Report to:- CEMEX UK Materials Ltd Cemex House Evreux Way Rugby Warwickshire CV21 2DT
December 2014
ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF LAND AT EAST LEAKE QUARRY, REMPSTONE ROAD, EAST LEAKE, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE LE12 6PW
~~~~~~~~~~~~ CONTENTS
1. SUMMARY…...... 1
2. BACKGROUND…...... 3
3. LEGISLATIVE & POLICY MECHANISMS…...... 3
4. INITIAL ASSESSMENT METHODS………………….………...... ……...…….. 5
5. SITE CONTEXT………..………………...... …….…...….……..……….. 9
6. PHASE 1 SURVEY……………………...... …………………...……..…...... … 11
7. FAUNA…………………………….……………….…………..……….....……… 19
8. PHASE 1 SURVEY CONCLUSIONS…………………...... …...……… 40
9. ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHOD……………...... ……… 41
10. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 1 – SCOPING……………...... …...... …… 48
11. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 2 – IDENTIFICATION OF LIKELY ZONE OF INFLUENCE………....…...... … 62
12. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 3 – VALUED ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS (VER) LIKELY TO BE AFFECTED………...... …………… 63
13. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 4 – BIOPHYSICAL CHANGES LIKELY TO AFFECT EXISTING VER……...... ………...... …… 64
14. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 5 – ASSESSMENT OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CHANGES TO THE INTEGRITY OF STATUTORILY PROTECTED AND/OR NON-STATUTORY WILDLIFE SITES, OR THE CONSERVATION STATUS OF VER WITHIN THE ZONE OF INFLUENCE……...... …...... …….…… 65 CONTENTS (continued)
15. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 6 – MITIGATION, COMPENSATION & ENHANCEMENT……...... ……….…… 75
16. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 7 – ASSESSMENT OF THE ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS…...... … 81
17. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 8 – ADVISING ON THE CONSEQUENCES FOR DECISION MAKING……...... …… 84
18. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 9 – MONITORING………...... … 84
19. REFERENCES……...... …… 84
APPENDIX A. A REVIEW OF THE COMMUTING RANGES OF BRITISH BATS USED TO DEFINE AN APPROPRIATE RADIUS FOR SEARCHES OF HISTORIC DATA- SETS…...... …...... ….. 93
APPENDIX B. PLANT SPECIES RECORDED AT THE EAST LEAKE QUARRY EXTENSION PHASE 1 SURVEY SITE…………...... …….... 97
APPENDIX C. RESULTS OF HEDGEROW ASSESSMENT AT THE EAST LEAKE QUARRY EXTENSION PHASE 1 SURVEY SITE…...... 99
APPENDIX D. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AT THE EAST LEAKE QUARRY EXTENSION SITE…...... 103
______
Report authors: Henry Andrews MSc CEcol MCIEEM, Leanne Butt BSc MSc ACIEEM & Christy Tolliday BSc MSc (2014) and Tom Staton BSc MSc (2012). Final Proof: Henry Andrews. This report has been prepared by AEcol (Andrews Ecology Ltd) with all reasonable skill and diligence, within the terms agreed with the client. No part of the report may be reproduced without prior written approval of AEcol. No liability is accepted in respect of the use of data, conclusions or other material contained in this report for any purposes other than those specific to this report. © AEcol – Andrews Ecology Ltd 2014 ______CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF LAND AT EAST LEAKE QUARRY, REMPSTONE ROAD, EAST LEAKE, NOTTINGHAMSHIRE LE12 6PW
1. SUMMARY
1.1.1 AEcol were commissioned by CEMEX UK Materials Ltd to assess the ecological importance of approximately 46 ha of land, c. 27.5 ha of which is proposed as an extension to the existing East Leake Quarry, Rempstone Road, East Leake, Nottinghamshire LE12 6PW.
1.1.2 The East Leake Quarry extension site is located at Ordnance Survey (O.S.) Grid reference SK570247, c. 2 km south-east of East Leake, on the north-west side of the village of Rempstone. The Sheepwash Brook is located directly along the northern boundary of the site and the River Soar is located c. 3.5 km to the south-west. The extension site is located in an area of predominantly agricultural land comprising tillage, fragmented hedgerows and isolated patches of woodland, with mineral extraction within the existing East Leake Quarry to the west, a large area of parkland to the south-west and areas of residential housing within surrounding villages.
1.1.3 The initial ecological assessment comprised:- A desk-study including a search for historical biological data relating to the site and a stratified radius performed by Nottinghamshire Biological and Geological Records Centre (NBGRC) in September 2014; Phase 1 habitat mapping to the method set out in the Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: A technique for environmental audit (JNCC 2003) in September 2014; An assessment of the conservation value of the habitats present against the criteria set for Priority Habitats within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) in September 2014; and An assessment of the habitats present as to their intrinsic value, and the potential for protected fauna to occur, including:- o An assessment of hedgerows present within the site for their importance under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997; o An assessment of ponds to the north-west of the site for their potential to support great crested newts Triturus cristatus; o A search for field-signs of water voles Arvicola amphibius, badgers Meles meles and otters Lutra lutra; and o An assessment of all trees within and bounding the site for their potential to support roosting bats.
1.1.4 The conclusions of the East Leake Quarry extension Phase 1 survey are as follows:- 1. The site has no Statutory Wildlife Sites within a 2 km radius; 2. The site has three non-Statutory Wildlife Sites within a 1 km radius comprising Sheepwash Brook Wetlands Local Wildlife Site (LWS), Stanford Park LWS and Manor Farm, East Leake Grassland LWS; 3. The site holds eight Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) habitat types which encompass one UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat
______
- 1 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
comprising ‘Hedgerows’, although hedgerows within the site do not qualify as ‘important’ within the Hedgerow Regulations 1997; 4. The site holds an impoverished flora and no legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of plants were recorded; 5. The site holds suitable habitat for a suite of common and widespread invertebrates, potentially including up to 40 UK BAP Priority Species; 6. The site holds no suitable habitat for legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of fish; 7. The site holds no suitable breeding habitat for amphibians, although the UK BAP Priority Species; common toad Bufo bufo may potentially occur in their terrestrial phase on boundary hedgerows. There are no grounds to predict the presence of the legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species; great crested newts; 8. The site holds potentially suitable habitat for two legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species of reptiles comprising transient grass snake Natrix natrix along the Sheepwash Brook and boundary hedgerows, as well as slow-worm Anguis fragilis also on boundary hedgerows; 9. The site holds suitable habitat for a suite of common and widespread breeding and/or wintering bird species, potentially including up to 34 Schedule 1 and/or UK BAP Priority Species; 10. The site holds suitable habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare Lepus europaeus (recorded during the Phase 1 survey) and may also support a further two UK BAP Priority Species; harvest mice Micromys minutus and hedgehogs Erinaceus europaeus, as well as the legally protected mammal; badger; 11. The site holds no potentially suitable habitat for the legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species; common dormice Muscardinus avellanarius, water voles or otters, although the occasional presence of otters along the Sheepwash Brook is possible; and 12. The site holds potentially suitable habitat and features which may be used by a suite of common and widespread commuting and/or foraging bats, potentially including up to two legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species comprising noctule Nyctalus noctula and soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus.
1.1.5 There has been no material change in the habitats present within the East Leake Quarry extension site in 2014, or in their potential to support protected species since the survey was performed in 2012. No further surveys are proposed in respect of plants, invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds or mammals (including bats).
1.1.6 Following the initial ecological assessment, an Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) was performed in accordance with Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom (IEEM 2006).
1.1.7 The EcIA concluded that with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures and safeguards, the extraction of mineral from the East Leake Quarry extension will not result in any significant change to the integrity of any non- Statutory Wildlife Site or to the conservation status of Valued Ecological Receptors (VER) present within the ‘zone of influence’ both on- and off-site.
______
- 2 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
1.1.8 Furthermore, the envisaged restoration scheme has been predicted to result in a significant net increase in biodiversity associated with the site and the wider locale.
1.1.9 In order to ensure, within reasonable limits, that there is no potential for a breach in conservation legislation, the safeguarding strategies and restoration will be set out within a detailed Ecological Management Plan to be submitted to the Local Authority Ecologist (LAE), prior to works commencing within the extension site. This will include the definition of responsibilities for each aspect, and the provision of summary reports to the LAE upon completion of each stage (i.e. the removal of the hedge section in order to access the site from the existing consented quarry).
2. BACKGROUND
2.1.1 AEcol were commissioned by CEMEX UK Materials Ltd to assess the ecological importance of approximately 46 ha of land, c. 27.5 ha of which is proposed as an extension to the existing East Leake Quarry, Rempstone Road, East Leake, Nottinghamshire LE12 6PW.
2.1.2 AEcol is an independent ecological consultancy with extensive experience of habitat assessment, restoration and management, working with conservation agencies, academic, commercial and industrial clients in the UK and overseas (see www.aecol.co.uk).
2.1.3 The initial ecological assessment comprised:- A desk-study; Phase 1 habitat mapping to the method set out in the Handbook for Phase 1 Habitat Survey: A technique for environmental audit (JNCC 2003); An assessment of the conservation value of the habitats present against the criteria set for Priority Habitats within the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP); and An assessment of the habitats present as to their intrinsic value, and the potential for protected fauna to occur.
2.1.4 Following the initial ecological assessment, an Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA) was performed in accordance with Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom (IEEM 2006).
3. LEGISLATIVE & POLICY MECHANISMS
3.1 General
Note: AEcol have no legal specialism and are in no way legally qualified. Reference to legislation made in broad terms within relevant sections of this report is included purely to identify conservation mechanisms etc. For detailed interpretation, or where doubt exists as to the legality of actions, qualified legal advice should be sought.
3.1.1 This section summarises the legal and conservation policy mechanisms that ______
- 3 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
determine the need for specific surveys. A brief overview of conservation legislation and planning policy that is relevant to this EcIA is provided in the following text.
3.2 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010
3.2.1 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 consolidate all the various amendments made to The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 in respect of England and Wales, which transposed Council Directive 92/43/EEC into national law. The Regulations provide for:- The designation and legal protection of ‘European Sites’; The legal protection of ‘European Protected Species’ (EPS); and The adaptation of planning and other controls for the protection of European Sites.
3.3 Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& as amended)
3.3.1 The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& as amended) is the principle mechanism for the legislative protection of wildlife sites and species in Great Britain.
3.4 Hedgerows Regulations 1997
3.4.1 Some hedgerows are protected by the Hedgerows Regulations 1997. Hedgerows are graded on a two-tier system; ‘important’ and ‘unimportant’. In order to qualify as important, hedgerows must meet criteria set out within the Regulations encompassing wildlife, historic and landscape aspects. Hedgerows that qualify as important under the Hedgerows Regulations 1997 should only be breached or removed following the application for, and receipt of, a ‘Hedgerow Removal Notice’ from the Local Planning Authority. A Hedgerow Removal Notice will typically be granted for:- Making a new opening in substitution for an existing opening which gives access to land, and where the existing opening is in-filled within eight months of the new breach; Obtaining access to land where another means of access is not available or only available at disproportionate cost; and For carrying out development for which planning permission has been granted.
3.5 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
3.5.1 In the most basic terms, Paragraph 109 of the NPPF states that “The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by... minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible...”. In addition, Paragraph 117 identifies the need for planning policies to identify and map components of local ecological networks (both designated sites and stepping stones in between), and promote the preservation, restoration and enhancement of UK BAP
______
- 4 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Priority Habitats and ecological networks, whilst also promoting the protection and recovery of Priority Species. In particular, the NPPF highlights that any development proposal on land within or outside a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) or any other ‘irreplaceable’ habitat (such as ancient woodland or veteran trees), that might have a negative effect upon the site interest, should be refused unless the need for, and benefits of, the development in that location clearly outweigh the consequential loss or damage.
3.5.2 Specific legislation and policy relating to habitats and species is summarised in the following sub-sections, however, it is not the remit of an ecologist to provide planning advice, and where doubt exists the reader should defer to a qualified and experienced planner.
3.6 UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP)
3.6.1 The UK Biodiversity Action Plans were established in order to provide detailed strategies for the conservation of the most threatened habitats and species at a national level. Such habitats and species are known as Priority Habitats and Priority Species. Lists of Priority Habitats and Species are updated regularly to ensure they remain relevant to the true conservation situation.
3.6.2 In order to satisfy the requirement for Planning Authorities to promote the preservation, restoration and enhancement of UK BAP Priority Habitats and recovery of Priority Species, the Planning Authority need to know the location and extent of any UK BAP Priority Habitats occurring within a site that is proposed for development, as well as Priority Species which either occur within the site, or primarily outside the site but for which the site represents an important part of that species range (i.e. bats that may forage over the site in a specific part of the year but roost elsewhere, or migratory birds that may overwinter in the site but are absent for the greater part of the spring and summer).
4. INITIAL ASSESSMENT METHODS
4.1 General
4.1.1 The wildlife value of the existing habitats in the East Leake Quarry extension site was assessed by applying established principles, for example, as set out in Nature Conservation in Environmental Assessment (Ramsey 1994), Guidelines for Baseline Ecological Assessment (Institute of Environmental Assessment 1995), the Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom issued by the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM) in 2006 (IEEM 2006) and the British Standard BS 42020 Biodiversity – Code of practice for planning and development (BSI British Standards Publication 2013).
4.1.2 By considering conservation legislation in respect of sites and species, UK BAP Priority Habitats and Species (both within the survey site and within pre-defined radii) and the potential for a “…significant population of national or local Red List ______
- 5 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
or notable species” to occur within the site, it is considered that the initial ecological assessment accords with British Standard BS 42020 Biodiversity – Code of practice for planning and development.
4.1.3 The Ecological Impact Assessment method used to assess the effects of the development upon biodiversity are set out in Section 9 of this report.
4.2 Desk-study
Data-search
4.2.1 A data-search centring on Ordnance Survey (O.S.) grid reference SK570247 was commissioned from Nottinghamshire Biological and Geological Records Centre (NBGRC), and the results formed the basis of the desk-study. However, Local Records Centres (LRC) seldom hold a comprehensive record of all the ecological surveys performed or species recorded within a given locality. Furthermore, the records held may be incomplete and ‘un-determined’ by any third-party referee who might ‘weed-out’ erroneous data. Finally, overly large search radii (particularly when used in relation to sedentary species) often reward the end user with misleading results, themselves leading to misuse of resources in unnecessary surveys and needless discussion. In an effort to counteract these potential negative influences by providing a full list of sites, and species that might potentially be present in the locality (based on both the species distribution and known commuting range), historic biological data relating to the East Leake Quarry extension site was requested as follows:- A list of all Statutory Wildlife Sites within a 2 km radius of the survey site; A list of all non-Statutory Wildlife Sites within a 1 km radius of the survey site; A search of historic data-sets for historic records of legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of flora and fauna occurring within a 500 m radius of the site centroid (SK570247); A search of historic data-sets for records of bat-roosts occurring within a 5 km radius of the site centroid, and of in-flight records within a 1 km radius (the larger search radius requested for bat-roosts is based on a review of typical nightly foraging ranges. A copy of the review is provided at Appendix A).
Historic surveys
4.2.2 In addition to the data-search, results of previous surveys performed at the East Leake Quarry extension site have been included within this report comprising:- AEcol 2012a. Ecological Assessment of Land at Rempstone, East Leake, Nottinghamshire. AEcol, Bridgwater. AEcol 2012b. Desk-study of Biological Data relating to the Proposed Rempstone Quarry Extension, East Leake, Nottinghamshire. AEcol, Bridgwater. Andrews Ward Associates 2009. Baseline Ecological Assessment of Land under Consideration for Extension of CEMEX (UK) Ltd’s East Leake Quarry, Nottinghamshire. Andrews Ward Associates, Bridgwater.
______
- 6 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Results
4.2.3 The desk-study results are summarised within the relevant contextual, botanical and faunal sub-sections.
4.3 Survey
4.3.1 A Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) survey was undertaken, applying the method and criteria defined in Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit (JNCC 2003) on 8th September 2014. Dominant vegetation types and plant species were recorded. Where plant identification was uncertain (and where the plant was sufficiently developed for confident identification), specimens were keyed using Stace (1991), Hubbard (1954) or Poland & Clement (2009), and the distribution and status of uncommon plants were assessed against Preston et al. (2002). A list of all plant species recorded at the East Leake Quarry extension site is provided at Appendix B.
4.3.2 Habitats within the site were assessed for their conservation value against the criteria set for UK BAP Priority Habitats. In addition, an assessment of the habitats present as to their intrinsic value, and the potential for protected fauna to occur was also performed, including:- An assessment of hedgerows present within the site for their importance under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997; An assessment of ponds to the north-west of the site for their potential to support great crested newts Triturus cristatus; A search for field-signs of water voles Arvicola amphibius, badgers Meles meles and otters Lutra lutra; and An assessment of all trees within and bounding the site for their potential to support roosting bats.
4.4 Personnel
4.4.1 Personnel responsible for each aspect of the assessment are provided at Table 1.
Table 1. Surveyors and reporting.
TASK PERSONNEL Desk-study Katherine Murkin BSc MCIEEM. Phase 1 survey Katherine Murkin and Christy Tolliday BSc MSc. Phase 1 survey Henry Andrews MSc CEcol MCIEEM, Leanne Butt BSc MSc ACIEEM reporting and Christy Tolliday. EcIA Henry Andrews, Leanne Butt and Katherine Murkin.
Statement of Authority
4.4.2 This assessment was performed by Henry Andrews MSc CEcol MCIEEM, Leanne
______
- 7 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Butt BSc MSc ACIEEM, Katherine Murkin BSc MCIEEM and Christy Tolliday BSc MSc.
4.4.3 Henry Andrews is an ecologist with competence in botanical and faunal surveys. In addition to a Master’s Degree in Biological Recording and Species Identification, he is a Chartered Ecologist and a Full member of the Chartered Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (CIEEM). Henry holds licences to survey for great crested newts, sand lizards Lacerta agilis, smooth snakes Coronella austriaca, common dormice Muscardinus avellanarius and all bat species in England. He has designed successful EPS Development Licences in respect of the genus and species as set out, which included habitat creation, species translocation and post- development monitoring spanning 5, 10, 15 and 25 years plus. Henry has been contracted to appear as an expert witness at Public Enquiry, and is the author of the Bat Tree Habitat Key (Andrews et al. 2013).
4.4.4 Leanne Butt is an ecologist with a Bachelor’s Degree in Zoology (dissertation in ground beetles as indicators of woodland biodiversity), and a Master’s degree in Wildlife Management and Conservation in which her dissertation studied the effects of rhododendron Rhododendron ponticum as an invasive species upon woodland biodiversity using ground beetles and breeding birds as indicators. In addition to competence in invertebrate sampling techniques and breeding bird survey, Leanne is an Associate member of the CIEEM and holds licences to survey for great crested newts and common dormice in England.
4.4.5 Katherine Murkin is a botanist with a Bachelor’s Degree in Environmental Biology in which her dissertation comprised a comparative analysis of the effect of differing seeding regimes on roadside species diversity. Katherine is a full member of the CIEEM and holds a licence to survey for great crested newts in England.
4.4.6 Christy Tolliday is an ecologist with a Bachelor’s Degree in Biology (dissertation in the effect of climate change on temperate zooplankton) and a Master’s Degree in Conservation & Biodiversity in which her dissertation comprised a comparative analysis of the effect of differing tidal and weather aspects on the diving rate of European shags Phalacrocorax aristotelis. Christy holds a licence to survey for great crested newts in England.
4.5 Constraints
4.5.1 Constraints in relation to historical data are identified and discussed at Paragraph 4.2.1.
4.5.2 No site-specific constraints were encountered during the East Leake Quarry Phase 1 survey.
______
- 8 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
5. SITE CONTEXT
5.1 General
5.1.1 The East Leake Quarry extension site (hereafter referred to as ‘the extension site’) is approximately 46 ha in size (of which c. 27.5 ha is proposed for the extension) and located at O.S. Grid reference SK570247. The extension site is located c. 2 km south-east of East Leake, on the north-west side of the village of Rempstone. The Sheepwash Brook is located directly beyond the northern boundary of the site and the River Soar which flows in a north-south alignment is located c. 3.5 km to the south-west. The extension site is located in an area of predominantly agricultural land comprising tillage, fragmented hedgerows and isolated patches of woodland, with mineral extraction within the existing East Leake Quarry to the west, a large area of parkland to the south-west and areas of residential housing within surrounding villages. Figure 1 below shows the location and extent of the East Leake Quarry extension Phase 1 survey site.
© Crown copyright 2014. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey licence number 100050075.
Figure 1. The location and extent of the East Leake Quarry extension Phase 1 survey site, outlined in red.
5.2 Statutory Wildlife Sites
5.2.1 The NBGRC data-search returned no details of Statutory Wildlife Site designations within a 2 km radius of the extension site.
5.3 Non-Statutory Wildlife Sites
5.3.1 Non-Statutory Wildlife Sites are usually identified by the relevant county Wildlife Trust having been selected through an application criteria developed by that particular Trust for assessment of biodiversity value in the county context. They
______
- 9 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
have no statutory protection but local authorities may adopt policies to ensure that their value is taken into consideration in the determination of planning applications that could affect them.
5.3.2 The NBGRC data-search returned details of three non-Statutory Wildlife Site designations within a 1 km radius of the extension site comprising:- Sheepwash Brook Wetlands Local Wildlife Site (LWS); Stanford Park LWS; and Manor Farm, East Leake Grassland LWS.
5.3.3 The location and extent of Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS, Stanford Park LWS and Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS in relation to the East Leake Quarry Phase 1 survey site is shown at Figure 2 below.
© Crown copyright 2014. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey licence number 100050075.
Figure 2. The location of the Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS, Stanford Park LWS and Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS in relation to the East Leake Quarry Phase 1 survey site.
5.3.4 Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS is located immediately adjacent to the north-west corner of the Phase 1 survey site and is c. 4.91 ha in surface area. The LWS is cited for its botanical interest and comprises a fishing lake surrounded predominantly by marsh and damp neutral grasslands, along with areas of woodland, scrub, hedgerows, bare ground and ruderal vegetation.
5.3.5 Stanford Park LWS is located approximately 645 m to the south-west of the Phase 1 survey site. The LWS comprises c. 113.14 ha of wooded parkland and is cited for its populations of beetles, birds, badgers and bats associated with mature trees.
______
- 10 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
5.3.6 Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS is located approximately 847 m to the north-west of the Phase 1 survey site and comprises c. 1.46 ha of species-rich grassland.
6. PHASE 1 SURVEY
6.1 Desk-study
6.1.1 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned no records of legally protected or UK BAP Priority Species of plants within the 500 m search radius.
6.2 Phase 1 habitats
6.2.1 Habitats within the 2014 East Leake Quarry extension Phase 1 survey site can be broadly divided into eight Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) habitat types comprising:- A2.1 – Woodland and Scrub / Scrub / Dense/continuous (c. 0.2 ha); B4 – Grassland and marsh / Improved grassland (c. 0.26 ha); C3.1 – Tall herb and fern / Other / Tall ruderal (c. 0.9 ha); J1.1 – Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed land / Arable (c. 44.08 ha); J2.1.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Intact hedge / Species-poor (c. 510 m); J2.2.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Defunct hedge / Species-poor (c. 380 m); J2.3.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedge with trees / Species-poor (c. 2180 m); and J2.6 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Dry ditch (c. 830 m).
6.2.2 Figure 3 on the following page shows the location and extent of Phase 1 habitats within the Phase 1 survey site. Table 2 below provides a summary description of the Target Note interest and Figure 4 on page 13 shows the location of Target Notes.
Table 2. East Leake Quarry Phase 1 Target Notes.
