about 100 scientists, managers and key stakeholders, was established in 2004 to advance the understanding of the processes and potential solutions to these rapid habitat changes. Ecosystem services provided by the slough and its watershed are threatened by water quality impairment, invasive species, watershed development, freshwater diversion and other stressors, which are the subject of coordinated parallel efforts to steward the resource. The Tidal Wetland Project is a planning process focused on the tidal portion of the ecosystem. Through consensus, this process established goals of preserving and restoring priority habitats including salt marsh, tidal creeks, tidal brackish marshes and soft sediment habitats.
    [Show full text]