No. LOCATION DESCRIPTION POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANCE All bats and their roosts are legally White willow Salix protected under the Wildlife & Countryside SK56986- alba with hazard- TN1 Act 1981 (& as amended) and The 25062 beam; Potential bat- Conservation of Habitats and Species Roost Feature (PRF). Regulations 2010. Great crested newts and their habitat are legally protected under the Wildlife & Pile of concrete Countryside Act 1981 (& as amended) and rubble potentially The Conservation of Habitats and Species suitable to hold Regulations 2010. Great crested newt and amphibians including SK57169- common toad are listed as UK BAP TN2 great crested newt 25025 Priority Species. Triturus cristatus and All reptiles are legally protected against common toad Bufo intentional and reckless killing or injuring bufo and common under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 reptiles. (& as amended) and are listed as UK BAP Priority Species. ______
- 11 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
No. LOCATION DESCRIPTION POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANCE SK57491- Brown hare Lepus Brown hares are listed as a UK BAP TN3 25067 europaeus skeleton. Priority Species. Rabbit warren SK57657- Oryctolagus TN4 Interest only. 24678 cuniculus and fox Vulpes vulpes scat.
Figure 3. The location and extent of Phase 1 habitats within the East Leake Quarry extension Phase 1 survey site.
6.3 Access
6.3.1 The site is accessed via the existing quarry to the west, gated entrances from Ashby Road along the south boundary or a driveway on the east boundary. A public footpath crosses the site from its south-east corner to the north-west corner.
6.4 A2.1 – Scrub
6.4.1 The north-eastern boundary of the site holds a c. 15 m wide band of bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. scrub (see Photo 1 on the following page) on a c. 1 m high earth bund. Additional species include elder Sambucus nigra, grey willow Salix cinerea,
______
- 12 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
stinging nettle Urtica dioica, annual nettle Urtica urens, black nightshade Solanum nigrum, hairy bitter-cress Cardamine hirsuta, scentless mayweed Tripleurospermum inodorum, mugwort Artemisia vulgaris and hard rush Juncus inflexus, in addition to tall ruderal species described below.
Figure 4. The location and extent of Phase 1 Target Notes within the East Leake Quarry extension Phase 1 survey site.
Photo 1. Band of bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. scrub viewed from the west.
______
- 13 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
6.5 B4 – Improved grassland
6.5.1 The south-eastern corner of the site holds a small strip of improved grassland (see Photo 2 below) set-aside with a c. 40 cm high sward. The grassland is dominated by perennial rye-grass Lolium perenne and Yorkshire-fog Holcus lanatus with additional species comprising tall fescue Schedonorus arundinacea, broadleaved dock Rumex obtusifolius, hogweed Heracleum sphondylium, wild radish Raphanus raphanistrum, cleavers Galium aparine and dandelion Taraxacum officinale, with oak Quercus sp. and sycamore Acer pseudoplatanus seedlings.
Photo 2. Improved grassland in the south-east corner.
6.5.2 A c. 6 m wide strip of improved grassland ley is present along the eastern end of the southern boundary (see Photo 3 below) and comprises perennial rye-grass with common weed species already described.
Photo 3. Improved grassland ley on the southern boundary. ______
- 14 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
6.6 C3.1 – Tall ruderal
6.6.1 Tall ruderal vegetation is present along field margins, most of which are c. 1 m wide abutting boundary hedgerows. A c. 30 m wide strip is present in the north-east of the site (see Photo 4 below). Dominant species comprise cow parsley Anthriscus sylvestris, stinging nettle and Yorkshire-fog. Additional species include bramble, broadleaved dock, redshank Persicaria maculosa, black bindweed Fallopia convolvulus, knotgrass Polygonum aviculare, hogweed, creeping thistle Cirsium arvense, common ragwort Senecio jacobea, perennial sow-thistle Sonchus arvensis, bristly ox-tongue Helminthotheca echioides, autumn hawkbit Scorzoneroides autumnalis, groundsel Senecio vulgaris, dandelion, great willowherb Epilobium hirsutum, foxglove Digitalis purpurea, snapdragon Antirrhinum majus, lesser burdock Arctium minor, red dead-nettle Lamium purpureum, wood sage Teucrium scorodonia, selfheal Prunella vulgaris, cleavers, dove’s-foot cranesbill Geranium molle, scarlet pimpernel Anagallis arvensis, white clover Trifolium repens, greater plantain Plantago major, field horsetail Equisetum arvense, bracken Pteridium aquilinum, annual meadow-grass Poa annua, common couch Elytrigia repens, timothy Phleum pratense, tall fescue, barren brome Anisantha sterilis and cock’s- foot Dactylis glomerata.
Photo 4. The c. 30 m wide strip of tall ruderal vegetation in the north-east of the site.
6.7 J1.1 – Arable
6.7.1 The majority of the East Leake Quarry site comprises arable tillage, which is divided into two fields of approximate equal size.
6.7.2 The western field (see Photo 5 on the following page) had been recently ploughed on the day of the survey. Very few other plant species were present, limited to
______
- 15 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
occasional broadleaved dock, cleavers, creeping buttercup Ranunculus repens and cut-leaved crane’s-bill Geranium dissectum.
Photo 5. The western field, which was recently ploughed on the day of survey.
6.7.3 The eastern field held stubble on the day of the survey (see Photo 6 on the following page), left over from a recently harvested crop, with a large amount of garden pea Pisum sativum. There was a higher proportion of weed species than the western field. Additional weed species included creeping thistle, spear thistle Cirsium vulgare, rape Brassica napus, common orache Atriplex patula, groundsel Senecio vulgaris, scentless mayweed Tripleurospermum inodorum, scented mayweed Matricaria chamomilla, petty spurge Euphorbia peplus, common poppy Papaver rhoeas, black bindweed Solanum nigrum, shepherd’s purse Capsella bursa-pastoris, field pansy Viola arvensis, field speedwell Veronica persica, and black grass Alopecurus myosuroides. A rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus warren was noted adjacent to the eastern boundary (Target Note: TN4). A pile of concrete rubble potentially suitable as a refuge for common amphibians and reptiles, as well as a skeleton of the UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare Lepus europaeus were noted along the northern boundary (Target Notes: TN2 and TN3).
6.7.4 The boundaries of the western and eastern fields held no physical demarcation.
6.8 J2 – Hedgerows
6.8.1 Most of the site is bounded by hedgerows, some of which hold young or mature trees (see Photo 7 on the following page), particularly along the eastern boundary, but none that would qualify as veteran and/or ancient. Management of the hedges varies, with some well maintained at c. 1-3 m height and others unmaintained. Most are intact; however some sections along the northern and eastern boundaries are defunct and include large gaps. Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna is generally the ______
- 16 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
dominant species with blackthorn Prunus spinosa, common elm Ulmus procera and elder. To the east of the site is a residential dwelling surrounded by hedgerows, dominated by ornamental shrubs. A white willow Salix alba was noted within the northern boundary with a hazard-beam Potential Roost Feature (PRF) (Target Note: TN1).
Photo 6. The eastern field, holding stubble and garden pea Pisum sativum.
Photo 7. The hedge with trees along the northern boundary of the site (Hedgerow reference: N3 within Appendix C).
6.8.2 The ground flora of the hedgerows is similar to the tall ruderal vegetation as ______
- 17 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
described previously, with some hedges holding lord’s-and-ladies Arum maculatum and lesser celandine Ranunculus ficaria.
6.8.3 With the exception of the Sheepwash Brook along the northern boundary, none of the hedgerows follow earth banks or ditches.
6.8.4 The potential for hedgerows within the site to qualify as ‘important’ under the ecological criteria of the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 and/or as the UK BAP Priority Habitat; ‘Hedgerows’ was considered. The detailed results of the hedgerow assessment are provided at Appendix C. In summary, none qualify as ‘important’ within the Hedgerow Regulations 1997, due to insufficient woody species and/or associated features but, with the exception of the defunct and ornamental hedgerows; the hedges surrounding the site qualify as the UK BAP Priority Habitat ‘Hedgerows’.
6.9 J2.6 – Dry ditch
6.9.1 The Sheepwash Brook runs along the northern boundary of the site. Although the brook did not hold any water during the time of survey (see Photo 8 below), fool’s watercress Apium nodiflorum was noted at some points along its stretch. Where sections of hedgerows are present, the ditch runs beneath the hedgerow, and through tall ruderal vegetation where the hedgerow is broken up. Bramble, great willowherb, perennial rye-grass and cock’s-foot are abundant on the ditch banks.
Photo 8. The dry ditch along the northern boundary.
______
- 18 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
6.10 UK BAP and Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitats
6.10.1 Two of the Phase 1 habitat types present within the extension site qualify as one UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat; ‘Hedgerows’ comprising:- J2.1.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Intact hedge / Species-poor; and J2.3.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedge with trees / Species-poor.
7. FAUNA
7.1 Invertebrates
Desk-study
7.1.1 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned no records of legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of invertebrate occurring within the 500 m search radius.
Species ecology
7.1.2 As many invertebrates have specific habitat requirements, invertebrate diversity is greatest in long-established habitat which contains a diverse range of native plant species, with a varied vegetative structure and connectivity to other suitable habitat within the wider landscape (Kirby 1992). Diverse mosaics of habitats which include bare ground, plant debris, dead wood and species-rich swards of varying heights are therefore of greatest interest, with the transitions between different habitats often of particular importance (Kirby 1992).
7.1.3 Tilled farmland is a very common and widespread habitat type and subject to considerable annual disturbance by cultivation and other management activities, as well as the application of agrochemicals. Where the diversity and abundance of crop weeds is restricted by herbicide application, the food resource for invertebrates are correspondingly reduced. The simple structure and plant composition of the habitat tends to limit the variety of different species and those which occur are either, to a degree, resistant to agrochemical applications or are highly mobile and recolonise from surrounding land following periodic extinction.
7.1.4 The value of hedgerows for insects lies partly in the variation of their structural components, as well as partly in the diversity of plant species they hold (Fry & Lonsdale 1991). Structural complexity encompasses not just the hedge body, but also hedgerow trees, verges and ditches. Species such as hawthorn and willows attract a wide variety of insects early in the year (op. cit), but additions to the shrub species diversity increase the value of a hedge to invertebrates in a like-for-like ratio. Hedgerow management is also of great importance with less regularly flailed hedges, of well over a metre thick and over 1.5 m tall, of greatest value (Kirby 1992).
______
- 19 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.1.5 The results of the Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) survey were assessed in order to provide a hypothesis as to the potential dependent invertebrate fauna that might occur within the site or within commuting distance, by comparing habitat information, survey results and known ecological requirements of legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species. In order to inform this assessment, a review of the geographical distribution and habitat requirements of legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of invertebrates was therefore performed.
7.1.6 The review suggests that the extension site holds potentially suitable habitat for up to 40 UK BAP Priority Species of common and widespread invertebrates, but no suitable habitat for legally protected invertebrates. These 40 UK BAP Priority Species comprise one beetle species (necklace ground beetle Carabus monilis), two butterfly species (white-letter hairstreak Satyrium w-album and wall Lasiommata megera) and 37 species of moth.
7.1.7 Arable field margins within the extension site are mostly narrow (to 1 m width), offering a poor habitat resource which is also likely to be subject to spray drift from agrochemicals. As such, the invertebrate fauna of tillage crops can be predicted to comprise an assemblage of common and widespread generalist species.
7.1.8 The hedgerows within the extension site have impoverished species diversity, dominated by hawthorn, and it is probable that all suffer from the negative effects of agricultural spray-drift. As such, it is likely that the associated invertebrate fauna will be similarly impoverished and comprise common and widespread species, tolerant of agrochemicals.
7.1.9 The Sheepwash Brook, adjacent to the northern boundary of the extension site, will hold additional invertebrate species adapted to flowing water. However, its potential for supporting a diverse range of invertebrates is reduced by the regular trapezoidal shape of the ditch, with little structural or vegetative diversity. The Brook will also take run-off from surrounding agricultural fields and its invertebrate fauna is therefore likely to comprise mobile species and species with a high tolerance to poor water quality.
7.1.10 The habitats within the extension site and its boundaries do not justify an invertebrate survey. The mosaic of habitats present within the extension site is unexceptional and subject to significant agricultural improvement; the associated invertebrate fauna is likely to be similarly unexceptional and unlikely to comprise an important assemblage of more specialist species. No invertebrate survey is therefore considered necessary.
7.2 Fish
Desk-study
7.2.1 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned no records of legally protected ______
- 20 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
and/or UK BAP Priority Species of fish occurring within the 500 m search radius.
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.2.2 No aquatic habitats are present within the extension site; fish will therefore be absent. However, the Sheepwash Brook, which passes along the northern boundary of the extension site, may hold small fish species. However, no uncommon or important fish species occur in streams of this character. No fish survey is therefore considered necessary.
7.3 Amphibians
Desk-study
7.3.1 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned three records of one UK BAP Priority Species of amphibian; common toad Bufo bufo occurring within the 500 m search radius. No records of great crested newt were returned. Table 3 summarises the records of common toad, their location, date and the distance between their recorded location and the extension site.
Table 3. Records of the UK BAP Priority Species of amphibian; common toad Bufo bufo occurring within 500 m of the East Leake Quarry extension site, their location, date and the distance between their recorded location and the extension site.
DISTANCE FROM SPECIES LOCATION DATE SITE SK573241 06/05/2014 419 m south-east Common toad SK566250 21/07/1997 104 m north-west Bufo bufo SK566249 1993 8 m north-west
7.3.2 No standing water is present within the extension site; therefore no suitable breeding habitat for amphibians exists. However, boundary hedgerows might represent suitable terrestrial habitat.
7.3.3 Great crested newts and their habitat have full legal protection under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& as amended) and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, which make it an offence to:- Intentionally kill, injure or take a great crested newt; Intentionally or recklessly to damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place used by a great crested newt for shelter or protection; or Intentionally or recklessly disturb a great crested newt when occupying a structure or place which it uses for that purpose.
7.3.4 In addition, both great crested newts and common toads are listed as UK BAP Priority Species. Further consideration was therefore given for the potential for great crested newts and common toads to occur within the extension site.
______
- 21 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
7.3.5 Natural England Standing Advice for great crested newts recommends that where suitable terrestrial habitat exists within 500 m of a potentially suitable breeding pond (even if that pond holds water only seasonally), the pond should be surveyed provided that the terrestrial habitat and potential breeding pond “…are not separated by significant barriers to dispersal such as a major trunk road or motorway” (Natural England undated).
7.3.6 A search for waterbodies was therefore performed as part of the desk-study in order to map the presence and location of ponds both within the extension site and within a 500 m radius.
Species ecology: Great crested newts
7.3.7 Great crested newts use both aquatic and terrestrial habitat; adults breed in ponds during the spring and then emerge onto land, spending the summer resting, foraging and dispersing before hibernating through the winter (Natural England undated).
7.3.8 It has been suggested that great crested newts prefer small to medium-sized breeding ponds, around 50-250 m² (Bullock et al. 1998, Langton et al. 2001). However, a study in the Netherlands (Rannap et al. 2009) of 127 breeding ponds recorded a mean size of 419.4 m², and the National Amphibian Survey (NAS) (Swan & Oldham 1993) reported the highest percentages of ponds holding great crested newts were water-bodies of 501-750 m² (within a size range of <26 - >10,000 m²). Key factors in the suitability of waterbodies to support successful breeding colonies of great crested newts are the presence of submerged and emergent aquatic vegetation (Langton et al. 2001), and the absence of fish.
7.3.9 Great crested newts deposit eggs individually on the submerged leaves of marginal plants, under water but often close to the surface (Langton et al. 2001), in a very characteristic fashion in which the leaves of water plants are folded completely in- half over each egg (Beebee & Griffiths 2000). As such, the presence of aquatic vegetation is essential for breeding success and consequent recruitment, with ponds that lack emergent or aquatic vegetation avoided (Swan & Oldham 1993).
7.3.10 Fish are well known as predators of fish larvae (Oldham 1994) and the presence of even smaller species such as sticklebacks Gasterosteus aculeatus and Pungitius pungitius may prevent successful recruitment entirely (McLee & Scaife 1992, Atkins 1998). During the NAS, frequencies of occurrence were lower in sites containing fish, but higher at those which desiccated during drought, and it was suggested that the two factors may have been related as large permanent waterbodies are more likely to hold fish. In addition, Jehle et al. (2011) cite Jarvis (2010) as suggesting that the presence of predatory three-spined stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus increased mortality of great crested newt eggs, potentially due to an immune stress response.
7.3.11 On land, favoured terrestrial habitat comprises deciduous woodlands, scrub, mature hedgerows, undisturbed grassland, derelict industrial land, derelict decommissioned extraction areas and the edges of urban areas (Inns 2009, Jehle et al. 2011). For hibernation, newts seek out a location that affords them protection from winter ______
- 22 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
conditions and exploit existing opportunities within the landscape such as log piles or disused mammal burrows, rather than excavating their own sites (Natural England undated).
Species ecology: Common toads
7.3.12 Common toads only enter water for a short period in the spring (Beebee & Griffiths 2000). The spring migration to their breeding ponds takes place on damp evenings in March, in a comparatively brief breeding season lasting from mid-March through to late April. When spawning is complete, toads have been known to disperse up to 1.6 km from the breeding site (Sinsch 1988) and typical home ranges vary between a recorded 55 and 1,600 m from the breeding pond (Beebee & Griffiths 2000). Optimum pond size is approximately 1,000 m² with abundant macrophyte and emergent vegetation. As toad tadpoles are unpalatable to fish, their presence does not inhibit use and it has even been suggested (Beebee & Griffiths 2000) that toads appear to show a preference for fish ponds for breeding sites. Favoured terrestrial habitats comprise rough grassland, scrub and open woodland, with improved grassland (including grazed pasture), arable fields, heathland and moorlands avoided (Op. cit). Hibernation sites are subterranean, and often in old rodent burrow (Inns 2009).
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.3.13 The search for waterbodies within a 500 m radius concluded that there are no waterbodies potentially suitable for breeding great crested newts and/or common toads within the extension site, but 10 waterbodies within a 500 m radius; the Sheepwash Brook, mineral processing lagoons and a further four ponds. Figure 5 on the following page shows the location and extent of the waterbodies identified.
7.3.14 Sheepwash Brook flows immediately adjacent to the northern site boundary.
7.3.15 Lagoons, present within the existing consented East Leake Quarry to the west, are used in mineral processing.
7.3.16 Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS holds two ponds (Ponds 1 and 2 in Figure 5), all within 145 m of the extension site. Pond 1 is of moderately recent construction, and was created to provide a back-up water supply for mineral processing within the consented quarry. Information supplied by NBGRC states that Pond 2 is a fishing lake; this is supported by the presence of fishing jetties around the pond perimeters. Three-spined stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus were noted within the pond in survey data provided by NBGRC and it is probable that the pond is stocked with larger fish species for fishing.
7.3.16 Two further ponds (Ponds 3 and 4) were identified (a third pond identified in the 2012 ecological assessment as being present on the Sheepwash Brook and located to the east of the site is no longer present). Pond 3 is located c. 360 m to the south of the site and south of Lings Farm. It is a field pond and is readily visible on satellite imagery. The status of Pond 4 is uncertain. Its location c. 115 m to the south of the site within a large ornamental garden in the grounds of Rempstone Hall would ______
- 23 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
suggest it is a fish-pond. However, it is not visible on satellite imagery and may no longer exist. Both these ponds are on private land far from any public footpath or bridleway and were therefore not accessed during the 2014 Phase 1 survey.
© Crown copyright 2014. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey licence number 100050075.
Figure 5. The location of the Sheepwash Brook, mineral processing lagoons and the four ponds (shown in dark-blue) within a 500 m radius of the East Leake Quarry extension site.
Habitat suitability assessment
7.3.17 The water level and flow-rate of the Sheepwash Brook can be predicted to be too variable for successful breeding by great crested newts and common toads.
7.3.18 The mineral processing lagoons have poor water quality, irregular water regimes, extremes in flow (due to pumping), no aquatic plant species (that might serve as an egg-laying substrate) and poor terrestrial habitat comprising bare ground in their immediate vicinity. Such a combination of factors is likely to be unfavourable for great crested newt colonisation. Certainly, two surveys for great crested newts in operational lagoon complexes on sites where great crested newts were known to occur (Willington Quarry, Derbyshire and Ryall Quarry, Worcestershire (both CEMEX)), proved negative for newts in the lagoons, despite the fact that males and females were recorded in terrestrial habitat dividing the individual waterbodies. It is therefore improbable that the lagoons at the existing consented East Leake Quarry will be favourable for breeding great crested newts or common toads.
7.3.19 Ponds 1 and 2 within the Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS were subject to the application of the great crested newt Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) (Oldham et al. 2000, ARG UK 2010), the results of which are set out in Table 4 below. The results of the HSI were that Ponds 1 and 2 had a ‘Poor’ likelihood of holding great crested ______
- 24 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
newts. However, the size and character of Pond 1 is of a suitable nature for breeding common toads. Certainly the presence of fish in Pond 1 will not be a negative influence on common toad recruitment, and this species also shows a greater tolerance to shading. It is therefore probable that Pond 1 will hold breeding common toads, and the species is known to have historically been present in the vicinity of this pond (see data-search results presented earlier).
Table 4. The results of the application of the great crested newt Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) as set out by Oldham et al. (2000) for Ponds 1 and 2.
POND 1 2 LOCATION 1 1 POND AREA (m²) N/A (>2000 m2) N/A (>2000 m2) POND PERMANENCE 0.9 0.9 WATER QUALITY 0.01 0.67 SHADE 1 0.6 HSI FOWL PRESENCE 0.67 0.67 FISH PRESENCE 1 0.01 PONDS WITHIN 1 km 0.4 0.4 TERRESTRIAL HABITAT 0.33 0.33 MACROPHYTE COVER 0.35 0.35 HSI TOTAL 0.40 0.36 HSI SCORE POOR POOR
7.3.20 Ponds 3 and 4 (if indeed Pond 4 still exists) are located over 250 m and 100 m distance from the extension site respectively, and both lie beyond the busy A6006 Ashby Road to the south, which can be predicted to act as a barrier to the dispersal of great crested newts. However, as both of these ponds are on private land far from any public footpath or bridleway, no HSI was therefore performed during the 2014 Phase 1 survey. However, English Nature’s Research Report 576 An assessment of the efficiency of capture techniques and the value of different habitats for the great crested newt (Cresswell & Whitworth 2004) notes that “although a maximum routine migratory range has been estimated as approximately 250 m from a breeding pond, Jehle (2000), determined a terrestrial zone of 63 m, within which 95% of summer refuges were located. In addition, following the breeding season, Jehle and Arntzen (2000), recorded 64% of newts within 20 m of the pond edge”. This suggests that the probability of newts of any species occurring at a distance of more than 100 m from a breeding site is very low, and even were great crested newts present within either Pond 3 or Pond 4 there is little to draw them from the abundance of suitable terrestrial habitat to the south, across a busy road and into poor habitat to the north.
Terrestrial habitat
7.3.21 Although great crested newts have been recorded in arable fields, these were nocturnal encounters of newts migrating rather than taking shelter, and has occurred where a high density of breeding ponds has been present within the fields or immediately adjacent habitat, but no other suitable habitat is present in the immediate vicinity. It is therefore possible that newts present in these situations
______
- 25 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
were animals commuting to, and from, more favourable foraging and hibernating habitat beyond. Great crested newts utilise hedgerows especially when they are in close proximity to breeding ponds (Cresswell and Whitworth 2004) and it is therefore considered that terrestrial amphibian habitat within the extension site will be limited to boundary hedgerows.
7.3.22 In conclusion, whilst common toads might be present in hedge bases in the north of the site, there are no grounds to predict the presence of great crested newts. It is certainly not a site that one would select if one wished to find the latter species for study.
7.4 Reptiles
Desk-study
7.4.1 Of the six legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of reptile native to the British Isles, four are known to occur in Nottinghamshire comprising slow-worm Anguis fragilis, common lizard Zootoca vivipara, grass snake Natrix natrix and adder Vipera berus.
7.4.2 All four species are legally protected against intentional and reckless killing or injuring under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& as amended) and are listed as UK BAP Priority Species.
7.4.3 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned no records of legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of reptile occurring within the 500 m search radius.
Species ecology
7.4.4 Slow-worms favour an extensive ground-cover of thick vegetation with open sunny areas for basking (Arnold & Burton 1978, Beebee & Griffiths 2000, Inns 2009). Suitable habitat may include pasture, hedge-banks, scrub-land, woodland glades, heathland and even railway embankments (Arnold & Burton 1978). As slow-worms rarely bask in the open, preferring to remain semi-concealed in dense vegetation, dappled shade or under surface refuges, favoured sites often hold an abundance of logs, large flat stones, and building refuse including tiles, carpet tiles or corrugated steel (Arnold & Burton 1978, Beebee & Griffiths 2000). Slow-worms show a predilection for white-netted slugs Deroceras reticulatum (an agricultural pest) and earth-worms Lumbricus terrestris (Luiselli 1992, English Nature 1998, Barker 2004). This slow-moving invertebrate diet means that they are themselves sedentary, moving on average less than four metres per day, with home ranges averaging approximately 200 m² (Smith 1990). Hibernation sites are normally underground, often in disused mammal burrows (Inns 2009).
7.4.5 Common lizards require undisturbed ground that is topographically diverse and free from pesticide applications (Beebee & Griffiths 2000). The species favours a moderately humid environment and is typically found in open woods, hedge-banks, heaths, bogs, grassland, and railway embankments (Arnold & Burton 1978). They ______
- 26 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
will bask in full sunshine, with logs and woodpiles favoured as basking sites (Beebee & Griffiths 2000), and males also show territorial behaviour around discarded car tyres (Andrews H. Pers. obs.). Active hunters, the adults take a variety of invertebrates including centipedes, spiders and small snails, whilst young rely upon aphids and smaller prey. Arable fields, heavily-grazed pastures and dense woodland will therefore not hold lizard populations (Beebee & Griffiths 2000).
7.4.6 Grass snakes actively hunt for their primary prey of frogs, toads, newts and fish (Appleby 1971, Arnold & Burton 1978) and typically favour damp places near water, with ponds, lakes, marshes, streams or ditches all frequented (Appleby 1971, Beebee & Griffiths 2000). The habitat in the surrounding area must also hold good ground-cover with an abundance of hiding places (Beebee & Griffiths 2000) as well as south-facing basking sites. In addition, for a population to persist, suitable egg- laying sites must be present with moisture essential to the development of the eggs; a site that is permanently damp but will not become waterlogged is essential (Appleby 1971). Manure heaps and piles of decaying vegetable matter are favoured, but loose soil, individual large logs or piles of rotting logs, and even disused mammal burrows may also be used (Appleby 1971). Hibernation sites include deep leaf litter, mammal burrows, overgrown rock piles and cracks or crevices beneath the buttress roots of large trees, with south-facing sites favoured overall (Beebee & Griffiths 2000).
7.4.7 Adders favour low-lying river meadows for summer feeding but may also be found in a variety of other undisturbed habitat including moors, heaths and dunes, bogs, open-woods and on field-edges. Adders are active hunters, moving distances of 50- 200 m per day in search of prey, principally comprising voles, mice and shrews (Arnold & Burton 1978, Beebee & Griffiths 2000) but also lizards (Appleby 1971, Arnold & Burton 1978). Adders mate soon after emergence from communal hibernacula in the late March through April period, and whilst the population will then disperse, the females return to the hibernacula from late August onward, to give birth (Beebee & Griffiths 2000). As such, the presence of suitable hibernacula, typically a disused mammal burrow within an earth bank or tumuli located in an area of dry thickly vegetated high ground (Beebee & Griffiths 2000), is essential to the maintenance of the population.
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.4.8 Potentially suitable slow-worm habitat is limited to a very small patch of bramble scrub in the north-east corner of the extension site and boundary hedgerows. However, the area of scrub is predicted to be too small and isolated in extent to support a permanent slow-worm population. Furthermore, the narrow field margins and likely impact of agricultural spray-drift on invertebrate prey within boundary hedgerows may preclude the presence of slow-worm in these areas.
7.4.9 The extension site lacks sufficient undisturbed ground or topographically diverse landforms and is subject to agrochemical application, thus depleting resources of available invertebrate prey. Common lizards are therefore not predicted to be present.
______
- 27 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
7.4.10 No waterbodies suitable for breeding amphibians (the favoured prey of grass snake) are present within the extension site, although common frog Rana temporaria and common toad may occasionally occur along the Sheepwash Brook. The extension site itself is largely unsuitable for grass snake due to the lack of vegetation cover and high disturbance, although the Sheepwash Brook, running along the north boundary, may be occasionally visited by transient individuals.
7.4.11 The extension site lacks suitably undisturbed habitat to support adder, with all field margins narrow and subject to agricultural spray-drift. The species is therefore not predicted to occur.
7.4.12 Habitats present within the extension site do represent superficially suitable terrestrial habitat for slow-worm, common lizard, grass snake and adder, and a concrete rubble pile was recorded along the northern boundary hedgerow which may be potentially suitable as a daytime refuge or hibernation site (see Table 2, Target Note: TN2). However, habitats within the extension site, although appear superficially suitable lack sufficiently undisturbed habitat and suitable prey resource to support a permanent population of any reptile species. No reptile survey is therefore considered necessary. However, transient grass snakes may pass along the Sheepwash Brook where it borders the site to the north and both grass snakes and slow-worms may occur along boundary hedgerows.
7.5 Birds
Desk-study
7.5.1 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned 17 records of 16 Schedule 1 and/or UK BAP Priority Species of birds occurring within the 500 m search radius. Table 5 summarises the records of the 16 bird species cited, their location, date and the distance between their recorded location and the site.
Table 5. Records of Schedule 1 and/or UK BAP Priority Species of birds occurring within 500 m of the East Leake Quarry extension site, their location, date and the distance between their recorded location and the East Leake Quarry extension site.
DISTANCE FROM SPECIES LOCATION DATE SITE Hobby 13/08/2011 Falco subbuteo Peregrine 18/12/2010 Falco peregrinus Little ringed-plover 02/07/11 Charadrius dubius SK562248 430 m west Lapwing 02/07/2011 Vanellus vanellus Green sandpiper 16/11/2011 Tringa ochropus Barn owl 01/08/2009 Tyto alba ______
- 28 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
DISTANCE FROM SPECIES LOCATION DATE SITE Skylark 02/07/2011 Alauda arvensis Starling SK562248 29/07/2009 430 m west Sturnus vulgaris Fieldfare 23/01/2011 Turdus pilaris Song thrush SK562248 26/06/2011 430 m west Turdus philomelos SK578243 25/03/2008 371 m south-east Redwing 23/01/2011 Turdus iliacus Yellow wagtail 16/04/2010 Motacilla flava Brambling Fringilla 31/10/2010 montifringilla SK562248 430 m west Linnet 23/07/2011 Carduelis cannabina Bullfinch 28/11/2010 Pyrrhula pyrrhula Reed bunting 23/04/2011 Emberiza schoeniclus
7.5.2 Details of LWS surveys provided by NBGRC include records of hawfinch Coccothraustes coccothraustes and yellow wagtail Motacilla flava from Stanford Park LWS; both UK BAP Priority Species.
Legislation
7.5.3 All wild birds and their occupied nests are legally protected under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& as amended) under which it is an offence to:- Intentionally kill, injure or take any wild bird; Intentionally damage, destroy or take the nest of any wild bird while it is in use or being built; or Intentionally destroy an egg of any wild bird.
7.5.4 Bird species listed on Schedule 1 of the Act receive additional legal protection which makes it an offence to intentionally or recklessly disturb the adults or their dependent young while they are at, or near to, an active nest site.
7.5.5 The bird breeding season is dependent on weather conditions and therefore varies between years and between species, but Natural England (undated) advise it is generally between early March and late August. However, a birds’ nest occupied outside of this period is still subject to legal protection.
Species ecology
7.5.6 The bird species present on an individual farm reflect a complex, interacting set of factors. They include the crops grown, whether and what types of livestock are kept, the management regimes adopted for tilled land or grass, the presence of hedges and ______
- 29 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
how they are managed, and the influence of other factors such as field drainage, availability of ponds or woodland and so on. Because modern farming methods are to a great extent standardised, farmland bird communities usually comprise a small number of very abundant and widespread species, sometimes plus one or more of about 20 less abundant but still widespread species. Other rarer species occur only occasionally in odd patches of suitable habitat (O’Connor & Shrubb 1986).
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.5.7 Consideration was given to the potential for habitats within the site to support breeding and/or wintering birds and the overall bird assemblage which may be present within the extension site. The results of the desk-study and Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) survey were therefore combined and assessed in order to provide a hypothesis as to the potential dependent avifauna that might occur within the site or within commuting distance, by comparing historic evidence, habitat information, survey results and known ecological requirements of the target species.
7.5.8 In order to inform this assessment, a review of the geographical distribution and habitat requirements of Schedule 1 and/or UK BAP Priority Species of birds was therefore performed. The following assessment of ornithological interest is based on prediction, taking account of habitat types and their management within the site. It draws on four main sources of information – The Birds of the Western Palearctic: concise edition (Snow & Perrins 1998), Bird Habitats in Britain (Fuller 1982), Farming & Birds (O’Connor & Shrubb 1986) and Hedges (Pollard, Hooper & Moore 1974).
7.5.9 Hawfinch favour high forest, mature woodland and parkland and will therefore not occur within the extension site, but yellow wagtail use arable farmland and the species could therefore occur.
7.5.10 The review suggests that the extension site holds potentially suitable breeding and/or wintering habitat for up to a maximum of 34 Schedule 1 and/or UK BAP Priority Species of birds. Of these total 34 species, the site holds potentially suitable:- Breeding and wintering habitat for 16 species comprising two Schedule 1 species and 13 UK BAP Priority Species; Breeding habitat for six species comprising one Schedule 1 species and five UK BAP Priority Species; and Wintering habitat for 12 species comprising eight Schedule 1 species and two UK BAP Priority Species.
7.5.11 The western half of the extension site carried a winter cereal crop during the 2012 Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) survey but had been recently ploughed in 2014. Sown in autumn, winter cereal crops are normally too tall in spring to be used by the ground- nesting species; lapwings Vanellus vanellus (a UK BAP Priority Species) though the UK BAP Priority Species skylarks Alauda arvensis use them as they give nesting cover in spring, and birds can do much of their feeding along the tramlines. However, crop density, food resources limited by pesticide use and other negative factors preclude successful breeding by the UK BAP Priority Species; grey partridge Perdix perdix. Normally, sowing follows harvest without a period of winter ______
- 30 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
stubbles, so that the period in which spilled grain and weed seeds are available to species including finches, stock doves and wildfowl is quite short. Ground-nesting birds could occupy arable tillage throughout the extension site.
7.5.12 Many of the hedges bounding the site are not regularly trimmed and provide good nesting cover and feeding habitat for a range of common and widespread species. Hedges within the site can be predicted to hold breeding wren Troglodytes troglodytes, robin Erithacus rubecula, blackbird Turdus merula, long-tailed tit Aegithalos caudatus, greenfinch Carduelis chloris and whitethroat Sylvia communis, as well as three UK BAP Priority Species; song thrush, bullfinch Pyrrhula pyrrhula and dunnock Prunella modularis. Whilst many trees are present along the hedgerows, few are mature and a search for cavities that could be used by nesting birds (or roosting bats) proved negative. However, canopy-nesters such as corvids could be present. Hedgerows in the east of the site abut a rape crop which, if it is present annually, could provide a seed source for three UK BAP Priority Species; linnet Carduelis cannabina, yellowhammer Emberiza citrinella and reed bunting Emberiza schoeniclus.
7.5.13 Species considered to be potentially present within the extension site includes a number of Schedule 1 and/or UK BAP Priority Species of breeding and/or wintering birds. However, these species are not rare and there is no direct legal requirement to safeguard or mitigate for the loss of breeding or indeed wintering bird habitats. Accordingly, no breeding or wintering bird survey is therefore recommended.
7.6 Common dormice
7.6.1 Common dormice are listed as UK BAP Priority Species. In addition, common dormice and their habitat receive full legal protection under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& as amended) and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, which implements the provisions of EC Directive 92/43 (“the Habitats Directive”), which make it an offence to:- Intentionally kill, injure or take a common dormouse; Intentionally or recklessly damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place used by a common dormouse for shelter or protection; or Intentionally or recklessly disturb a common dormouse when occupying a structure or place which it uses for that purpose.
Desk-study
7.6.2 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned no records of common dormice occurring within the 500 m search radius.
Species ecology
7.6.3 Dormice are an arboreal woodland species (Bright & Morris 1990, 1991 & 1992), yet whilst most commonly found in broadleaved woodlands and species-rich hedgerows, occasional records of dormice have been made in heathland, culm grassland, coastal scrub and coniferous plantations (Chanin & Woods 2003). In ______
- 31 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
addition, studies in the south-west of England have demonstrated that scrub often represents dormouse habitat (Eden & Eden 1999, Chanin & Woods 2003), and the species has been recorded in mono-species goat willow Salix caprea scrub in Surrey in spring (White C & Murkin K 2013 Pers. comm.). Hedgerows in which dormice are present typically comprise a wide diversity of shrub species (with abundant bramble) (Bright & MacPherson 2002, Chanin & Woods 2003) and significantly high productivity in terms of overall food resource. Radio-tracking also demonstrated that dormice in hedgerows feed principally on bramble, dog-rose Rosa canina and hazel Corylus avellana, but avoid hawthorn (Bright & MacPherson 2002). The seeds of hornbeam Carpinus betulus and blackthorn are also favoured, particularly in areas where hazel is absent (Eden & Eden 1999). There is a common misconception that dormice are dependent upon honeysuckle Lonicera periclymenum and hazel, however, whilst the presence of both honeysuckle for the provision of nest material and hazel for a ready source of food prior to hibernation are of benefit to dormice, they are not essential (Hurrell & McIntosh 1984) and dormouse presence (from nest evidence) has been found in a low-cut hedge over 1 km from any area with fruiting hazel (Eden & Eden 1999).
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.6.4 Common dormice are an arboreal species and will therefore not occupy the arable field or its margins. Although dormice can occupy hedgerows, this occurs where hedgerows offer connectivity to larger areas of broadleaved woodland. As the hedgerows bounding the extension site are in themselves too small to sustain a permanent population of dormice, and many are fragmented with large gaps, it is concluded that dormice will not occur within the extension site.
7.7 Water voles
7.7.1 Water voles are listed as UK BAP Priority Species and are legally protected under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& as amended) which makes it an offence to:- Intentionally kill, injure or take a water vole; Intentionally or recklessly damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place used by a water vole for shelter or protection; or Intentionally or recklessly disturb water vole when occupying a structure or place which they use for that purpose.
Desk-study
7.7.2 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned no records of water voles occurring within the 500 m search radius.
Species ecology
7.7.3 Water voles are typically found in linear riparian habitat, alongside rivers, ponds and canals, where there is dense waterside vegetation to provide food and shelter. Water voles favour slow-flowing water courses (Strachan 1998, Moorhouse et al. 2009), with high banks for burrowing and refuge areas above winter flood levels, and a ______
- 32 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
year-round availability of feeding material (Stoddart 1970, Lawton & Woodroffe 1991, Barreto et al. 1998, Strachan 1998, Moorhouse & Macdonald 2005, Strachan & Moorhouse 2006). Shore type is predominately earth or clay with a stepped or step bank, where they can burrow and create a dry nest above the water table (Strachan 1998). Bank-side and emergent vegetation is important, with optimal habitat containing a continuous and tall amount of cover comprising tussocks of grass, rush, sedge or reed (Strachan 1998, Moorhouse et al. 2009). Excessive shading by shrubs and trees is less favoured (Strachan 1998).
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.7.4 No standing or running water is present within the extension site. However, the Sheepwash Brook flows adjacent to the northern boundary of the site, and although some sections of the Sheepwash Brook are open and therefore hold some grasses, these sections are unlikely to be sufficient in extent to support a permanent water vole population. Most of the Brook is directly beneath large hedgerows and does not support a sufficient foraging resource. A search for water vole field-signs (as defined by Strachan 1998) within the extension site and a 30 m radius was performed in 2012 and 2014. No signs of water vole presence were encountered along the Sheepwash Brook and it is therefore concluded that the species is not present.
7.8 Badgers
7.8.1 Badgers and their occupied setts are legally protected under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. It is an offence to kill a badger, to disturb a badger when in its sett or to damage or destroy an occupied sett. The Act defines an occupied sett as “any structure or place which displays signs indicating current use by a badger.” Natural England (2009) have provided guidance on the definition of ‘current use,’ stating that “for a sett to fall within the definition of the Act, a badger need not be in current occupation, and may not have been for some time. As long as there are signs present indicating “current use” the sett is defined as such in the Act and is therefore protected. The maximum lapse of time between last occupation by badgers and the inspection of a sett for it to be considered in “current use” is how long it takes the signs to disappear, or more precisely, to appear so old as to not indicate “current use” … A sett is therefore protected as long as such signs remain present. In practice, this could potentially be for a period of several weeks after the last actual occupation of the sett by a badger or badgers.”
Desk-study
7.8.2 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned two records of badger occurring within the 500 m search radius. Table 6 on the following page summarises the records of badger, their location, date and the distance between their recorded location and the East Leake Quarry extension site.
______
- 33 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Table 6. Records of the legally protected mammal species; badger Meles meles occurring within 500 m of the East Leake Quarry extension site, their location, date and the distance between their recorded location and the extension site.
DISTANCE FROM SPECIES LOCATION DATE SITE Not provided due to data Badger confidentiality Meles meles 14/02/1997
Species ecology
7.8.3 In the UK, 50% of setts are located within deciduous woodland (Delahay et al. 2008) with coniferous woodland less favoured. This figure rises to 75% if woodland, hedgerow and scrub are combined (op cit). The Mammal Society’s 1963 survey found 92% of setts were dug into slopes and hedgerow setts are only common where the hedges typically occur on earth banks. Vegetation cover near a sett is also important for entry and exit, and for young to play under shelter from potential predators (Neal & Cheeseman 1996). The loss of this cover may, particularly in cases of large scale landscape change such as tree felling, result in the abandonment of the main sett, with the clan relocating to an annex or subsidiary, making regular visits to the main sett but not returning until the vegetation has again built up to provide sufficient cover (ibid). The cover may itself also be an indicator of badger presence; badgers are very partial to elder berries and will eat them during nightly activity, depositing the seeds within spoil in a latrine close to the sett upon their return, and thereby providing a pre-manured substrate from which the seeds readily germinate and a thicket of elder springs up around the sett. This provides the cover the badgers favour and a ready food source. As such, the presence of an elder thicket in an area where the species is otherwise absent is often a conspicuous giveaway to the location of a badger sett.
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.8.4 Badgers favour sloping ground and vegetation cover in which to create setts. The extension site is entirely flat, with the exception of the Sheepwash Brook which runs along a ditch on the northern boundary (whose water level will fluctuate). None of the boundary hedgerows are on banks and all are entirely flat. The arable fields are entirely flat and subject to regular disturbance as part of crop cultivation and are thus unsuitable for badger setts. Nevertheless, given the abundance of badgers in the local area, a search for badger field-signs (as defined by Bennett et al. 2005) within the extension site and a 30 m radius was performed in 2012 and 2014. The search proved negative; it is therefore concluded that badgers are not present.
7.9 Otters
7.9.1 Otters are listed as UK BAP Priority Species. In addition, otters and their holts receive full legal protection under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& as ______
- 34 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
amended) and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, which implements the provisions of EC Directive 92/43 (“the Habitats Directive”), which make it an offence to:- Intentionally kill, injure or take an otter; Intentionally or recklessly damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place used by an otter for shelter or protection; or Intentionally or recklessly disturb an otter when occupying a structure or place which it uses for that purpose.
Desk-study
7.9.2 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned no records of otters occurring within the 500 m search radius.
Species ecology
7.9.3 The main constituent of the otter’s diet is fish, although amphibians (mainly frogs) and crayfish may also make up a substantial proportion of the diet and mammals, birds and reptiles are also taken in some cases (Chanin 2003). Typically otters favour lowland streams, over 2 m wide (Chanin 1993) favouring those with dense aquatic vegetation in the channel margins (Bailey & Rochford 2006). However, otters are also found in a wide variety of other aquatic habitats including slow- flowing coarse fish rivers, faster salmon and trout waters, lakes, gravel-pits, tarns, fresh- and salt-marshes, ditches, and in some areas along the seashore (Wayre 1979, Jefferies & Woodroffe 2008). Otters may also occasionally frequent very small streams (in winter months when lakes freeze over, and hunting becomes restricted to flowing water (Chanin 1993)) and even dry watercourses (Jefferies et al. 1986, Chanin 2001) but more often the latter are merely used as commuting routes between larger water-bodies, and these regularly used routes may develop well-worn trails which can be easily recognised (Chanin 1993).
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.9.4 No standing or running water is present within the extension site. However, the Sheepwash Brook flows adjacent to the northern boundary of the site, but is unlikely to support a sufficient prey resource to regularly support foraging otter. However, the ponds to the north-west could be regularly used and the Sheepwash Brook could therefore be used as a commuting route. A search for otter field-signs (as defined by Bennett et al. 2005) within the extension site and a 30 m radius was performed in 2012 and 2014. No signs of otter presence were encountered along the Sheepwash Brook, but the occasional presence of otters along the Sheepwash Brook cannot be discounted. However, it can be concluded that no holts are present.
7.10 Other mammals (excluding bats)
Desk-study
7.10.1 Of the remaining UK BAP Priority Species of mammal (excluding bats) native to ______
- 35 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
the British Isles, four are known to occur in Nottinghamshire comprising:- Harvest mouse Micromys minutus; Brown hare; Hedgehog Erinaceus europaeus; and Polecat Mustela putorius.
7.10.2 The data-search performed by NBGRC returned eight records of one UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare occurring within the 500 m search radius. Table 7 below summarises the records of brown hare, their location, date and the distance between their recorded location and the extension site.
Table 7. Records of the UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare Lepus europaeus occurring within 500 m of the East Leake Quarry extension site, their location, date and the distance between their recorded location and the extension site.
DISTANCE FROM SPECIES LOCATION DATE SITE SK562248 05/06/2004 426 m west 14/06/2004 SK564248 220 m west 12/06/2004 Brown hare 02/04/2005 SK570246 Lepus europaeus 22/06/2004 05/02/2005 Within site SK570247 09/01/2005 SK570250 03/07/2005
Harvest mouse
7.10.3 Harvest mice have a distribution bias to the south of England where the species is typically found in tall, dense grassy habitats including tall grass and rushes (particularly in large ditches), reedbeds, grassy hedgerows and bramble patches (Harris & Yalden 2008). In areas of modern agriculture, cereal crops may be used with field headlands and rough grass banks act as refuges during the winter (Op. cit.). Young plantation woodlands may also be colonised (Harris & Yalden 2008).
7.10.4 The extension site holds superficially suitable habitat for harvest mice, but the amount of available habitat is limited to the small patch of bramble scrub, boundary hedgerows and the arable field for a short period only. Furthermore, the lack of records of this species within a 500 m radius suggests that no population exists within the vicinity to colonise the site, despite seemingly similar habitats abundant throughout the landscape.
Brown hare
7.10.5 Brown hares are most common in cereal-dominant arable fields, showing a marked preference for cultivated areas with crops, over non-cultivated areas, such as pasture, set-aside or woodland (Harris & Yalden 2008). There is a requirement for permanent cover, with survival of young generally higher in areas of mixed agriculture than ______
- 36 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
those with cereal monocrops (Harris & Yalden 2008). Smaller fields providing year- round food and shelter are therefore preferred over a ‘prairie’ landscape (Harris & Yalden 2008). In areas of mixed agriculture, cattle-grazed pasture and fallow land, as well as strips of uncultivated land in arable fields are used (Harris & Yalden 2008). Brown hares are also known to use woods, shelter-belts and hedgerows, especially during the winter months (Harris & Yalden 2008).
7.10.6 An individual brown hare was encountered within the western field, near the northern boundary, during the Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) survey performed by AEcol in 2012 (AEcol 2012) and a brown hare skeleton was noted during the 2014 survey. The extension site holds sufficient suitable habitat for the species and records both within the site and a 500 m radius exist; brown hares can therefore be predicted to be present.
Hedgehog
7.10.7 Hedgehogs occur in lowland habitats where grassland is present in adjacent to woodland, scrub or hedgerows, however, one study recorded them in only three of a total 82 pasture fields (Harris & Yalden 2008). They are generally scarce in coniferous woodland, marshy areas and moorland, but may be abundant in suburban areas particularly in proximity to amenity grassland (Op. cit.).
7.10.8 Suitable habitat exists within the extension site for hedgehogs, which could occupy boundary hedgerows. However, no records of the species exist within a 500 m radius although suitable habitats may be present within residential housing in Rempstone to the south-east.
Polecat
7.10.9 Polecats have a distribution bias toward Wales and the Midlands. The species is associated with wetland and riparian vegetation, but also occurs on woodland edge habitat, woodland copse, on field boundaries and near disused farm buildings (during winter), generally avoiding open fields and suburban areas (Harris & Yalden 2008, Burton 1968). Dens are made of dry grass, and are often located in any suitable holes including fox Vulpes vulpes earths, rabbit burrows or natural rock crevices (Burton 1968).
7.10.10 Superficially suitable habitat is present within the extension site for polecat, but is limited to the small patch of bramble scrub and field boundaries. However, polecats generally avoid open fields, and as the majority of the site comprises large open arable fields, the species can be predicted to be absent from the extension site.
7.10.11 In conclusion, brown hares are predicted to be present within the extension site and the presence of harvest mice and hedgehogs is likely given the amount of suitable habitat in the locality. However, the site is more likely to be used by a common and widespread mammal assemblage comprising red fox, grey squirrel Sciurus vulgaris, common rat Rattus norvegicus, wood mouse Apodemus sylvaticus, field vole Microtus agrestis and bank vole Myodes glareolus. Furthermore, a rabbit
______
- 37 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
warren and fox scat were noted during the Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) survey in 2014 (see Table 2, Target Note: TN4).
7.11 Bats
Desk-study
7.11.1 Of the 17 bat species currently recognised as native to the British Isles, 12 have been recorded in Nottinghamshire, comprising:- Barbastelle Barbastella barbastellus; Serotine Eptesicus serotinus; Brandt’s bat Myotis brandtii; Daubenton’s bat Myotis daubentonii; Whiskered bat Myotis mystacinus; Natterer’s bat Myotis nattereri; Leisler’s bat Nyctalus leisleri; Noctule Nyctalus noctula; Nathusius’ pipistrelle Pipistrellus nathusii; Common pipistrelle Pipistrellus pipistrellus; Soprano pipistrelle Pipistrellus pygmaeus; and Brown long-eared bat Plecotus auritus.
7.11.2 All bat species and their roosts receive full legal protection under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& as amended) and The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, which implements the provisions of EC Directive 92/43 (“the Habitats Directive”), under which it is an offence to:- Intentionally kill, injure or take a bat; Intentionally or recklessly to damage or destroy, or obstruct access to, any structure or place used by a bat for shelter or protection; or Intentionally or recklessly disturb a bat when occupying a structure or place which it uses for that purpose.
7.11.3 In addition, four of the above 12 species are listed as UK BAP Priority Species comprising barbastelle, noctule, soprano pipistrelle and brown long-eared bat.
7.11.4 The data returned from the search performed by NBGRC was divided into ‘roost’ records which indicate a colony of a specific species is at least seasonally present every year within the search area, and ‘in-flight’ records which simply indicate a species has been recorded in the area but (due to the migratory nature of several species) can offer no further insight into the resident status of the species. A summary of roost records returned is provided at Table 8 on the following page. A summary of in-flight records is provided at Table 9 on the following page.
______
- 38 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Table 8. Summary of bat-roost records occurring within a 5 km radius of the East Leake Quarry extension site, provided by NBGRC.
DISTANCE FROM SPECIES LOCATION DATE SITE Daubenton’s bat SK5623 1996 1.04 km south Myotis daubentonii SK559240 18/08/1987 0.88 km south-west SK5624 11/07/1997 0.7 km south-west SK5524 11/07/1997 1.21 km west Noctule SK5523 11/07/1997 1.51 km south-west Nyctalus noctula SK558244 06/1993 0.86 km west SK558236 06/1993 1.22 km south-west Common pipistrelle SK554261 22/06/2011 1.71 km north-west Pipistrellus SK538279 28/06/2009 4.07 km north-west pipistrellus SK538279 12/05/2009 4.12 km north-west SK538279 28/06/2009 4.07 km north-west SK544221 22/10/2008 3.27 km south-west 19/09/2001 06/06/2001 SK5624 0.87 km south-west 07/2000 1995 SK561241 06/09/2001 0.68 m south-west SK547284 21/10/2000 4 km north-west Brown long-eared SK5627 02/08/2000 2.2 km north-west bat SK560240 01/07/2000 0.81 km south-west Plecotus auritus SK592265 27/11/1999 2.2 km north-east SK552262 23/10/1999 1.89 km north-west SK544240 04/05/1995 2.32 km south-west SK605273 25/03/1991 3.71 km north-east SK558262 25/08/1987 1.53 km north-west SK558263 25/08/1987 1.63 km north-west SK546286 30/08/1986 4.2 km north-west SK605260 Not given 3.1 km north-east
Table 9. Summary of in-flight bat records occurring within a 1 km radius of the East Leake Quarry extension site, provided by NBGRC.
DISTANCE FROM SPECIES LOCATION DATE SITE Whiskered bat/Brandt’s bat Myotis mystacinus/Myotis SK562239 2004 749 m south-east brandtii Brown long-eared bat SK561240 19/06/2008 724 m south-west Plecotus auritus
East Leake Quarry extension site
7.11.5 All trees within and bounding the site were inspected for any features which could potentially support roosting bats in both 2012 and 2014. No such features were found in 2012; several crack willows Salix fragilis along the northern boundary held basal rot where stems had snapped, but none had sufficiently sheltered cavities to provide bat roost potential (AEcol 2012). However, the 2014 survey noted an ______
- 39 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
individual white willow tree with a hazard-beam on the northern boundary of the extension site (see Table 2, Target Note: TN1).
7.11.6 Although no built structures lie within the extension site, four structures lie within c. 50 m of the eastern boundary. Three of these comprise a residential property and associated outbuildings, but were not inspected as landowner permission had not been arranged. However, the buildings appear to be relatively modern with sound brickwork and tiles. The fourth structure is an open-sided derelict barn constructed using concrete, which was visible from within the extension site. The roof has a central apex, which is constructed using tiles over a timber frame with many tiles noted to be missing. The roof is lined internally with roofing felt, but no roof-void is present. The single internal room is entirely open on the north-east side. Whilst individual or low numbers of bats could roost beneath the roof tiles, the barn is not suitable to support a large colony or maternity roost. Any bats roosting within these structures would however be likely to commute along boundary hedgerows within the extension site and the locality.
7.11.7 The value of the extension site for foraging bats is limited to boundary hedgerows and the Sheepwash Brook. The arable fields may occasionally hold foraging noctule, but are very exposed and unlikely to hold a sufficient invertebrate prey resource to support high numbers of bats. Hedgerows are likely to support foraging common and soprano pipistrelle, whilst Daubenton’s bats could commute along the hedgerows en-route to favoured foraging habitat over ponds to the north-west. Brown long-eared bats are unlikely to regularly use the boundary hedgerows as they lack connectivity to woodland; the bats roosting at Stanford Hall to the south are likely to forage in broadleaved woodland within their typical 500 m commuting range (Entwistle et al. 1996).
8. PHASE 1 SURVEY CONCLUSIONS
8.1.1 The conclusions of the East Leake Quarry extension Phase 1 survey are as follows:- 1. The site has no Statutory Wildlife Sites within a 2 km radius; 2. The site has three non-Statutory Wildlife Sites within a 1 km radius comprising Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS, Stanford Park LWS and Manor Farm, East Leake Grassland LWS; 3. The site holds eight Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) habitat types which encompass one UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Hedgerows’, although hedgerows within the site do not qualify as ‘important’ within the Hedgerow Regulations 1997; 4. The site holds an impoverished flora and no legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of plants were recorded; 5. The site holds suitable habitat for a suite of common and widespread invertebrates, potentially including up to 40 UK BAP Priority Species; 6. The site holds no suitable habitat for legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of fish; 7. The site holds no suitable breeding habitat for amphibians, although the UK BAP Priority Species; common toad may potentially occur in their terrestrial
______
- 40 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
phase on boundary hedgerows. There are no grounds to predict the presence of the legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species; great crested newts; 8. The site holds potentially suitable habitat for two legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species of reptiles comprising transient grass snake along the Sheepwash Brook and boundary hedgerows, as well as slow-worm also on boundary hedgerows; 9. The site holds suitable habitat for a suite of common and widespread breeding and/or wintering bird species, potentially including up to 34 Schedule 1 and/or UK BAP Priority Species; 10. The site holds suitable habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare (recorded during the Phase 1 survey) and may also support a further two UK BAP Priority Species; harvest mice and hedgehogs, as well as the legally protected mammal; badger; 11. The site holds no potentially suitable habitat for the legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species; common dormice, water voles or otters, although the occasional presence of otters along the Sheepwash Brook is possible; and 12. The site holds potentially suitable habitat and features which may be used by a suite of common and widespread commuting and/or foraging bats, potentially including up to two legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species comprising noctule and soprano pipistrelle.
8.1.2 There has been no material change in the habitats present within the East Leake Quarry extension site in 2014, or in their potential to support protected species since the survey was performed in 2012. No further surveys are proposed in respect of plants, invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds or mammals (including bats).
9. ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT METHOD
9.1 Introduction
Approach to assessment
9.1.1 Where practical, the approach to the assessment of effects adopted within this EcIA is that set out in:- BSI British Standards Publication 2013. BS 42020 Biodiversity – Code of practice for planning and development. The British Standards Institution. IEEM 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
Assessment stages
9.1.2 The Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom (IEEM 2006) identify nine stages in an Ecological Impact Assessment (EcIA). These comprise:- 1. Scoping; 2. Identification of the likely ‘zone of influence’; 3. Identification and evaluation of existing Valued Ecological Resources (VER) likely to be affected; ______
- 41 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
4. Identification of the biophysical changes likely to affect existing VER; 5. Assessment of the significance of changes to the integrity of a Statutorily protected or non-Statutory Wildlife Site or the conservation status of VER within the zone of influence; 6. Identification and incorporation of mitigation measures where possible to avoid or reduce negative impacts, compensation measures to off-set effects that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level, and ecological enhancement measures, in order to attempt to produce a net gain for biodiversity in the longer term; 7. Assessment of the ecological impacts of the project on existing VER in light of the mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures offered (i.e. ‘summing- up’ in a reasoned conclusion); 8. Advising on the consequences for decision making in a ‘Summary of Impacts’ table; and 9. Where appropriate designing a monitoring scheme in order to ensure the success of any recommended mitigation, compensation and/or enhancement actions.
9.2 Stage 1: Scoping
9.2.1 The scoping aspect comprised:- 1. The desk-study and Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) survey presented earlier within Sections 5, 6 and 7 of this report; 2. Consultation with the County Ecologist and screening by Statutory and non- Statutory consultees; 3. A description of the development, presented in Development Overview at sub- sections 10.3 and 10.4 of this report; and 4. Review of studies performed in respect of:- a. Hydrology and Hydrogeology (see sub-section 10.5) b. Air Quality (see sub-section 10.6); c. Noise (see sub-section 10.7); and d. Lighting (see sub-section 10.8)
9.2.2 This information was used to ensure compliance and to ‘set the scene’ in the opening stage of the East Leake Ecological Assessment of Effects (EcIA).
9.3 Stage 2: Identification of the likely ‘zone of influence’
9.3.1 The ‘zone of influence’ is the range over which actions, such as development, may affect the environment. The definition of a reliable zone of influence is required in order that the assessment of effects take into account the full geographical scale of possible effects, and their significance.
9.3.2 Logically the zone of influence will be defined on two levels; both the scope/range of physical effects caused on the environment by a development, and the wider effects upon transient species that might pass through, or visit the areas affected.
9.3.3 One might divide each catalyst into ‘outgoing’ (such as air quality (i.e. dust), noise and hydrological effects that originate within a development footprint, but might ______
- 42 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
travel beyond the site boundaries and thereby have an effect outside the site) and ‘incoming’ (such as birds and bats which might nest and roost outside a development footprint, but enter the site to forage or rest). Each aspect will have a different zone of influence due to the differing ranges over which they travel, and the scale of impact they might potentially have, and the sensitivity of the habitats and species concerned.
9.3.4 Therefore, the results of ecological, hydrological, air quality, noise and lighting studies are necessary to inform the determination of the likely zone of influence at development footprint and wider scales.
9.4 Stage 3: Identification and evaluation of existing VER likely to be affected
9.4.1 In accordance with the CIEEM guidance (IEEM 2006), the identification of ecological resources and features likely to be affected has been presented within this EcIA as the results of Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) habitat mapping and botanical and faunal survey predictive assessments and is summarised in the conclusions at Section 8 of this report.
9.4.2 The CIEEM suggest that the value of an ecological resource or feature should be determined within a geographical context at International, UK, National, Regional, County, District, Local or Zone of Influence only scale. AEcol have found this unworkable as insufficient data exists against which to define assessment criteria. The situation is such that exactly which vice-counties1 combine to form a region has yet to be defined. As a result, the scale against which the ecological resources and features were evaluated was decided by planning policy and British Standard BS42020 which value biodiversity on three levels:- Legally protected sites (i.e. Statutory Wildlife Sites), habitats (i.e. hedges that qualify as ‘important’ under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997) and species which encompass VER of international and/or UK importance; UK BAP Priority Habitats and Species2 which encompass VER of national and county importance (N.B. although it may not be legally protected, Ancient Semi- Natural Woodland (ASNW) and Plantation on Ancient Woodland Sites (PAWS) are typically assigned National value); and Non-Statutory Wildlife Sites and important species assemblages which encompass VER of principally county importance alone.
9.4.3 Some additional features may have an incidental value that is greater than their intrinsic value. The CIEEM give the example of a band of scrub that might shield an
1 Geographical division of the British Isles used for the purposes of biological recording. 2 Priority Habitats and Species are the subject of Species Action Plans (SAP) in the UK BAP. SAP reflect that the habitat or species is considered to be in a sub-optimal state, but do not imply any specific level of value for the habitat or species (IEEM 2006). However, the very fact that the habitat or species is in a sub-optimal state, already will logically have an impact within the planning process, particularly if the development will add to a pre-existing decline. Furthermore, as no other qualitative or quantitative scale is provided against which to evaluate habitats and species with no legislative protection within the planning process, using the UK BAP to define national and county importance appeared the most common sense approach to the evaluation of those habitats and species that lack legal protection. ______
- 43 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
adjacent SSSI from agricultural spraying in an adjacent field (IEEM 2006). Such a feature would therefore be considered in accompaniment with its associated interest, as the one is interwoven with the other, based on their individual merit. For example, the band of scrub in the example above might be considered of ‘associated’ National importance, for were it to be lost the result would be likely to be significantly negative to the SSSI it shields. Such features are dealt with on their individual merit in the relevant sub-section.
9.5 Stage 4: Identification of the biophysical changes likely to affect existing VER
9.5.1 The biophysical changes predicted to occur as a result of development, which will have an impact upon the ecology of the site, comprise habitat losses and gains and, potentially, alterations in existing conditions in relation to hydrology, air quality, noise and lighting.
9.6 Stage 5: Assessment of the significance of changes to the integrity of a Statutorily protected or non-Statutory Wildlife Site, or the conservation status of VER within the zone of influence
9.6.1 An ecologically significant impact is defined as an impact (positive or negative) on the integrity of a defined site and/or the conservation status of habitats or species within a given geographical area (IEEM 2006).
9.6.2 The CIEEM (IEEM 2006) recommend that the “concept of ‘conservation status’ is used to determine whether an impact on a habitat or species is likely to be ecologically significant.” CIEEM provide a slightly modified definition of conservation status to that provided in the EC Habitats Directive:- Habitats – Conservation status is determined by the sum of the influences acting on the habitat and its typical species, that may affect its long-term distribution, structure and functions, as well as the long-term survival of its typical species within a given geographical area; and Species – Conservation status is determined by the sum of influences acting on the species concerned that may affect the long-term distribution and abundance of its populations within a given geographical area.
9.6.3 The CIEEM recommend each change is described as to: what it is; its direction (i.e. whether it is positive or negative); its timing; duration; frequency; magnitude; certainty; extent; and reversibility upon completion of the development:- Direction is taken to mean whether an impact is positive or negative; Timing is taken to mean the start date of a given action. This is relevant in the context of the seasonal sensitivity of animals (i.e. greater sensitivity when raising young and hibernating than might be the case at other times), and their resilience to repeated disturbance; for example, most animals habituate to regular or constant noise but may be disturbed by irregular or intermittent noise; Duration is taken to mean how long the action/change will last. This is relevant in the context of annual cycles such as breeding seasons, and the lifespan of
______
- 44 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
different species; Frequency is taken to mean whether or not the action/change will be repeated and, if so, how often. This is relevant in the context of cumulative impacts upon an isolated population. Magnitude is assessed using criteria based on that defined by Percival (2003):- o Very high – Total loss/gain or very major alteration to key elements / features of the baseline conditions, such that the post-development character / composition / attributes will be fundamentally changed and may be lost from the site altogether (guide: <20% of the original extent of habitat or population remains or there is a gain of 80% or above); o High – Major loss/gain or major alteration to key elements / features of the pre-development baseline conditions, such that post-development character / composition / attributes will be fundamentally changed (guide: 20-80% of habitat / population lost/gained); o Medium – Loss/gain or alteration to one or more key elements / features of the baseline conditions such that post-development character / composition / attributes of the baseline will be partially changed (guide: 5-20% of habitat / population lost/gained); o Low – Minor shift away from the baseline conditions. Change arising from the loss / alteration will be discernible but underlying character / composition / attributes of baseline condition will be similar to pre-development circumstances / patterns (guide: 1-5% of habitat / population lost/gained); and o Negligible – Very slight change from baseline condition. Change barely distinguishable, approximating to the ‘no change’ situation (guide <1% of habitat / population lost/gained). Certainty is assessed using a four-point objective scale suggested by the CIEEM for the assessment of the predicted outcome of biophysical changes. These changes comprise:- o Certain / near-certain – probability estimated at 95% chance or higher; o Probable – probability estimated above 50% but below 95%; o Unlikely – probability estimated above 5% but less than 50%; and o Extremely unlikely – probability estimated at less than 5% (IEEM 2006). It is however important to bear in mind that although the scale may be objective, the assignment of the levels of certainty will be subjective, because it is impossible to precisely predict the certainty of many borderline aspects. Extent is taken to mean the surface area (in this case expressed as hectares) of habitats, or the surface area of a particular species territory. Reversibility is taken to mean the feasibility of restoring an area to its pre- development habitat and condition, sufficient to support the baseline fauna it held.
9.6.4 Impacts can also broadly be divided into direct and indirect negative and positive impacts.
Direct and indirect negative impacts
9.6.5 The potential direct negative impacts comprise:-
______
- 45 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Habitat loss (both permanent and temporary); Habitat degradation (for example, due to deposition of dust, or changes in hydrology); Disturbance to and displacement of species (for example, through increased human presence, noise and artificial lighting); and Injury/mortality (for example, by being run-over by quarry vehicles).
9.6.6 The potential indirect negative impacts comprise:- Exclusion from habitat (for example, by physical barriers); Dispersal from and abandonment of a specific site or area of habitat; Habitat fragmentation (for example, by severance of favoured commuting or migration routes); Altered behavioural patterns (for example, increased foraging by some species of bats around lighting, but avoidance by others); and Injury or mortality (for example, due to increased predation risk following habitat fragmentation).
Direct and indirect positive impacts
9.6.7 The potential direct positive impacts comprise:- Gain of habitats with perceived increased biodiversity value to those they replace (both permanent; for example new habitats creation within a restoration scheme, and temporary; for example within a working scheme such as the quarry void itself or seeded storage mounds and screening bunds); Habitat alteration or enhancement (for example, in-fill planting of extant hedges to provide screening may increase the hedgerow species and improve hedgerow structure, thereby benefiting a wide variety of other faunal taxa); Habitat creation as mitigation for the displacement of species during the working scheme (for example, deployment of bat-boxes); and Adoption of management practices known to be beneficial for biodiversity, during and post development.
9.6.8 The potential indirect positive impacts comprise:- Increased habitat connectivity to habitats off-site (for example, by providing ‘stepping-stones’ between Statutory and non-Statutory Wildlife Sites, or by increased hedgerow continuity providing wildlife corridors); Colonisation of habitats by an increased range and/or abundance of species or assemblages of taxa, with greater conservation priority; Increase in suitable habitat available for taxa (for example, introduction of planting which may include suitable food plants for invertebrates which would have otherwise been absent); and Cessation of prior habitat management or practices that may have been deleterious to biodiversity (for example, cessation of herbicide and pesticide application within agricultural land).
______
- 46 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
9.7 Stage 6: Mitigation, compensation and enhancement
9.7.1 In order that development does not have significant negative impacts upon biodiversity, the ‘mitigation hierarchy’ is applied.
9.7.2 The mitigation hierarchy has three levels:- 1. Avoidance of significant negative impacts through good design; 2. Mitigation to lessen the effects of significant impacts that cannot be avoided; and 3. Compensation to address any residual impacts that cannot be avoided or mitigated.
9.7.3 BS42020: Biodiversity – Code of practice for planning and development states that “the mitigation hierarchy should underpin all decisions made by professionals working within the planning and development sectors.” Furthermore, the efficacy of avoidance, mitigation and compensation advocated should (where possible) be evidence-supported, and conditioned within any subsequent permission to ensure compliance.
9.7.4 In addition, the NPPF makes reference to the spirit of seeking enhancement, even where the scheme is not anticipated to have any significant negative impacts. Enhancement is entirely separate from the mitigation hierarchy, and should endeavour to satisfy the spirit of the NPPF which states “The planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by... minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible...”. As with avoidance, mitigation and compensation, enhancements should be conditioned within any subsequent permission to ensure compliance.
9.8 Stage 7: Assessment of the ecological impacts of the project (in light of mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures)
9.8.1 The final stage in the assessment process is to provide a frank, realistic and reasoned ‘summing-up’ of the ecological impacts of the project, both positive and negative, following the application of avoidance, mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures.
9.9 Stage 8: Advising on the consequences for decision making
9.9.1 IEEM (2006) recommends that the analysis of potential impacts, and the definition of their level of significance (based on the parameters set out in paragraph 9.6.3), is summarised in a ‘Summary of Impacts’ table.
9.9.2 The table characterises the level of change and extent of the impact (i.e. how much habitat will be lost or gained, or the number of species associated with a particular habitat), and summarises the level of significance of each impact if no mitigation/compensation measures were implemented, and whether or not the impact remains significant following mitigation/compensation. ______
- 47 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
9.9.3 Summarising potential impacts within such a table provides a systematic and consistent approach which also helps to quantify potential impacts without subjectivity. It also safeguards against potential impacts on VER being overlooked.
9.10 Stage 9: Monitoring
9.10.1 Post-development monitoring may be prescribed in order to safeguard against unintended or unanticipated negative effects and, where protected sites, habitats and/or species may be involved, thereby ensure legal compliance.
9.10.2 In addition, where evidence is lacking as to the efficacy of a proposed mitigation, compensation or enhancement action, monitoring may be performed in order to best ensure the success by revising the action in light of monitoring evidence.
10. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 1 – SCOPING
10.1 Initial ecological appraisal – ‘extended’ Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) survey
10.1.1 The desk-study and Phase 1 survey (JNCC 2003) are presented earlier within Sections 5, 6 and 7 of this report.
10.1.2 The results of the ‘extended’ Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) survey suggested that no additional surveys would be required to inform the development proposals.
10.2 Consultee responses
10.2.1 The ‘extended’ Phase 1 survey report was then submitted to the Nottinghamshire County Council Senior Practitioner Nature Conservation; Mr Nick Crouch in order to gain a scoping opinion.
10.2.2 The response from Nottinghamshire County Council indicated that an Environmental Impact Assessment (in accordance with the CIEEM methodology (IEEM 2006)) would be required.
10.2.3 Nottinghamshire County Council has received a screening response from the following Statutory and non-Statutory consultees:- Rempstone Parish Council; Environment Agency (Midlands Region); Severn Trent Water Limited; Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust; Natural England; The Highways Agency; English Heritage; Nottinghamshire County Council (Highways) Rushcliffe; Nottinghamshire County Council (Noise Engineer);
______
- 48 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Trent Valley Internal Drainage Board; and Nottingham East Midlands Airport.
10.2.4 The consultee responses have been considered in the following EcIA.
10.3 Development context
Overview
10.3.1 This summary description of the development is based on a more detailed description produced by CEMEX UK Operations Ltd.
10.3.2 The development comprises an application to consolidate previous planning permissions and an extension to the east of the existing consented East Leake Quarry involving the extraction of sand and gravel, with restoration to agriculture and conservation wetland, retention of existing aggregate processing plant, silt lagoon and access road.
10.3.3 The consented East Leake Quarry occupies a total surface area of c. 52 ha and the extension site occupies a total surface area of c. 27.5 ha. The extension will involve the extraction of approximately 1.78 million tonnes of sand and gravel (at an average thickness of 4.96 m, with a maximum depth of more than 9 m) from an area c. 27.5 ha in surface area. The extraction of mineral from the extension site will extend the life of the development by approximately 10-12 years. The extension would be worked in six phases, at an output rate of approximately 150,000 to 180,000 tonnes per year. The development footprint is shown at Figure 6 below.
© Crown copyright 2014. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey licence number 100050075.
Figure 6. The East Leake Quarry development footprint: the extent of the existing consented East Leake Quarry is shown in orange; the extension site is shown by the red line boundary and the proposed extraction area is shown in blue. ______
- 49 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
10.3.4 The proposed extraction area comprises one agricultural field bounded on all sides by hedgerows and planting which will be retained within the extension site. The extension site is separated from the existing consented East Leake Quarry by a mature hedgerow which runs from north to south. The field is bounded to the south by the public A6006 Melton Road, to the west by sand and gravel extraction and to the east by Rempstone Church, Clifton Lodge, Beech Tree Lodge and Loughborough Road. Sheepwash Brook bounds the site to the north in addition to pockets of woodland planting.
10.3.5 Development of the extension site will comprise:- 1. Vegetation clearance, soil and overburden stripping from the internal haul road and initial extraction phase; 2. Construction of an internal haul road from the extraction area to the existing East Leake Quarry processing plant; 3. Construction of soil and overburden storage mounds and screening bunds; 4. The extraction of sand and gravel in six phases; and 5. The progressive restoration of the extraction area partially back to agriculture with the remainder restored for nature conservation.
10.3.6 Impacts will vary during the construction, operation and decommissioning phases.
Construction impacts
10.3.7 In summary, construction works will comprise:- Vegetation clearance; Fencing root-protection areas; Archaeological investigation; Soil and overburden stripping from the internal haul road and initial extraction phase; Construction of soil and overburden storage mounds and screening bunds; Construction of an internal haul road from the extraction area to the existing East Leake Quarry processing plant; and Laying of water/silt pipework.
Vegetation clearance and root-protection areas
10.3.8 The extraction boundary will be pegged out and hedgerows or Rights of Way (if necessary) will be fenced. Root-protection areas of 3-10 m radius will be fenced and vegetation will be cleared.
Soil and overburden stripping
10.3.9 To expose the sand and gravel deposit, the overlying soils and overburden will be removed. All soil handling will be carried out in accordance with the guidance set out in the “Good Practice Guide for Handling Soils” (MAFF 2000) and the CEMEX Soil Handling Strategy (submitted as part of the planning application). Soils will only be stripped when they are in a dry and friable condition, generally between the months of March to October or in appropriate dry periods outside that preferred
______
- 50 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
period. The machinery used for stripping and placement of soils will be a combination of hydraulic excavator and an articulated dump truck in accordance with good practice for achieving high-quality restoration.
Soil and overburden storage mounds and screening bunds
10.3.10 Stripped soils and overburden will be stored in mounds and bunds along the southern and eastern boundaries or direct placement to assist the restoration. Storage mounds and screening bunds will be formed by the loose placement of stripped soils by the dumper truck and shaped using a bulldozer with low pressure tracks. The mounds and bunds are used for storage of material for the restoration, as well as to provide acoustic and visual screening from residential properties and public roads. Mounds and bunds will be located a minimum of 3 m distance from boundary hedgerows, but where mature oak and ash trees are located, a root-protection zone of 10-13 m radius will be implemented.
10.3.11 Soil storage mounds for topsoil and overburden will be a maximum of 3 m and 5 m high respectively and seeded with a ‘Traditional Hay Meadow’ seed-mix (British Seed Houses: RE1) based on the National Vegetation Community (NVC) type: MG5 Cynosurus cristatus – Centaurea nigra grassland. This is a mesotrophic grassland community typical of well-drained permanent pastures and meadows and will provide compensatory habitat for farmland birds which may be displaced due to the development.
10.3.12 The grassland will be seeded with a mixture of red fescue Festuca rubra ssp. litoralis, meadow fescue F. pratensis, crested dog’s-tail Cynosurus cristatus, common bent Agrostis capillaris, cock’s-foot, golden oat-grass Stipa gigantea and sweet vernal grass Anthoxanthum odoratum, with additional wildflowers including meadowsweet Filipendula ulmaria, ribwort plantain Plantago lanceolata, yarrow Achillea millefolium, common knapweed Centaurea nigra, lady’s bedstraw Galium verum, ox-eye daisy Leucanthemum vulgare, selfheal, meadow buttercup Ranunculus acris, bulbous buttercup Ranunculus bulbosus, agrimony Agrimonia eupatoria, rough hawkbit Leontodon hispidus, yellow rattle Rhinanthus minor, bird’s-foot trefoil Lotus corniculatus and salad burnet Sanguisorba minor.
10.3.13 Seeding will be performed during the period September through October, or if required, during April through May (while ground is wet or damp). Seed will be sown in two directions and be lightly rolled in. The rate of sowing will be 5 g/m² (50 kg/ha). Mounds and bunds will be maintained by spot-treating noxious weeds, and if necessary, will be mown or strimmed during late summer or early autumn to reduce excessive growth.
10.3.14 The location and extent of soil storage mounds and screening bunds are shown at Figure 7 on the following page.
Internal haul road
10.3.15 The main internal haul road will be located along the northern extraction boundary, with roads spearing south into individual phases when required. The haul ______
- 51 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
road will continue westwards and be linked to the existing processing plant via a small gap (which will be gated) created through the existing mature hedgerow running north to south on the western boundary of the extension site. Appropriate stand-offs will be maintained; 3 m from existing hedgerows, a minimum of 35 m from the public A6006, 100 m from Beech Tree Lodge and 15 m from Sheepwash Brook.
© Crown copyright 2014. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey licence number 100050075.
Figure 7. The location and extent of soil storage mounds and screening bunds.
Water and silt pipework
10.3.16 Pipework will be located through the internal access point and buried under the bridleway linking into the existing surface water management system of East Leake Quarry.
Processing plant
10.3.17 The construction of an additional processing plant for the extension site is not required.
10.3.18 The aggregate processing plant would be retained within the existing consented East Leake Quarry for the crushing, washing and grading of the sand and gravel extracted from the extension site. In addition, existing freshwater and silt lagoons will be retained in their current location to allow for settlement of the silt fraction washed from the sand and gravel, and to supply fresh re-circulated water. The extension site will continue to use the existing finished product stockpile area, as well as reception facilities.
10.3.19 The aggregate processing plant, reception offices, silt lagoons and stocking ______
- 52 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
area lies towards the northern boundary in the centre of East Leake Quarry.
Site access
10.3.20 The extension site will be accessed via the existing haul road leading onto the public A6006 Rempstone Road. All traffic is strictly controlled and restricted to this route in order to avoid passing through the village of East Leake. Traffic movements will continue at approximately 72 movements per day with a maximum of a 100 vehicle movements.
Operational impacts
10.3.21 The extension site will continue to operate on the same hours and days as is currently permitted; between 0700 and 1900 hours Monday to Friday and between 0700 and 1300 hours on Saturday. The site will not operate on Sunday or Bank Holidays. Maintenance hours will be the same as working hours, except in the case of emergency repairs to critical safety or environmental protection equipment.
10.3.22 In summary, operational impacts will comprise:- The phased extraction of minerals; and The progressive site restoration.
10.3.23 The extraction of sand and gravel will progress in six principle phases, as shown at Figure 8 below. The output level from the quarry is currently 150,000 to 180,000 tonnes per year which equates to an average of approximately 100 loaded vehicles per working day.
© Crown copyright 2014. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey licence number 100050075.
Figure 8. The location and extent of Phases 1 to 6 of the extraction.
______
- 53 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
10.3.24 Each year the phased extraction will comprise a series of regularly-spaced extraction campaigns. The site will be dewatered using a pump and the mineral excavated using a 360º hydraulic excavator and wheeled loading shovel working on benches set below ground level. Mineral will then be transported to the processing plant at the existing consented East Leake Quarry via articulated dump trucks. Raw material will be stockpiled within the existing plant site stocking area, for processing and sale.
Method of working
10.3.25 Operations will commence in the south-west corner of the extension site, with extraction progressing in an anti-clockwise direction back towards the existing consented East Leake Quarry.
10.3.26 However, in order to reduce as many negative environmental impacts as is reasonably practicable, mineral extraction will not be performed simultaneously within the exiting operation and the extension site. Operations will not proceed within Phase 1 of the extension until the final phase of the existing consent (Phase 4 of extraction within the triangular parcel of land to the south-west of the extension site (named Burton’s; see Plan: P4/689/3E)) is complete.
Phase 1
10.3.27 The void created by mineral extraction in Phase 1 will be used to create two silt lagoons to assist in the processing of the material and recycling of water on-site.
10.3.28 Phase 1 occupies a surface area of approximately 4.93 ha and will be worked in several campaigns over a period of c. 1.6 to 1.9 years, extracting a total of approximately 298,000 tonnes. Topsoil and subsoil will first be stripped from Phase 1, starting from the south-western corner of the extension site and moving northwards. Topsoil will be placed in storage mounds (no higher than 3 m) along the southern boundary of the public A6006 Melton Road to provide additional screening to residential properties, which will be seeded and maintained during extraction. Clay will be placed in c. 4 m high bunds on the north, east and south-east and remaining soils or overburden will be placed along the northern and eastern boundary to provide an acoustic barrier for the residents of Beech Tree Lodge. Soils will remain on-site and be used within the restoration.
Phase 2
10.3.29 Phase 2 is divided into three areas to assist progressive extraction (Phase 2a, 2b and 2c), restoration and silt disposal. Phase 2a occupies a surface area of approximately 2.31 ha, Phase 2b approximately 1.54 ha and Phase 2c approximately 2.19 ha. All three areas within Phase 2 will be worked over a period of c. 1.7 to 2.04 years, extracting a total of approximately 306,000 tonnes. Topsoil removed during Phase 2a will be placed within Phase 1 to enable bank profiling of the silt lagoon, and interburden or clay will be used to create the silt lagoons in Phase 1 and final restoration contours within Phase 2a. Remaining clay will be stored in the east. Topsoil removed during Phase 2b will be placed along the southern boundary of the ______
- 54 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
public A6006 Melton Road and interburden will be used within Phase 2b. Remaining interburden and clay shall be placed within Phase 2a. Phase 2c topsoil and interburden shall be placed into Phases 2b and 2c, with operations within Phase 2c progressing in a broadly northerly direction.
Phase 3
10.3.30 Phase 3 occupies a surface area of approximately 4.08 ha, split into two equal areas; Phase 3a and Phase 3b. Phase 3 will be worked over a period of c. 1.5 to 1.8 years, extracting a total of approximately 306,000 tonnes. Topsoil removed during Phase 3a will be placed within Phases 2b and 2c, whilst interburden will be placed within Phase 3a. Clay removed will be placed within Phase 2c or stored within a bund along the eastern boundary. Extraction during Phase 3b will continue from east to north, with interburden directly placed within Phases 3a and 3b and clay placed within Phase 3a. Topsoil removed will be placed to the east and stored for use within the restoration.
Phase 4
10.3.31 Phase 4 occupies a surface area of approximately 2.87 ha and will be worked over a period of c. 1.1 to 1.4 years, extracting a total of approximately 210,000 tonnes. Topsoil will be placed within Phase 3a to enable restoration to continue.
Phase 5
10.3.32 Phase 5 occupies a surface area of approximately 5.1 ha and which will be worked over a period of c. 2 to 2.6 years, extracting a total of approximately 397,000 tonnes. Topsoil will be placed within the east of Phase 3b to enable restoration to continue. Clay and interburden will be placed within Phases 4 and 5.
Phase 6
10.3.33 Phase 6 occupies a surface area of approximately 4.62 ha and which will be worked over a period of c. 1.6 to 1.9 years, extracting a total of approximately 298,000 tonnes. Topsoil will be placed within Phase 5 to enable restoration to continue. Clay from Phase 6 will be placed within Phase 5. This is in addition to the clay storage bunds in the east and north. As Phase 6 progresses, worked soil will be removed from the storage bunds in the east and used within the restoration of Phase 5. Topsoil from the southern boundary will be used within the restoration of the remaining areas in Phase 5 and Phase 6.
Decommissioning and restoration impacts
10.3.34 In summary, the decommissioning and restoration impacts will comprise:- The final restoration of the site; and Associated aftercare.
______
- 55 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Restoration overview
10.3.35 The proposed restoration scheme envisages the majority of the extension site restored back to agriculture, with the remainder managed as conservation grassland, wet woodland, lowland mixed deciduous woodland, scrub, hedgerows and a complex of lakes, ponds and wetland. This will incorporate the existing restoration schemes at East Leake Quarry, as well as complement habitats in the locality.
10.3.36 The restoration scheme has been designed to utilise silt to create areas of wet woodland and reedbed. The restoration also accounts for constraints as a result of proximity to East Midlands Airport (i.e. bird strike and airfield safeguarding) and the adjacent Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS in an attempt to provide a balance of agriculture and conservation, which will in turn contribute to County biodiversity targets.
Soil operations and placement
10.3.37 Following the completion of mineral extraction, the extension site will be levelled and graded with clay, silt, interburden and topsoil on-site, in order to create the restoration contours and soil depths required. Material will be progressively used for the restoration of Phases 1 to 6. Soil placement will be performed in accordance with the guidance set out in the “Good Practice Guide for Handling Soils” (MAFF 2000) and the CEMEX Soil Handling Strategy (submitted as part of the planning application). Soils will only be handled when in a dry and friable condition. Provided soil placement is performed in early summer, it is anticipated that the restoration will be completed within 2 years following mineral extraction.
Lakes and ponds
10.3.38 Approximately 4.7 ha of lakes and ponds will be created, encompassing seven lakes along the northern extraction boundary and a further five ponds to the south. The lakes will be created from silt lagoons and the extraction void. The slopes of the silt-lagoons created during operations will be restored and planted with native broadleaved woodland or thorny scrub. Lakes will have an average depth of 4 m and a maximum depth of 6 m. Lake margins will be a minimum 5 m wide, with soil placement designed to provide an uneven surface (including ‘shelves’) to create microhabitats for the development of tussocky grassland. The westernmost lake will be subject to bank profiling on the shallower northern banks only. The lakes will be restored so as to protect aerodrome safety whilst also promoting biodiversity gains. The natural regeneration and planting of c. 0.9 ha of reedbed around lake margins will be encouraged to provide further biodiversity gains and the aquatic margins will be established by natural re-colonisation and if required, planted using local sources. Marginal vegetation will be managed through natural seasonal variation in water levels, providing bare muddy areas for bird species.
10.3.39 The extent and depth of the five ponds will be dictated by the circumstances on the ground. However, their creation will be in line with the recommendations set out within Gravel Pit Restoration for Wildlife - Site Managers’ Guide (Andrews & Kinsman undated). ______
- 56 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
10.3.40 The lake and pond margins will be restored to conservation grassland, hedgerows and wet and dry woodland.
Grassland
10.3.41 Approximately 3.5 ha of conservation grassland will be created around the lakes and ponds and will comprise the same seed-mix as used on the soil storage bunds; British Seed Houses: RE1 ‘Traditional Hay Meadow’, which is based on the NVC type: MG5 Cynosurus cristatus – Centaurea nigra grassland. Seeding will be performed during the period September through October, or if required, during April through May (while ground is wet or damp). Seed will be sown in two directions and be lightly rolled in. The rate of sowing will be 5 g/m² (50 kg/ha).
Hedgerows
10.3.42 Gaps in existing hedgerows on the boundaries of the site will be planted with native tree and shrub species to enhance their biodiversity value. Tree planting will be performed in the first available planting season in the period November through March and maintained throughout the duration of operations to improve screening. Existing mature pedunculate oak Quercus robur and ash Fraxinus excelsior trees will be retained and their root-systems protected with a protection zone of 13 m radius from the stem. The proposed hedgerow planting mix comprises hawthorn (55%), field maple Acer campestre (15%), blackthorn (10%), hazel (5%), wych elm Ulmus glabra (5%), goat willow Salix caprea (5%) and dog-rose (5%). In addition, hedges will hold a total 10 feathered pedunculate oak standards at random locations, preferably at changes of direction. Hedgerows will be planted as a double staggered row with plants and rows c. 500 mm apart (5 plants per metre). Planting will be protected with tree shelters and hedgerows protected by timber post and stock-proof wire fencing.
10.3.43 Approximately 1,250 m of new hedgerows are also proposed within the restored agricultural field parcels which will incorporate field ditches flowing into the lakes and ponds.
Woodland
10.3.44 When the restoration profile contours have been achieved and soils have been reinstated, planting will performed within the first available planting season in the period November through March.
10.3.45 Approximately 1.1 ha of wet woodland will be created around lakes and ponds in the low-lying northern part of the site. The wet woodland will comprise alder Alnus glutinosa (35%), goat willow (25%), hawthorn (15%), crack willow (10%), grey willow (10%) and osier Salix viminalis (10%). Ideally planting will not take place in close proximity to the lake margins to allow the natural establishment of reedbed and grassland, and thus avoid shoreline erosion.
10.3.46 In addition, approximately 2 ha of lowland mixed deciduous woodland will be planted, comprising pedunculate oak (40%), field maple (20%), hazel (15%), ______
- 57 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
wych elm (10%), hawthorn (5%), blackthorn (5%) and dog-rose (5%). Hawthorn, blackthorn and dog-rose will be concentrated around the southerly woodland edges, and the north-eastern slope of the extraction area will be planted with native broadleaved woodland mix and hazel coppice.
10.3.47 Prior to planting any areas of compaction to be broken up to a minimum depth of 450 mm. Trees and shrubs will be notch planted at varying spacing, with an average spacing of 2.5 m centres in random groups of 3 to 7. All planting will be protected by tree shelters and stock-fenced.
Agriculture
10.3.48 The majority of the site will be restored back to similar grade agricultural land present prior to mineral extraction. Land will be restored as either grazing pasture or tillage land or a combination of both.
10.3.49 An arable crop (not a root crop) will be sown, as soon as possible after replacement of the soils, to begin improving the soil structure. The optimum months for sowing winter cereals are September/October. Should ground conditions preclude the sowing of a winter cereal crop an alternative crop such as wheat will be sown in the following spring. In January or February of each year of the aftercare programme, soil samples will be taken from the top 150 mm of the soil profile and analysed to determine the nutrient status. Any fertiliser or lime required will be applied in the correct quantities upon the results of this analysis in March.
10.3.50 Details of the crop regime for each year of the five year aftercare programme will be agreed in advance during the annual April aftercare meeting between the company, the tenant or landowner, and the MPA. The suggested cropping regime (subject to agreement at the annual meeting) will be as follows: Years 1 and 2: Winter wheat; Year 3: Winter oil seed rape (break crop); and Years 4 and 5: Winter wheat.
Peripheral areas
10.3.51 The southern slope of the site will be planted with native broadleaved trees to create a parkland landscape to complement the nearby Rempstone Hall (located to the south).
Aftercare
10.3.52 The aftercare scheme would be progressively implemented on completion of the restoration scheme, ideally commencing in the spring. Aftercare is designed to ensure land is restored to an undisturbed state in order to enhance biodiversity for nature conservation benefit.
10.3.53 The scheme includes the management of newly-created habitats including woodland and grassland, as well as reinstated agricultural habitats. All management will be performed in accordance with good practice guidance. Agricultural areas and ______
- 58 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
woodland will be subject to a five-year aftercare period, and conservation areas a ten-year aftercare period. Maintenance visits will be kept to a minimum and timed to avoid the majority of the accepted bird breeding season (April through July inclusive).
10.3.54 Monitoring of vegetation development around the lake margins will be performed with reference to the bird strike management plan. If required, planting with British-grown native plant material will be considered should marginal vegetation fail to develop by the fifth year. Naturally colonised trees or shrubs around the lake will be monitored and if necessary, coppiced on a two to three year rotation to enable a varied age structure. Species found to be invasive or dominant will be removed, particularly on the southern margins.
10.3.55 The conservation grassland will be managed and maintained at a height of 200 mm for the majority of the year. Once seeded, the grassland will be left to flower throughout late summer through early autumn before annual mowing, where arisings will be removed. Any persistent or noxious weeds will be spot-treated for eradication and weed management details will be submitted as an annual aftercare report.
10.3.56 Hedgerows will be maintained to a height no more than 2 m, with standard trees left uncut. All planting will be maintained by the use of glyphosate to create a 1 m wide ‘weed-free’ margin along each hedgerow until canopies close. Two maintenance visits will be performed each year during the aftercare period; one in spring and one in early summer. Visits will include weed control (including noxious weeds), litter removal and the checking or firming up of tree shelters. Any plants found to be dead or dying during the five-year aftercare period will be replaced with a size and species to be agreed with the Mineral Planning Authority (MPA) on a like-for-like basis, in order to maintain a 100% stocking rate during the aftercare period and to achieve a minimum of 90% stocking rate upon final restoration. In addition, any plants loosened by frost or wind will be firmed up and any damaged branches will be removed. At the end of the 5 to 10 year aftercare period (or before should growth warrant it), tree shelters will be removed and new hedgerows trimmed to a height of 1.5 m or will be laid to promote basal growth.
10.3.57 The suggested crop regime for areas of arable are winter wheat in Years 1, 2, 4 and 5, with winter oil seed rape in Year 3. Good agricultural practice will be maintained to control weed growth and nutrient status will be monitored for appropriate fertiliser application. The drainage of restored arable land will be kept under review.
10.3.58 An annual site meeting will be held between CEMEX UK Operations Ltd and the MPA in each year of the aftercare period, in order to review and agree on an appropriate aftercare programme for the following year. Any modifications to aftercare management will be submitted to and approved by the MPA.
______
- 59 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
10.4 Alternative scenarios
10.4.1 The release of new reserves from the extension site will ensure supplies to current markets are maintained, as existing reserves at East Leake Quarry will be depleted within approximately 18 months.
10.4.2 As mineral is a finite resource, reliance on alternative suppliers may result in an increase in material transported from elsewhere (i.e. from outside of the county). In addition, increased pressure on mineral production outside of the county may mean reserves at those sites are depleted more rapidly, thus increasing the need for new sites.
10.4.3 If the application for the extension site was brought forward at a later stage, East Leake Quarry would have to close, resulting in a loss of employment and infrastructure due to the depletion of existing reserves.
10.4.4 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd does not have alternative sites to the extension site within the surrounding 10 km radius. An existing site at Attenborough will be in the final stages of production when the extension is scheduled to commence, and is therefore not a viable alternative.
10.4.5 The ‘do nothing’ alternative will result in the depletion of current permitted mineral reserves within three years and the closure of the quarry resulting in loss of employment and infrastructure. Pressure for new reserves elsewhere in the county will increase, biodiversity benefits offered within this proposal will not be realised and mineral reserves sterilised.
10.5 Hydrology and Hydrogeology
10.5.1 In order to investigate the hydrology and hydrogeology of the extension site and surrounding area, a flood-risk assessment was performed by Mr Chris Nugent of Hydro-Logic Services Ltd. and a hydrogeology assessment was performed by Mr Andrew Tait of ESI Ltd.
10.5.2 The floor risk assessment concluded that overall the risk of flooding within the extension site is low and no special measures are considered necessary. No flooding is expected from other sources as the extraction area lies outside of the King’s Brook, River Trent and River Soar floodplains. However, a principal concern was increased flood-risk downstream, particularly as a result of surface run-off from soil storage mounds and screening bunds. Management measures to minimise this risk including grass seeding, perimeter trenches (as necessary) and management and monitoring should however ensure downstream flood risks do not increase.
10.5.3 The man-made lake within Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS is fed by a spring. Dewatering is therefore likely to reduce flow to this lake, and through the lake via the overflow to Sheepwash Brook. However, it is unlikely that this will result in a significant impact upon the water level of the lake or the Sheepwash Brook itself. Furthermore, if lake levels fall or water flow is reduced, water will be pumped into ______
- 60 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
the lake to maintain levels as mitigation. Following restoration, groundwater levels will return to almost pre-quarrying levels and no long-term impacts will occur. The marshy area of the LWS will not be impacted by dewatering the extraction area.
10.5.4 Flow to two springs (Rempstone and Lings Farm spring) joined to King’s Brook may be reduced due to dewatering, in particular Rempstone spring, whose expected average flow could be reduced by half. However, flow will recover following extraction and restoration, and this reduction in flow is not considered significant; no monitoring or mitigation is necessary. The loss of flow on King’s Brook and the Lings Farm spring is also not considered to be significant.
10.5.5 Impacts could potentially arise from groundwater and surface water quality as a result of spillage of contaminating liquids associated with plant operations, but suitable pollution prevention measures such as those set out within Control of Water Pollution from Construction Sites (Murnane et al. 2002) and Environmental Good Practice on Site (Chant-Hall et al. 2005) will significantly reduce the likelihood of polluting liquids and other contaminants being released during the development. Impacts arising from discharge of water with suspended sediment will be controlled using settlement lagoons in the consented East Leake Quarry and be discharged under the conditions of the existing discharge consent.
10.5.6 Following restoration, groundwater levels will be above that currently and no significant long-term impacts on surface water flows are anticipated.
10.5.7 Overall, continued mineral extraction will have an impact upon the local groundwater table, but this will be reduced by progressive working and restoration. However, it is considered that with appropriate monitoring and mitigation measures implemented, no significant hydrological impact will be caused as a result of continued mineral extraction at East Leake Quarry.
10.6 Air Quality
10.6.1 The air quality assessment at the East Leake Quarry extension site was performed by Mr Tim Pinder of EA Ltd.
10.6.2 The assessment concluded that, due to the high moisture content of the sand and gravel deposit, the effects of dust are likely to be insignificant over the greater part of the site for the life of the scheme. Appropriate mitigation measures will however be implemented to further reduce potential impacts of dust, such as seeding of soil storage mounds and screening bunds, progressive mineral extraction and restoration to avoid leaving large areas exposed, limited soil handling and restricting vehicle speeds. Overall, as mitigation measures and dust monitoring will be employed in accordance with industry good practice guidance, the effects are likely to be negligible and the potential for impacts on the surrounding ecological sites has been assessed as insignificant.
______
- 61 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
10.7 Noise
10.7.1 The noise assessment at the East Leake Quarry extension site was performed by Dr Robert Storey of Walker Beak Mason.
10.7.2 Noise can cause disturbance to fauna, at its most trivial causing minor avoidance movement and in more severe forms leading to breeding failure or even mortality. Different species show different levels of tolerance and there is a tendency for many species to habituate to activities that are found to pose no threat, especially those that are regular or repeated in nature, slow-moving or fixed in location (Hockin et al.1992). Similarly with noise, the greater effects come from sudden loud sounds rather than continuous low level noise.
10.7.3 Current levels of human disturbance over the extension site are restricted to agricultural operations. However, wider background noise includes the existing East Leake Quarry operations, aircraft and vehicles on nearby roads; all create an average background noise of up to 47 decibels. Except in the immediate vicinity of the extraction area, operational activity will largely be restricted to machinery movement in a confined location at any one time, with occasional increased human presence. To ensure noise impacts are kept to a minimum, on-site speed limits will be restricted, internal haul roads will be one-way to reduce reversing alarms (which will be white noise alarms) and maintenance of road surfaces will reduce noise from vehicle movements.
10.7.4 It is therefore concluded that the disturbance effects of the extension site will be of very low negative significance.
10.8 Lighting
10.8.1 The development of the extension site will not include the construction of any lighting.
11. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 2 – IDENTIFICATION OF LIKELY ZONE OF INFLUENCE
11.1 Environmental zone of influence
11.1.1 The identification of the likely zone of influence as a result of biophysical changes has been defined within the hydrological, air quality and noise assessments (presented earlier within Stage 1: Scoping). The conclusions of the hydrological, air quality and noise assessments are then used to identify potential on- and off-site impacts resulting from biophysical changes.
11.1.2 Reference to the hydrological, air quality and noise assessments suggests the environmental zones of influence were predicted to be as follows:- Potential hydrological effects: 2 km radius of the extension site boundary; Potential air quality effects: 1 km radius of the extension site boundary; and ______
- 62 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Potential noise effects: 1 km radius of the extension site boundary.
11.1.3 There will be no lighting constructed within the extension site. The definition of a zone of influence for lighting is therefore unnecessary.
11.2 Ecological zone of influence
11.2.1 The identification of the likely zone of influence for Statutory and non-Statutory Wildlife Sites and faunal species was initially defined and stratified within the data- search radii in the desk-study (presented earlier at sub-section 4.2). This information was later used as the basis for the faunal assessment upon which the need for further botanical and faunal survey was decided.
11.2.2 The ecological zones of influence were defined as:- A 2 km radius of the extension site boundary and Statutory Wildlife Sites; A 1 km radius of the extension site boundary and non-Statutory Wildlife Sites; A 500 m radius of the extension site boundary and historic records of legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species (excluding bats); and A 1 km or 5 km radius of the extension site boundary and historic in-flight (1 km) and roost (5 km) records of legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of bats.
12. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 3 – VALUED ECOLOGICAL RECEPTORS (VER) LIKELY TO BE AFFECTED
12.1 General
12.1.1 In accordance with the CIEEM guidance (IEEM 2006), the identification of ecological resources and features present within the development footprint, and likely to be affected, has been presented within this report as the Phase 1 (JNCC 2003) habitat mapping, botanical and faunal survey predictive assessments and survey results. To simplify progression through the EcIA, a summary description, with an assessment of the biodiversity value of each of the VER, is provided in the following text.
12.2 Ecological Receptors
12.2.1 The Valued Ecological Receptors (VER) at the East Leake Quarry extension site comprise:- Three non-Statutory Wildlife Sites comprising:- o Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS; o Stanford Park LWS; and o Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS. One UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Hedgerows’ (c. 1909 m);
______
- 63 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
A suite of common and widespread invertebrates, potentially including up to 40 UK BAP Priority Species; The UK BAP Priority Species of amphibian; common toad in their terrestrial phase potentially on boundary hedgerows; Two UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; slow-worm and grass snake potentially on boundary hedgerows; A suite of common and widespread breeding and/or wintering bird species, potentially including up to 25 UK BAP Priority Species; The UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare (recorded during the Phase 1 survey) and potentially a further two UK BAP Priority Species; harvest mice and hedgehogs; and A suite of foraging and/or commuting bat species, potentially including up to two UK BAP Priority Species comprising noctule and soprano pipistrelle.
13. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 4 – BIOPHYSICAL CHANGES LIKELY TO AFFECT EXISTING VER
13.1 General
13.1.1 The biophysical changes at East Leake that may be predicted to have an effect upon existing VER may broadly be divided into direct and indirect impacts, and further subdivided into those that are negative and those that are positive.
13.2 Potential direct and indirect negative impacts upon existing VER
Potential direct negative impacts
13.2.1 The potential direct negative impacts comprise:- 1. Habitat loss (both permanent and temporary, which is typically sudden such as through soil-stripping etc.); 2. Degradation or alteration of on-site habitats (for example, due to changes in hydrology or deposition of dust); 3. Disturbance to and displacement of species (for example, through increased human presence and noise); and 4. Injury or mortality (for example, by being run-over by quarry vehicles).
Potential indirect negative impacts
13.2.2 The potential indirect negative impacts comprise:- 1. Dispersal from and abandonment of a specific site or area of habitat; 2. Altered behavioural patterns (for example, avoidance due to noise and increased human presence); and 3. Degradation or alteration of off-site habitats (for example, due to changes in hydrology or deposition of dust).
______
- 64 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
13.3 Potential direct and indirect positive impacts upon existing VER
Potential direct positive impacts
13.3.1 The potential direct positive impacts comprise:- 1. Temporary gain of habitats with perceived increased biodiversity value to those they replace, such as the quarry void itself which will have value to early succession invertebrates and breeding birds present in the existing consented quarry, and seeded storage mounds and screening bunds on former tillage which will have increased value to taxa present on extant field margins, due to the absence of agricultural spray drift.
Potential indirect positive impacts
13.3.2 The potential indirect negative impacts comprise:- 1. The cessation of herbicide and pesticide application within the site may result in increased biodiversity on the retained hedges and field margins.
14. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 5 – ASSESSMENT OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CHANGES TO THE INTEGRITY OF STATUTORILY PROTECTED AND/OR NON-STATUTORY WILDLIFE SITES, OR THE CONSERVATION STATUS OF VER WITHIN THE ZONE OF INFLUENCE
14.1 Statutory Wildlife Sites
14.1.1 No Statutory Wildlife Sites exist within a 2 km radius of the extension site; there will therefore be no potential impacts upon Statutory Wildlife Sites.
14.2 Non-Statutory Wildlife Sites
General
14.2.1 The three non-Statutory Wildlife Sites within the zone of influence comprise Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS, Stanford Park LWS and Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS. Citations for the three LWS lack detail and, to our knowledge, no condition assessment has ever been undertaken. It is therefore unknown whether the existing consented East Leake Quarry has had any historic negative effect upon these sites. However, it is predicted that if quarrying was to have any negative effect, this would already have occurred, and therefore the continuation of operations will have no further significant impact.
14.2.2 It should be noted that the lack of any detailed citation or condition assessment, has limited the assessment of effects of the continuation of quarrying into the extension site upon the three LWS to a broad overview alone.
______
- 65 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS
14.2.3 Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS is located immediately adjacent to the north-west corner of the extension site. The existing consented East Leake Quarry has worked adjacent to the eastern boundary of the LWS and were extraction within the extension site to be implemented, works would remain at this distance, with the extension site working to within c. 20 m of the closest southern boundary of the LWS.
14.2.4 There will be no direct negative impact upon Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS as a result of the continuation of existing consented operations within East Leake Quarry, or the continuation of quarrying into the extension site.
14.2.5 The hydrogeological assessment suggested that dewatering is likely to reduce flow to the man-made lake present within the Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS (as it is fed by a spring), as well as through the lake via the overflow to Sheepwash Brook. However, no significant impact is anticipated, and any minor negative impact that might occur will be rectified by the pumping of water. In addition, it was also concluded that the area of marsh is less likely to be impacted by the extraction of mineral in the extension site than it would have been during the extraction works at the consented East Leake Quarry. As, following restoration, groundwater levels will return to almost pre-quarrying levels and no long-term impacts will occur, there will therefore be no significant indirect negative impacts as a result of dewatering on the LWS. The results of air quality and noise assessments conclude that there will be no indirect significant negative impacts upon the LWS as a result of dust emissions or noise, due to the implementation of good practice mitigation measures. Furthermore, there are no grounds to predict any increase in visitor pressure within the site as a result of the development.
14.2.6 There will be no direct positive impacts upon Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS as a result of the continuation of quarrying within the extension site, nor will the existing consented East Leake Quarry and extension site indirectly contribute to the conservation aims of the LWS, as habitats that are present within the LWS will not be present within the operational quarry. However, the restoration of the extension site may indirectly contribute to the conservation aims of the LWS as the restoration envisages the creation of an area of wetland comprising a complex of ponds and reedbed, as well as wet woodland, hedgerows and neutral grassland. The restoration will therefore increase habitat connectivity to the LWS (which holds a similar complex of habitats), as well as providing an increased availability of suitable habitat for dependent species. Overall, the restoration of the extension, as well as the existing East Leake Quarry, is likely to result in a significant net increase in the biodiversity value of the LWS.
Stanford Park LWS
14.2.7 Stanford Park LWS is located approximately 645 m to the south-west of the extension site. The existing consented East Leake Quarry has worked to within c. 340 m of the closest northern boundary of the Stanford Park LWS and were
______
- 66 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
extraction within the extension site to be implemented, works would remain at this distance.
14.2.8 There will be no direct negative impact upon Stanford Park LWS as a result of the continuation of existing consented operations within East Leake Quarry, or the continuation of quarrying into the extension site.
14.2.9 The existing consented quarry and the extension site are beyond the hydrological, dust and noise ‘zone of influence’ of Stanford Park LWS. There will therefore be no indirect significant negative impact upon the LWS associated with hydrology, dust or noise as a result of the development of the extension site. Furthermore, there will be no significant negative impact as a result of visitor pressure on the LWS; footpaths adjacent to the LWS will not be affected by the temporary diversion.
14.2.10 There will be no direct positive impact upon Stanford Park LWS as a result of the continuation of quarrying within the extension site, nor will the existing consented East Leake Quarry and extension site indirectly contribute to the conservation aims of the LWS, as habitats that are present within the LWS will not be present within the operational quarry. In addition, the restoration of the extension site will not indirectly contribute to the conservation aims of the LWS.
Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS
14.2.11 Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS is located approximately 847 m to the north-west of the extension site. The existing consented East Leake Quarry has worked adjacent to the south-western corner of the Manor Farm, East Leake Grassland LWS, and were extraction within the extension site to be implemented, works would remain at this distance.
14.2.12 There will be no direct negative impact upon Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS as a result of the continuation of existing consented operations within East Leake Quarry, or the continuation of quarrying into the extension site.
14.2.13 The existing consented quarry and the extension site are beyond the hydrological, dust and noise ‘zone of influence’ of Manor Farm, East Leake Grassland LWS. There will therefore be no indirect negative impact upon the LWS associated with hydrology, dust or noise as a result of the development of the extension site. There are no grounds to predict a significant negative impact upon the LWS as a result of a potential increase in visitor pressure.
14.2.14 There will be no direct positive impact upon Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS as a result of the continuation of quarrying within the extension site, nor will the existing consented East Leake Quarry and extension site indirectly contribute to the conservation aims of the LWS, as habitats that are present within the LWS will not be present within the operational quarry.
14.2.15 The restoration of the extension site may however indirectly contribute to the conservation aims of Manor Farm, East Leake Grassland LWS, as the continued restoration of the existing East Leake Quarry (see Composite Final Restoration Plan ______
- 67 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
in Appendix 7) to the west, in addition to the restoration of the extension site, will increase habitat connectivity to the LWS which is cited for its species-rich grassland. Overall, the restoration of the extension, as well as the existing East Leake Quarry, will result in a significant net increase in the biodiversity value of the LWS.
14.3 Assessment of the significance of changes to the conservation of habitats within the zone of influence
14.3.1 Potential impacts to habitats have been divided into direct and indirect, which have been sub-divided into negative and positive. Habitats both on- and off-site have been considered.
Direct negative impacts
14.3.2 The development of the extension site will result in the permanent loss of a total of c. 27.83 ha of habitats on-site comprising:-
Approximately 0.03 ha of C3.1 – Tall herb and fern / Other / Tall ruderal;
Approximately 27.8 ha of J1.1 – Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed land / Arable; and
Approximately 4 m of J2.3.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedge with trees / Species-poor, which qualifies as one UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Hedgerows’.
14.3.3 The permanent loss of c. 27.83 of habitat is due to the extraction of mineral (c. 27.5 ha of habitat) and the construction of temporary soil storage mounds and screening bunds (c. 0.33 ha of habitat). Although the construction of these mounds and bunds is temporary, c. 0.33 ha of arable will be permanently lost, as arable land beneath two bunds will not be reinstated within the restoration. Impacts resulting from the permanent loss of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D1 at Appendix D.
14.3.4 The extension site will result in the temporary loss of a total of c. 3 ha of habitat comprising:-
Approximately 0.01 ha of B4 – Grassland and marsh / Improved grassland; and
Approximately 2.99 ha of J1.1 – Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed land / Arable.
14.3.5 The temporary loss of c. 3 ha of habitat is due to the construction of temporary soil storage mounds and screening bunds. Following extraction and removal of these mounds and bunds, improved grassland and arable temporarily lost will be reinstated. Impacts resulting from the temporary loss of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D2 at Appendix D.
______
- 68 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
14.3.6 The extension site will not result in any permanent or temporary loss of habitats off- site; there will therefore be no direct negative impacts upon habitats off-site.
Indirect negative impacts
14.3.7 There are no grounds to predict indirect negative impacts upon habitats on-site as a result of hydrological effects. It is therefore concluded there will be no significant indirect negative impacts upon habitats on-site as a result of dust.
14.3.8 The hydrological assessment concluded that the base flow of the off-site Sheepwash Brook (located along the northern boundary of the extension site and c. 40 m to the north of the extraction area) will be reduced as a result of dewatering. However, this will be compensated for by the continued discharge of excess water to the Sheepwash Brook.
14.3.9 Flow to Rempstone spring and Lings Farm spring, which are joined to a tributary of King’s Brook may be reduced due to dewatering. However, the loss of flow on King’s Brook and the Lings Farm spring is considered to be insignificant within the hydrological assessment. The Rempstone Spring originates under broadleaved woodland and appears to pass south-east for c. 60 m in a trapezoid ditch between two large fields of tillage. The flow is under shade from woodland at both ends, and a hedge over the central section. Where the spring flow joins the King’s Brook tributary, the brook is itself in a trapezoid ditch between tillage. It was concluded within the hydrological assessment that flow within the Rempstone spring will recover following extraction and restoration, and this reduction in flow is not considered significant and no monitoring or mitigation is considered necessary. The dense shade over the spring and ditch, coupled with the intensively farmed habitat on either side, with the predictable effects of agricultural spray-drift, are likely to limit the biodiversity associated with the seasonal water flow. As the habitat in the wider locale also comprises large ‘prairie’ fields of tillage, there are no grounds to predict an uncommon assemblage of any taxa will be associated with this feature. Nor are there grounds to suspect the presence of protected species associated with aquatic habitats, such as water voles. On balance, the ecological effects of dewatering, even if they do result in a reduction of seasonal flow, are likely to be insignificant.
14.3.10 Mitigation measures in relation to dust emissions will be employed in accordance with industry good practice guidance, thus reducing the potential negative effects of dust. It is therefore concluded there will be no significant indirect negative impacts upon habitats off-site as a result of dust.
Direct positive impacts
14.3.11 The restoration of the extension site will result in the permanent gain of a total of c. 27.5 ha and c. 1250 m of linear habitats on-site comprising:-
Approximately 3.1 ha of A1.1.2 – Woodland and scrub / Woodland / Broadleaved / Plantation, which qualifies as:-
______
- 69 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
o Two UK BAP Priority Habitats comprising ‘Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland’ (c. 2 ha) and ‘Wet Woodland’ (c. 1.1 ha); and o One Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Wet broadleaved woodland’ (c. 1.1 ha).
Approximately 6.83 ha of B2.2 – Grassland and marsh / Neutral grassland / Semi-improved, which qualifies as:- o One UK BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Lowland Meadows’; and o One Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Lowland neutral grassland’.
A maximum of approximately 11.97 ha of B4 – J1.1 – Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed land / Arable. This may qualify as ‘arable farmland’ under the Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat; ‘Farmland: Arable farmland, arable field margins and improved grassland’. This will however depend upon the intensity of management;
Approximately 0.9 ha of F1 – Swamp, marginal and inundation / Swamp, which qualifies as one UK BAP Priority Habitat and Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Reedbed’;
Approximately 4.7 ha of G1.1 – Open water / Standing water / Eutrophic, which qualifies as:- o One UK BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Eutrophic Standing Waters’ (c. 4.58 ha); and o One Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Eutrophic and Mesotrophic Standing Water’ (c. 4.58 ha).
Approximately 1250 m of J2.3 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedgerow with trees, which qualifies as one UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Hedgerows’.
14.3.12 Impacts resulting from the permanent gain of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D4 at Appendix D.
14.3.13 The extension site will result in the temporary gain of a total of c. 3.33 ha of habitat on-site comprising:-
Approximately 3.33 ha of B2.2 – Grassland and marsh / Neutral grassland / Semi-improved, which qualifies as:- o One UK BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Lowland Meadows’; and o One Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Lowland neutral grassland’.
14.3.14 The temporary gain of c. 3.33 ha of habitat is due to the construction of temporary soil storage mounds and screening bunds, which will be seeded with a ‘Lowland Hay Meadow’ grass seed-mix. Following extraction, these bunds will be
______
- 70 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
taken down and the material used in the restoration. Impacts resulting from the temporary gain of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D5 at Appendix D.
14.3.15 The extension site will not result in any permanent or temporary gain of habitats off-site; there will therefore be no direct positive impacts upon habitats off- site.
Indirect positive impacts
14.3.16 The extension site will result in the retention of a total of c. 10.17 ha and c. 2785 m of linear habitats on-site comprising:-
Approximately 0.24 ha of B4 – Grassland and marsh / Improved grassland;
Approximately 0.37 ha of C3.1 – Tall herb and fern / Other / Tall ruderal;
Approximately 9.56 ha of J1.1 – Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed land / Arable;
Approximately 420 m of J2.1.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Intact hedge / Species-poor, which qualifies as one UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Hedgerows’;
Approximately 180 m of J2.2.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Defunct hedge / Species-poor;
Approximately 1485 m of J2.3.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedge with trees / Species-poor, which qualifies as one UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Hedgerows’; and
Approximately 700 m of J2.6 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Dry ditch.
14.3.17 Impacts resulting from the retention of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D3 at Appendix D.
14.3.18 The extension site will not result in indirect positive impacts upon habitats off-site.
14.4 Assessment of the significance of changes to the conservation of species within the zone of influence
14.4.1 Potential impacts to species have been divided into negative and positive impacts, both permanent and temporary.
______
- 71 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Direct negative impacts: Permanent
14.4.2 The proposed development may result in a potential direct negative effect upon the following on-site faunal VER as a result of permanent loss of habitat:-
A suite of common and widespread invertebrate species, potentially including up to 38 UK BAP Priority Species;
A suite of common amphibians on boundary hedgerows, potentially including one UK BAP Priority Species; common toads;
Two legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species of reptiles; slow-worm and grass snake, potentially present on boundary hedgerows;
A suite of common and widespread breeding and/or wintering bird species, potentially including up to 23 UK BAP Priority Species;
The UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare (recorded during the Phase 1 survey) and potentially a further two UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; harvest mice and hedgehogs; and
A suite of foraging and/or commuting bats, potentially including up to two UK BAP Priority Species comprising noctule and soprano pipistrelle. All bat species are legally protected.
14.4.3 Impacts resulting from the permanent loss of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D1 at Appendix D.
14.4.4 The hydrological, air quality, noise and lighting assessments suggest the potential for significant direct permanent negative effects upon species off-site are negligible.
Direct negative impacts: Temporary
14.4.5 The proposed development may result in a potential direct negative effect upon the following on-site faunal VER as a result of temporary loss of habitat:-
A suite of common and widespread invertebrate species, potentially including up to 35 UK BAP Priority Species;
A suite of common and widespread breeding and/or wintering bird species, potentially including up to 19 UK BAP Priority Species;
The UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare (recorded during the Phase 1 survey) and potentially the UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; harvest mice; and
A suite of foraging and/or commuting bats, potentially including up to one UK BAP Priority Species comprising noctule. All bat species are legally protected. ______
- 72 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
14.4.6 Impacts resulting from the temporary loss of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D2 at Appendix D.
14.4.7 The hydrological, air quality, noise and lighting assessments suggest the potential for significant direct temporary negative effects upon species off-site are negligible.
Indirect negative impacts: Permanent and temporary
14.4.8 The hydrological, air quality, noise and lighting assessments suggest the potential for significant indirect negative effects, both permanent and temporary, upon species on- or off-site are negligible.
Direct positive impacts: Permanent
14.4.9 The proposed development may result in a potential positive effect upon the following on-site faunal VER as a result of permanent habitat gain:-
A suite of common and widespread invertebrate species, potentially including up to 62 UK BAP Priority Species;
A suite of common amphibian species in their breeding and terrestrial phase, potentially including one UK BAP Priority Species; common toad;
Two legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; slow-worm and grass snake;
A suite of breeding and/or wintering bird species, potentially including up to 32 UK BAP Priority Species;
The UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare (recorded during the Phase 1 survey) and potentially a further two UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; harvest mice and hedgehogs, as well one legally protected mammal species; badger; and
A suite of foraging and/or commuting and/or roosting bats, potentially including up to three UK BAP Priority Species comprising noctule, soprano pipistrelle and brown long-eared bat. All bat species and their roosts are legally protected.
14.4.10 Impacts resulting from the permanent gain of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D4 at Appendix D.
14.4.11 The hydrological, air quality, noise and lighting assessments suggest the potential for significant direct permanent positive effects upon species off-site are negligible.
Direct positive impacts: Temporary
14.4.12 The proposed development may result in a potential positive effect upon the
______
- 73 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
following on-site faunal VER as a result of temporary habitat gain:-
A suite of common and widespread invertebrate species, potentially including up to 29 UK BAP Priority Species;
A suite of common amphibian species in their terrestrial phase, potentially including one UK BAP Priority Species; common toad;
The legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; slow-worm;
A suite of common and widespread breeding and/or wintering bird species, potentially including up to 17 UK BAP Priority Species;
The UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare (recorded during the Phase 1 survey) and potentially a further two UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; harvest mice and hedgehogs, as well as potentially the legally protected mammal species; badger; and
A suite of foraging and/or commuting bats, potentially including up to one UK BAP Priority Species comprising noctule. All bat species are legally protected.
14.4.13 Impacts resulting from the temporary gain of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D5 at Appendix D.
14.4.14 The hydrological, air quality, noise and lighting assessments suggest the potential for significant direct temporary negative effects upon species off-site are negligible.
Indirect positive impacts: Permanent
14.4.15 The proposed development may result in a potential positive effect upon the following on-site faunal VER as a result of habitat retention:-
A suite of common and widespread invertebrate species, potentially including up to 39 UK BAP Priority Species;
A suite of common amphibian species in their terrestrial phase, potentially including one UK BAP Priority Species; common toad;
Two legally protected and UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; slow-worm and grass snake potentially on boundary hedgerows;
A suite of common and widespread breeding and/or wintering bird species, potentially including up to 22 UK BAP Priority Species;
The UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare (recorded during the Phase 1 survey) and potentially a further two UK BAP Priority Species of
______
- 74 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
mammal; harvest mice and hedgehogs, as well as potentially the legally protected mammal species; badger; and
A suite of foraging and/or commuting and/or roosting bats, potentially including up to two UK BAP Priority Species comprising noctule and soprano pipistrelle. All bat species and their roosts are legally protected.
14.4.16 Impacts resulting from the retention of habitats on-site are detailed in Table D3 at Appendix D.
14.4.17 The hydrological, air quality, noise and lighting assessments suggest the potential for significant in-direct permanent positive effects upon species off-site are negligible.
Indirect positive impacts: Temporary
14.4.18 No temporary indirect significant positive impacts are anticipated on- or off- site.
15. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 6 – MITIGATION, COMPENSATION & ENHANCEMENT
15.1 Mitigation: Non-Statutory Wildlife Sites
Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS
15.1.1 No mitigation strategy is proposed for potential direct negative impacts as a result of the development of the extension site upon Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS.
15.1.2 Mitigation in respect of potential indirect negative impacts on Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS as a result of hydrology, dust and noise is summarised below.
15.1.3 Adoption of good practice measures with respect to pollution prevention and monitoring of groundwater and surface-water quality will ensure there are no significant hydrological impacts on the LWS. However, as dewatering is likely to reduce flow to the man-made lake present within the LWS, if lake levels fall or water flow is reduced, water will be pumped into the lake to maintain levels as mitigation. Following restoration, groundwater levels will return to almost pre- quarrying levels and no long-term impacts will occur. Therefore there will be no significant indirect negative impacts as a result of dewatering on the LWS.
15.1.4 Standard dust control measures will be employed in accordance with industry good practice guidance. Therefore potential negative effects are likely to be negligible and there are no grounds to predict significant indirect negative impacts upon the LWS as a result of dust.
15.1.5 Noise levels resulting from the mineral development will be within recommended limits as set out in NPPF criteria, and appropriate mitigation measures such as ______
- 75 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
restricting noise to the hours of operation and acoustic soil bunds will be implemented. There are therefore no grounds to predict significant indirect negative impacts upon the LWS as a result of noise.
15.1.6 No mitigation strategy is proposed for potential indirect negative impacts as a result of increased visitor pressure on the LWS; there are therefore no grounds to predict a significant negative impact upon this site as a result of a potential increase in visitor pressure.
Stanford Park LWS
15.1.7 Stanford Park LWS is located outside of the hydrological, noise and dust ‘zones of influence’ and there are no grounds to predict a significant negative impact upon this site as a result of a potential increase in visitor pressure. No mitigation strategy is therefore proposed.
Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS
15.1.8 Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS is located outside of the hydrological, noise and dust ‘zones of influence’ and there are no grounds to predict a significant negative impact upon this site as a result of a potential increase in visitor pressure. No mitigation strategy is therefore proposed.
15.2 Mitigation: Habitats and Plants
UK BAP Priority Habitats
15.2.1 The extraction of mineral from the extension site will result in the loss of c. 4 m of hedgerow which qualifies as one UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat; ‘Hedgerows’. However, the hedgerow does not qualify as ‘important’ under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997 and the majority of boundary hedgerows will be retained within the working scheme (c. 1905 m). In addition, the restoration scheme envisages the creation of approximately 1250 m of hedgerows which qualify as both the UK BAP Priority Habitat and Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat ‘Hedgerows’. No mitigation strategy therefore is proposed in respect of the c. 4 m length of hedgerow to be lost.
Plants
15.2.2 No legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of plants were recorded within the extension site and there are no grounds to predict the presence of uncommon, legally protected and/or UK BAP Priority Species of plants, due to the habitats present. It is therefore concluded that the current level of botanical survey is adequate and no further botanical survey is recommended. No mitigation strategy in respect of plant species is therefore required.
______
- 76 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
15.3 Mitigation: Fauna
Invertebrates
15.3.1 The majority of the habitats present within the site which can be predicted to hold the greatest invertebrate diversity, lie on the margins of the site and are therefore outside the proposed extraction area. Habitats outside this area will be retained within the working scheme and therefore the impacts upon invertebrates potentially present within the site will be negligible. Furthermore, during operations, soil storage mounds and screening bunds will be constructed on the margins of the extraction area, which will be seeded within a ‘Traditional Hay Meadow’ grass seed- mix; this can be predicted to be of biodiversity value to a range of invertebrates, including those potentially present within the arable field margins. In any case, as the habitats present within the site are widespread in the locality, it can be predicted invertebrates present within the site will be present in the adjacent fields outside. Therefore, the loss of the habitats present within the extension site will not have the potential for a significant negative effect upon the local invertebrate fauna. No mitigation strategy is therefore proposed for invertebrates
Amphibians and reptiles
15.3.2 In order to safeguard against the potential for injury and/or mortality to hibernating amphibians, slow-worms and/or grass snakes, the section of hedgerow on the western boundary of the site to be removed will be taken down in the active season; April through October by the following method:- 1. Stage 1: The point the hedgerow will be breached will be clearly marked; 2. Stage 2: Depending upon the timing, nesting birds may delay when the hedgerow can be removed. Therefore, if possible, the hedgerow section will be cut down using hand-tools outside the bird-nesting season (1st March through 31st August inclusive) to between 30-50 cm height and the brash removed for disposal off-site prior to continuing to Stage 3. If it is not possible to take the hedgerow down in this period, it must first be inspected by an experienced ecologist to determine whether nesting birds are present in the section to be removed. If nesting birds are present, removal of the hedge must be delayed until the young have fledged prior to continuing with Stage 3. If no birds are present, the hedge removal may continue to Stage 3 without delay; 3. Stage 3: Immediately prior to the hedge being removed a finger-tip search will be performed by an experienced ecologist and any amphibians and/or reptiles encountered will be hand-captured for release into terrestrial habitat within the Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS; and 4. Stage 4: The hedge may then be removed by an excavator with no further constraints.
Birds
15.3.3 Bird species considered to be potentially present within the extension site include a number of UK BAP Priority Species, but there is no direct legal or policy requirement to mitigate for the loss of breeding bird or foraging habitats. In any
______
- 77 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
case, habitats present within the site are common to the wider locale and widespread nationally; therefore bird species can disperse to other habitats outside of the site.
15.3.4 If the removal of the hedgerow section and soil-stripping (within each phase of the working scheme) is performed outside of the accepted bird nesting season (1st March through 31st August inclusive), then no specific mitigation strategy will be required.
15.3.5 However, if the removal of the hedgerow section and soil-stripping are to take place within the accepted bird nesting season the following safeguarding strategy will be applied:- 1. Stage 1: The point the hedgerow will be breached and the extent of each phase of the working scheme will be clearly marked; 2. Stage 2: Depending upon the timing, nesting birds may delay when removal of the hedgerow section and soil-stripping within each phase of the working scheme can be performed. Therefore, if possible, the hedgerow section will be cut down using hand-tools outside the bird nesting season to between 30-50 cm height in line with the mitigation strategy proposed for amphibians and reptiles. If it is not possible to take the hedgerow down in this period, it must first be inspected by an experienced ecologist to determine whether nesting birds are present in the section to be removed. If nesting birds are present, the removal of the hedge must be delayed until the young have fledged. In addition, a walk-over survey by an experienced ecologist must be performed if soil-stripping is performed within the accepted bird nesting season, particularly in relation to ground-nesting species such as skylarks. If nesting birds are encountered, soil- stripping must be delayed until the young have fledged prior to works continuing; and 3. Stage 3: If no nesting birds are present, hedgerow removal and soil-stripping may be performed with no further constraints.
15.3.6 The bird breeding season is dependent on weather conditions and therefore varies between years and between species, but Natural England (undated) advise it is generally between early March and late August. A bird nest occupied outside of this period is still subject to legal protection, therefore contractors should be aware of the location of bird nests and cease works immediately if any are found to be occupied, regardless of the month. In addition, particular care must be taken in respect of Schedule 1 bird species which are afforded additional legal protection against intentional and reckless disturbance whilst nesting.
15.3.7 Potential impacts of noise on breeding birds outside the site will be mitigated for by the creation of acoustic soil bunds which will be seeded within an appropriate traditional hay meadow grass seed-mix. Similarly, the removal of these bunds should be timed to take place outside of the accepted bird breeding season. If removal is performed during the accepted bird nesting season, an inspection in accordance with the precautionary strategy set out within paragraph 15.3.5 will be performed to determine whether nesting birds are present and works will be postponed appropriately if they are.
15.3.8 In addition, a 3 m stand-off will be maintained from boundary hedgerows to reduce potential disturbance effects on birds nesting within hedgerows as much as is ______
- 78 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
reasonably practicable.
Mammals
15.3.9 None of the mammal species potentially present within the extension site hibernate. All are therefore mobile and all can be predicted to be sensitive to human and machine presence. Most are also crepuscular and will therefore be active outside quarry hours. As a result, it is improbable that there will be any significant potential for mortality or injury to any mammal species as a result of the development. Furthermore, the habitats within the site are widespread in the locality and there is therefore no shortage of habitat into which mammals may disperse, and from which mammals may colonise temporary and permanent habitats on-site as they become established. Therefore, aside of the safeguards proposed for amphibians and reptiles, which can be predicted to displace mammals for the habitat to be destroyed, no further mitigation is proposed in respect of mammals.
15.3.10 However, due to the legal protection afforded to badgers and their ability to colonise and construct setts within vegetated spoil mounds and storage bunds, a precautionary strategy is proposed prior to the taking down of mounds and bunds during the progressive restoration. It is therefore recommended that a walk-over survey is performed by an experienced ecologist to ensure that no occupied badger setts are present within each mound or bund prior to their removal. This survey will be performed in addition to the inspection outlined in respect of nesting birds. The survey method will comprise a search of the target area for setting activity. Any badger setts found will be assessed for their level of occupation and type of sett, based on criteria defined by Andrews (2013). If an occupied badger sett is recorded within the soil storage mounds or screening bunds, a licence may be required from Natural England in order to close the sett and allow works to proceed within the legislation.
15.4 Compensation: Non-Statutory Wildlife Sites
15.4.1 The development will not result in a significant impact upon the integrity of any non-Statutory Wildlife Site within the zone of influence. There is therefore no need for a compensation strategy for potential effects upon non-Statutory Wildlife Sites.
15.5 Compensation: Habitats and plants
15.5.1 The development will not result in a significant impact upon the conservation status of any UK BAP Priority Habitat within the zone of influence.
15.5.2 The loss of habitats and plants within the extension site is negligible and would not ordinarily warrant compensation. Nonetheless the proposed restoration envisages a gain of five new UK BAP Priority Habitats, occupying a total of c. 12.08 ha. These five UK BAP Priority Habitats comprise:- Approximately 2 ha of ‘Lowland Mixed Deciduous Woodland’; Approximately 1.1 ha of ‘Wet Woodland’; ______
- 79 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Approximately 3.5 ha of ‘Lowland Meadows’; Approximately 0.9 ha of ‘Reedbed’; and Approximately 4.58 ha of ‘Eutrophic Standing Waters’.
15.5.3 Of these total six UK BAP Priority Habitats to be created within the restoration, six also qualify as Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitats, occupying a total of c. 25.38 ha and c. 1250 m of linear habitat comprising:- Approximately 1250 m of ‘Hedgerows’; Approximately 1.1 ha of ‘Wet broadleaved woodland’; Approximately 6.83 ha of ‘Lowland neutral grassland’; Approximately 0.9 ha of ‘Reedbed’; Approximately 4.58 ha of ‘Eutrophic and Mesotrophic Standing Water’; and Approximately 11.97 ha of ‘Farmland: Arable farmland, arable field margins and improved grassland3’.
15.5.4 During operations, there will also be a temporary gain of one UK BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Lowland Meadows’ and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat comprising ‘Lowland neutral grassland’, due to the creation of soil storage mounds and screening bunds which will be seeded with a ‘Traditional Hay Meadow’ seed-mix.
15.5.5 Overall, the restoration scheme ensures there will be no net loss of one existing UK BAP Priority Habitat and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat; ‘Hedgerows’, but in fact an overall net gain of c. 1246 m, as well as the retention of c. 1905 m. Furthermore, the restoration scheme envisages the gain of five new UK BAP Priority Habitats, as well as six Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitats. Therefore, following the restoration, the extension site will encompass a total of six UK and Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitats up five from the original one.
15.6 Compensation: Fauna
15.6.1 The development will not result in a significant impact upon the conservation status of any legally protected or UK BAP Priority Species within the zone of influence.
15.6.2 The individual species and potential assemblages that may potentially be affected do not have legal protection that would condition compensation for any potential negative effect, nor are there any uncommon features likely to be of value to any specific species that is subject to a particular conservation policy, such as a UK BAP Species Action Plan. There is therefore no compelling reason to directly compensate for any effects to individual species potentially present within the site.
3 The creation of c. 11.97 ha of habitat may qualify as ‘improved grassland’ and/or ‘arable’ under the overarching Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat; ‘Farmland: Arable farmland, arable field margins and improved grassland’. Exactly which subheading, if either, this will fall under will however depend upon the final post-development land-use and the intensity of management. ______
- 80 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
15.7 Enhancement: non-Statutory Wildlife Sites
15.7.1 The restoration of the extension site will indirectly enhance habitats within Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS and therefore contribute to the conservation aims of the LWS. The restoration will increase habitat connectivity to the Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS (which holds a similar complex of habitats), as well as providing an increased availability of suitable habitat for dependent species present within the LWS.
15.8 Enhancement: Habitats and plants
15.8.1 Gaps in existing hedgerows on the boundaries of the site will be planted with native tree and shrub species to enhance their biodiversity value.
15.9 Enhancement: Fauna
15.9.1 No species specific faunal enhancements are proposed, other than the seeding of soil storage mounds and screening bunds with a ‘Traditional Hay Meadow’ seed-mix, which will provide compensatory habitat for farmland birds which may be displaced due to the development.
16. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 7 – ASSESSMENT OF THE ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS (in light of mitigation, compensation and enhancement measures)
16.1 Non-Statutory Wildlife Sites
16.1.1 With the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures in accordance with standard good practice, there will be no significant impacts upon Sheepwash Brook Wetlands LWS, Stanford Park LWS and Manor Farm, East Leake Meadows LWS as a result of hydrology, dust and noise effects.
16.2 Habitats and plants
16.2.1 There are no uncommon or irreplaceable habitats within the extension site, nor are there any individual uncommon plant species. The envisaged restoration scheme ensures there will be an overall net gain in UK BAP and Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitats; therefore there will be no significant impacts upon habitats or plants as a result of the extraction of mineral from the extension site.
16.3 Invertebrates
16.3.1 The extension will perpetuate the existence of ephemeral early-succession habitat, such as bare and sparsely vegetated ground and seasonally wet ground favoured by many uncommon invertebrates. The cessation of agricultural activity within the site, ______
- 81 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
and the consequential absence of pesticides etc. will have an enhancing effect on existing habitats to be retained, thereby increasing invertebrate abundance both in terms of diversity and biomass. The envisaged restoration scheme ensures there will be an overall net gain in the diversity of habitats with a predictable increase in associated invertebrate diversity. This is demonstrable by the increase in the potential associated UK BAP and Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Species of invertebrate fauna, which rises from 40 UK BAP Priority Species alone, to 62 UK BAP and Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Species.
16.3.2 Overall, it is predicted that the development will have a significant net positive effect on invertebrate diversity and biomass in the site, which will have a ‘knock-on’ positive effect upon insectivorous amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals.
16.4 Amphibians
16.4.1 The extension site will itself result in an increased area of terrestrial foraging habitat available to amphibians, in the form of the grass-covered storage mounds and screening bunds. Furthermore, the absence of pesticide application as a consequence of the cessation of farming within the site may be predicted to increase the biomass of invertebrate prey within the site as a whole, thus providing a more profitable habitat to amphibians generally. The implementation of an appropriate safeguarding strategy will ensure that there are no significant negative impacts upon amphibians as a result of the extraction of mineral from the extension site. Finally, the envisaged restoration will result in a significant increase in aquatic habitat in the locality which, despite the predictable introduction of fish to all suitable ponds, will nonetheless provide new breeding habitat for common toads (a UK BAP Priority Species).
16.4.2 Overall, it is predicted that the development will have a significant net positive effect on amphibian diversity and abundance within the site, which will have a ‘knock-on’ positive effect upon grass snakes as well as some bird species, such as grey heron Ardea cinerea, which take amphibians upon occasion.
16.5 Reptiles
16.5.1 The extension site will itself result in an increased area of hunting and basking habitat available to reptiles, in the form of the grass-covered storage mounds and screening bunds. The cessation of pesticide application in the site can be predicted to result in an increased biomass of molluscs, resulting in an increased prey resource for slow-worms which predate small slugs. The same aspect will also have a beneficial effect upon grass snakes, although further removed; cessation of pesticides results in a greater invertebrate biomass favouring amphibians, with a consequential increase in numbers, which are themselves the favoured prey of grass snakes.
16.5.2 The implementation of an appropriate safeguarding strategy will ensure that there are no significant negative impacts upon reptiles as a result of the extraction of ______
- 82 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
mineral from the extension site. Finally, the envisaged restoration will result in a significant increase in foraging/hunting and basking habitat for slow-worms and grass snakes in the locality, as well as offering a sheltered and comparably undisturbed refuge to reptiles in an otherwise inhospitable landscape.
16.5.3 Overall, it is predicted that the development will have a significant net positive effect on slow-worms and grass snakes.
16.6 Birds
16.6.1 The extension will perpetuate the existence of ephemeral early-succession habitat, such as bare and sparsely vegetated ground, seasonally wet ground and gravel-pit habitat favoured by the Schedule 1 species of ground-nesting bird; little-ringed plover Charadrius dubius (which is known to favour gravel-pits with suitable ground cover along the margins).
16.6.2 The cessation of agricultural activity within the site, and the consequential absence of pesticides etc. will have an enhancing effect on extant habitats to be retained such as hedgerows, thereby increasing their invertebrate biomass. This will have a beneficial effect upon common and widespread insectivorous UK BAP Priority Species of birds nesting within hedgerows including dunnock and song thrush.
16.6.3 The envisaged restoration scheme ensures there will be an overall net gain in the diversity of habitats with a predictable increase in the types of nest-site and wintering habitat available. This is demonstrable by the increase in the potential associated avifauna, which rises from 25 to 32 UK BAP Priority Species. The restoration scheme may also benefit a range of other Schedule 1 and/or UK BAP Priority Species of wintering bird within the site, such as hen harrier Circus cyaneus, merlin Falco columbarius, fieldfare Turdus pilaris, redwing Turdus iliacus and lesser redpoll Carduelis cabaret (in alder carr).
16.6.4 Overall, it is predicted that the development will have a significant net positive effect on ornithological diversity and in the site, which will have a ‘knock-on’ positive effect upon birds of prey, such as kestrels Falco tinnunculus, buzzards Buteo buteo and sparrowhawks Accipiter nisus.
16.7 Mammals (including bats)
16.7.1 The development will not result in any significant negative impact upon any mammal species. The various factors already presented within the previous faunal accounts, demonstrate the increase in mammalian habitat and prey diversity within the site, both during and after the development. Although, in quantitative terms, the potential UK BAP Priority Species of mammals potentially present rises by only an individual species; brown long-eared bat, the potential mammalian fauna predicted to be able to exploit the restored site is significantly increased from that present prior to the development, and includes an additional four species of bats.
______
- 83 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
16.8 Residual Ecological Impacts
16.8.1 No residual ecological impacts are anticipated as a result of the extraction of mineral from the extension site.
16.9 Cumulative Effects
16.9.1 No cumulative ecological effects are anticipated as a result of the extraction of mineral from the extension site.
17. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 8 – ADVISING ON THE CONSEQUENCES FOR DECISION MAKING (summing-up)
17.1.1 In accordance with CIEEM guidance (IEEM 2006) a Summary of Impacts is provided at Appendix A within Tables A1 to A5.
17.1.2 The EcIA concluded that with the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures and safeguards, the extraction of mineral from the East Leake Quarry extension will not result in any significant change to the integrity of any non- Statutory Wildlife Site or to the conservation status of Valued Ecological Receptors (VER) present within the ‘zone of influence’ both on- and off-site.
17.1.3 Furthermore, the envisaged restoration scheme has been predicted to result in a significant net increase in biodiversity associated with the site and the wider locale.
18. EAST LEAKE EcIA: STAGE 9 – MONITORING
18.1.1 Hydrological, dust and noise effects will be monitored in accordance with standard good practice.
18.1.2 In order to ensure, within reasonable limits, that there is no potential for a breach in conservation legislation, the safeguarding strategies and restoration will be set out within a detailed Ecological Management Plan to be submitted to the Local Authority Ecologist (LAE), prior to works commencing within the extension site. This will include the definition of responsibilities for each aspect, and the provision of summary reports to the LAE upon completion of each stage (i.e. the removal of the hedge section in order to access the site from the existing consented quarry).
19. REFERENCES
Section 2
IEEM 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
______
- 84 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Section 4, Sub-section 4.1
BSI British Standards Publication 2013. BS 42020 Biodiversity – Code of practice for planning and development. The British Standards Institution.
IEEM 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
Institute of Environmental Assessment 1995. Guidelines for Baseline Ecological Assessment. Chapman & Hall, London.
Ramsey D (Ed.) 1994. Nature Conservation in Environmental Assessment. English Nature, Peterborough.
Section 4, Sub-section 4.2
AEcol 2012a. Ecological Assessment of Land at Rempstone, East Leake, Nottinghamshire. AEcol, Bridgwater.
AEcol 2012b. Desk-study of Biological Data relating to the Proposed Rempstone Quarry Extension, East Leake, Nottinghamshire. AEcol, Bridgwater.
Andrews Ward Associates 2009. Baseline Ecological Assessment of Land under Consideration for Extension of CEMEX (UK) Ltd’s East Leake Quarry, Nottinghamshire. Andrews Ward Associates, Bridgwater.
Section 4, Sub-section 4.3
Hubbard C 1954. Grasses. Middlesex: Penguin Books.
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Poland J & Clement E 2009. The Vegetative Key to the British Flora. John Poland, Southampton, in association with the Botanical Society of the British Isles.
Preston C, Pearman D & Dines T 2002. New Atlas of the British & Irish Flora. New York: Oxford University Press.
Stace 1991. Field Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
Section 4, Sub-section 4.4
Andrews H et al. 2013. Bat Tree Habitat Key. AEcol, Bridgwater.
______
- 85 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Section 6, Sub-section 6.2
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.1
Fry R & Lonsdale D 1991. Habitat Conservation for Insects – A Neglected Green Issue. The Amateur Entomologist Volume 21, Cravitz Printing Company Ltd, Essex.
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Kirby P 1992. Habitat Management for Invertebrates: a practical handbook. RSPB, Bedfordshire.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.3
ARG UK 2010. Great crested newt habitat suitability index. ARG UK Advice Note 5.
Atkins W 1998. ‘Catch 22’ for the great crested newt: Observations on the breeding ecology of the great crested newt Triturus cristatus and its implications for the conservation of the species. British Herpetological Society Bulletin. No 63.
Beebee T & Griffiths R 2000. Amphibians and Reptiles. Collins New Naturalist Series, Harper Collins, London.
Bullock D, Oldham R & Corbett K 1998. In: Gent T & Gibson S (eds.) 1998. Herpetofauna Workers Manual. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Cresswell W & Whitworth R 2004. an assessment of the efficiency of capture techniques and the value of different habitats for the great crested newt Triturus cristatus. English Nature Research Reports No 576. Natural England, Peterborough.
Inns H 2009. Britain’s Reptiles and Amphibians. WildGuides, Hampshire.
Jehle R 2000. The terrestrial summer habitat of radio-tracked great crested newts (Triturus cristatus) and marbled newts (T. marmoratus). Herpetolgical Journal 10: 137-142.
Jehle R & Arntzen J 2000. Post breeding migrations of newts with contrasting ecological requirements. J. Zool. Lond. 254: 297-306.
Jehle R, Thiesmeier B & Foster J 2011. The Crested Newt. Laurenti Verlag, Bielefeld, Germany.
Langton T, Beckett C and Foster J 2001. Great Crested Newt Conservation Handbook. Froglife, Suffolk.
Natural England undated. Standing Advice Species Sheet: Great Crested Newts. Natural ______
- 86 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
England, Peterborough.
McLee A & Scaife R 1992. The colonisation by great crested newts Triturus cristatus of a water-body following treatment with a piscicide to remove a large population of sticklebacks Gasterosteus aculeatus – BHS Bulletin No 42. 1992.
Oldham R 1994. In: Gent T & Bray R (eds.) 1994. Conservation and management of great crested newts: Proceedings of a symposium held on 11 January 1994 at Kew Gardens, Richmond, Surrey. English Nature No 20. Natural England, Peterborough.
Oldham R, Keeble J, Swan M & Jeffcote M 2000. Evaluating the Suitability of Habitat for the Great Crested Newt (Triturus cristatus). Herpetological Journal 10: 143-155.
Rannap R, Lõhmus A & Briggs L 2009. Restoring Ponds for Amphibians: A Success Story. Hydrobiologica 634: 87-95.
Sinsch U 1988. Seasonal changes in the migratory behaviour of the toad Bufo bufo: direction and magnitude of movements. Oecologia 76: 390-398.
Swan M & Oldham R 1993. National amphibian survey. English Nature Research Report No. 38. Natural England, Peterborough.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.4
Appleby L 1971. British Snakes. John Baker Ltd, London.
Arnold E & Burton J 1978. A Field Guide to the Reptiles and Amphibians of Britain and Europe. Collins, London.
Barker G 2004. Natural Enemies of Terrestrial Molluscs. C.A.B.I. Publishing, Oxfordshire.
Beebee T & Griffiths R 2000. Amphibians and Reptiles. Collins New Naturalist Series, Harper Collins, London.
English Nature 1998. Species Conservation Handbook: Translocation of Slow-worms. HERPS 3.2: Updated June 1998. English Nature, Peterborough.
Inns H 2009. Britain’s Reptiles and Amphibians. WildGuides, Hampshire.
Luiselli L 1992. The diet of the slow-worm (Anguis fragilis) Linnaeus 1758, in the Tarvisio Forest (Carnic Alps, NE Italy) (Squamata: Sauria: Anguidae). Herpetozoa B5: 91-94.
Smith N 1990. The ecology of the slow-worm (Anguis fragilis L.) in Southern England. MPhil thesis, University of Southampton. Cited in: Beebee T & Griffiths R 2000. Amphibians and Reptiles. New Naturalist Series, Harper Collins, London.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.5
Fuller R 1982. Bird Habitats in Britain. Poyser. ______
- 87 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
O’Connor R & Shrubb M 1986. Farming & Birds. CUP.
Pollard E, Hooper M & Moore N 1974. Hedges. Collins New Naturalist.
Snow D & Perrins C (eds) 1998. The Birds of the Western Palearctic. Concise Edition. OUP.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.6
Bright P & MacPherson D 2002. Hedgerow Management, Dormice and Biodiversity. English Nature Research Reports No. 454, Natural England, Peterborough.
Bright P & Morris P 1990. Habitat requirements of Dormice in relation to Woodland management in south-west England. Biological conservation 54: 307-326.
Bright P & Morris P 1991. Ranging and nesting behaviour of the dormouse, Muscardinus avellanarius, in diverse low-growing woodland. J. Zool. 224: 177-190.
Bright P & Morris P 1992. Ranging and nesting behaviour of the dormouse, Muscardinus avellanarius, in coppice-with-standards woodland. J. Zool. 226: 589-600.
Chanin P & Woods M 2003. Surveying dormice using nest tubes. Results and experience from the south west dormouse project. English Nature Research Report 524. Natural England, Peterborough.
Eden R & Eden S. 1999. Dormice in Dorset - the importance of hedges and scrub. British Wildlife 10: 185-189.
Hurrell E & McIntosh G 1984. Mammal Society dormouse survey, January 1975 – April 1979. Mammal Review 14: 1-18.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.7
Barreto G, Macdonald D & Strachan R 1998. The tightrope hypothesis: an explanation for plummeting water vole numbers in the Thames catchment. In: Bailey R, Jose P & Sherwood B (Eds.) 1998. United Kingdom Floodplains. Westbury Academic and Scientific Publishing.
Lawton J & Woodroffe G 1991. Habitat and distribution of water voles: why are there gaps in a species range? Journal of Animal Ecology 60: 79-91.
Moorhouse T, Gelling M & Macdonald D 2009. Effects of habitat quality upon reintroduction success in water voles: Evidence from a replicated experiment. Biological conservation 142: 53-60.
Moorhouse T & Macdonald D 2005. Temporal patterns of range-use in water voles: do ______
- 88 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______females territories drift? Journal of Mammology 84: 655-661.
Stoddart D 1970. Individual range, dispersion and dispersal in a population of water voles (Arvicola terrestris (L.)). Journal of Animal Ecology 39: 403-425.
Strachan R 1998. Water Vole Conservation Handbook. First Edition. Wildlife Conservation research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Strachan R & Moorhouse T 2006. Water vole Conservation Handbook. Second Edition. Wildlife conservation Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.8
Bennett A, Ratcliffe P, Jones E, Mansfield H & Sands R 2005. Other Mammals, in: Hill D, Fasham M, Tucker G, Shewry M & Shaw P (eds) 2005. Handbook of Biodiversity Methods. Cambridge University Press.
Delahay R, Wilson G, Harris S & Macdonald D 2008. In: Harris S & Yalden D (Eds.) 2008. Mammals of the British Isles: Handbook, 4th Edition. The Mammal Society, c/o Society of Experimental Biology, Southampton.
Neal E & Cheeseman C 1996. Badgers. Poyser Natural History, T & AD Poyser Ltd, London.
Natural England 2009. Protection of Badgers Act 1992 (as amended) Guidance on ‘Current Use’ in the definition of a Badger Sett. Natural England, Peterborough.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.9
Bailey M & Rochford J 2006. Otter survey of Ireland 2004/2005. Irish Wildlife Manuals 23. Dublin: National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Bennett A, Ratcliffe P, Jones E, Mansfield H & Sands R 2005. Other Mammals, in: Hill D, Fasham M, Tucker G, Shewry M & Shaw P (eds) 2005. Handbook of Biodiversity Methods. Cambridge University Press.
Chanin P 1993. Otters. Whittet Books, London.
Chanin P 2001. Otter road casualties: a survey of the A30, A38 and M5 in Devon and Cornwall. Unpublished report. London: Highways Agency. Cited in Chanin P 2003. C. Monitoring the Otter Lutra lutra. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Monitoring Series 10. Peterborough: English Nature.
Chanin P 2003. Ecology of the European Otter. Conserving Natura 2000 Rivers Ecology Series 10. Peterborough: English Nature.
Jefferies D, Wayre P, Jessop R and Mitchell-Jones A 1986. Reinforcing the native otter Lutra lutra population in East Anglia – an analysis of the behaviour and range development of the first release group. Mammal Review 16: 65-79. ______
- 89 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Jefferies D & Woodroffe G 2008. In: Harris S & Yalden D (Eds.) 2008. Mammals of the British Isles: Handbook, 4th Edition. The Mammal Society, c/o Society of Experimental Biology, Southampton.
Wayre P 1979. The Private Life of the Otter. B. T. Batsford Ltd, London.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.10
AEcol 2012. Ecological Assessment of Land at Rempstone, East Leake, Nottinghamshire. AEcol – Andrews Ecology Ltd, Bridgwater.
Burton M 1968. Wild Animals of the British Isles. Wayside and Woodland Series. Frederick Warne & Co. Ltd., London.
Harris S & Yalden D (Eds.) 2008. Mammals of the British Isles: Handbook, 4th Edition. The Mammal Society: Southampton.
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Section 7, Sub-section 7.11
AEcol 2012. Ecological Assessment of Land at Rempstone, East Leake, Nottinghamshire. AEcol – Andrews Ecology Ltd, Bridgwater.
Entwistle A, Racey P & Speakman J 1996. Habitat exploitation by a gleaning bat, Plecotus auritus. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B, 351: 921-931.
Section 9, Sub-section 9.1
BSI British Standards Publication 2013. BS 42020 Biodiversity – Code of practice for planning and development. The British Standards Institution.
IEEM 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
Section 9, Sub-section 9.2
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Section 9, Sub-section 9.4
IEEM 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
______
- 90 - ©AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Section 9, Sub-section 9.6, 9.7 & 9.9
IEEM 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
Section 10, Sub-section 10.1
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
Section 10, Sub-section 10.2
IEEM 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
Section 10, Sub-section 10.3
Andrews J & Kinsman D undated. Gravel pit restoration for wildlife: Site Manager’s Guide. RSPB, Sandy.
MAFF 2000. Good Practice Guide for Handling Soils (version 04/00). FRCA, Cambridge.
Section 10, Sub-section 10.5
Chant-Hall G, Charles P & Connolly S 2005. Environmental good practice on site (2nd Edition). C650, CIRIA, London.
Murnane E, Heap A, Grimes J, Rawlinson J, Williams I & Forrester L 2002. Control of water pollution from construction sites – guide to good practice. SP156, CIRIA, London.
Section 10, Sub-section 10.6
DETR 1995. The Environmental Effects of Dust from Surface Mineral Workings - Volume Two. ARUP Environmental, Ove Arup & Partners, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
Section 10, Sub-section 10.7
Hockin D, Ounsted M, Gorman M, Hill D, Keller V and Barker M 1992. Examination of the effects of disturbance on birds with reference to its importance in environmental assessments. J. Env. Management 36: 253-286. Section 12, Sub-section 12.1
IEEM 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
JNCC 2003. Handbook for Phase 1 habitat survey: A technique for environmental audit. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.
______
- 91 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Section 17
IEEM 2006. Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management.
______
______
- 92 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
APPENDIX A. A REVIEW OF THE COMMUTING RANGES OF BRITISH BATS USED TO DEFINE AN APPROPRIATE RADIUS FOR SEARCHES OF HISTORIC DATA-SETS.
In order to define an appropriate buffer for data-requests a literature review of all references to the commuting ranges of individual bat species was performed (see Table A1). A single average and maximum commuting range was calculated, these are set out in Table A2.
Table A1. Results of a review of commuting distances of bats native to the UK.
BAT SPECIES AVERAGE COMMUTING DISTANCE MAXIMUM COMMUTING DISTANCE Barbastelle 18 km (Schofield & Mitchell-Jones 2003) 4.5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) Barbastella barbastellus 18 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) 6.5 km (Catto et al. 1996) 8.2 km (Robinson & Stebbings 1997) Serotine 6 km (Schofield & Mitchell-Jones 2003) 2 km (Schofield & Mitchell-Jones 2003) Eptesicus serotinus 12 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 6.5 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) 4.5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 0.7 km (Fitzsimons et al. 2002) Bechstein’s bat 0.3 - 1 km (Altringham 2003) 1.4 km (Fitzsimons et al. 2002) Myotis bechsteinii 1 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) 2.5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 1 km (Dietz et al. 2011) Brandt’s bat 10 km (Dense & Rahmel 2002) 2.3 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) Myotis brandtii 10 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 2 km (Swift & Racey 1983) 10 km (Richardson 1985) 2.3 km in females, 3.7 km in males (Encarnacao et Daubenton’s bat 10 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) al. 2005) Myotis daubentonii 3 km (Altringham 2003) 6 km (Schofield & Mitchell-Jones 2003) 3.7 km, max 6-10 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 2.8 km (Cordes 2004) Whiskered bat NO DATA 2.2 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) Myotis mystacinus 2.8 km (Dietz et al. 2011) Natterer’s bat 4 km (Smith & Racey 2005) NO DATA Myotis nattereri 4 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 4.2 km (Waters et al. 1999) 5.75 km (Waters et al. 1999) Leisler’s bat 4.2 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) 13.4 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) Nyctalus leisleri 4.2 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 17 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 6 km (Schober & Grimmberger 1997) Noctule 6 km (Mackie & Racey 2007) 10 km (Richardson 2000) Nyctalus noctula 4.5 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) 26 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 2.5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) Nathusius’ pipistrelle 6.5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) ? Pipistrellus nathusii 1 - 2 km (Schober & Grimmberger 1997, Davidson- Watts et al. 2006) 5 km (Altringham 2003) Common pipistrelle 3-4 km (Schofield & Mitchell-Jones 2003) 5.1 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) Pipistrellus pipistrellus 1.8 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) 1.5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) Soprano pipistrelle 1.7 km (Harris & Yalden 2008). ? Pipistrellus pygmaeus 1.5 km (Dietz et al. 2011). Brown long-eared bat 0.5 km (Entwistle et al. 1996, Richardson 2000) 3 km (Entwistle et al. 1996, Richardson 2000) Plecotus auritus 500 m (Dietz et al. 2011) 3.3 km (Dietz et al. 2011) Grey long-eared bat 1.1 - 3.3 km (Swift and Racey 1983, Fuhrmann & Maximum 5.5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) Plecotus austriacus Seitz 1992, Fluckiger & Beck 1995) 2.1 km (Duverge & Jones 1994, Jones et al. 1995) 2.1 km (Duverge & Jones 1994, Jones et al. Greater horseshoe bat 6.2 km (Richardson 2000) 1995) Rhinolophus 3-4 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) 14 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) ferrumequinum 2.1 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 0.6 km (Bontadina et al. 2002) Lesser horseshoe bat 2 km (Vaughn et al. 1997, Schofield & Mitchell- 4.2 km (Bontadina et al. 2002) Rhinolophus Jones 2003) 4 km (Harris& Yalden 2008) hipposideros 2.5 km (Harris & Yalden 2008) 5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) 2.5 km (Dietz et al. 2011) ______
- 93 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Table A2. Mean average commuting range of bats native to the UK.
BAT SPECIES AVERAGE RANGE MAXIMUM RANGE Barbastelle 4.5 km 18.km Barbastella barbastellus Serotine 5.5 km 9 km Eptesicus serotinus Bechstein’s bat 0.8 km 1.95 km Myotis bechsteinii Brandt’s bat 2.3 km 10 km Myotis brandtii Daubenton’s bat 4.4 km 10km Myotis daubentonii Whiskered bat ? 2.7 km Myotis mystacinus Natterer’s bat ? 4km Myotis nattereri Leisler’s bat 4.2 km 12.05 km Nyctalus leisleri Noctule 4.75 km 18 km Nyctalus noctula Nathusius’ pipistrelle 6.5 km ? Pipistrellus nathusii Common pipistrelle 2.1 km 5.05 km Pipistrellus pipistrellus Soprano pipistrelle 1.6 km ? Pipistrellus pygmaeus Brown long-eared bat 0.5 km 3.15 km Plecotus auritus Grey long-eared bat 2.2 km 5.5 km Plecotus austriacus Greater horseshoe bat 3.5 km 7km Rhinolophus ferrumequinum Lesser horseshoe bat 1.9 km 4.4 km Rhinolophus hipposideros
Looking at the results 100% of the species has a range of less than 7 km in the UK. Looking deeper, 86% of the species for which an average commuting distance could be calculated have a range of less than 5 km. When the maximum ranges of whiskered and Natterer’s bats, which are also less than 5 km, are added the result is increased to 88%.
It is therefore concluded that a 5 km radius is appropriate for data-searches of historic bat records.
References
Altringham J 2003. British Bats. Collins New Naturalist series No 93, Harper Collins, London.
Bontadina F, Schofield H & Naef-Daenzer B 2002. Radio-tracking reveals that lesser horseshoe bats (Rhinolophus hipposideros) forage in woodland. J. Zool. London, 258: 281- 290. ______
- 94 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Catto C, Hutson A, Racey P & Stephenson P 1996. Foraging behaviour and habitat use of the serotine bat (Eptesicus serotinus) in southern England. J. Zool. London, 238: 623-633.
Cordes B 2004. Kleine Bartfledermaus – Myotis mystacinus. In: Meschede A & Rudolph B (eds) Fledermause in Bayern. Ulmer Verlag. 155-165.
Davidson-Watts I, Walls S & Jones G 2006. Differential habitat selection by Pipistrellus pipistrellus and Pipistrellus pygmaeus identifies distinct conservation needs for cryptic species of echolocating bats. Biological Conservation, 133: 118-127.
Dense C & Rahmel U 2002. Untersuchungen zur Habitatnutzung der GroBen Bartfledermaus (Myotis brandtii) im nordwestlichen Niedersachsen. In: MESCHEDE, A., HELLER, K.-G. & BOYE, P. eds. Okolgie, Wanderungen und Genetik von Fledermausen in Waldern – Untersuchungen als Grundlage fur den Fledermausschutz, 51-68. Munster: Landsirtschaftsverlag.. Cited in: Boye P & Dietz M 2005. Development of good practice guidelines for woodland managements for bats. English Nature Research Reports 661, Peterborough.
Dietz C, Helversen O & Dietmar N 2011. Bats of Britain, Europe & Northwest Africa. A & C Black, London.
Duverge P & Jones G 1994. Greater horseshoe bats – activity, foraging behaviour and habitat use. British Wildlife 6: 69-77.
Encarnacao J, Kierdork U, Holweg D, Jasnoch U & Wolters V 2005. Sex-related differences in roost-site selection by Daubenton's bats Myotis daubentonii during the nursery period. Mammal Review 35: 285–294.
Entwistle A, Racey P & Speakman J 2000. Roost selection by the brown long-eared bat Plecotus auritus. Journal of Applied Ecology, 34: 399-408.
Fitzsimons P, Hill D & Greenaway F 2002. Patterns of habitat use by female Bechstein’s bats (Myotis bechsteinii) from a maternity colony in a British woodland. School of Biological Sciences, University of Sussex.
Fluckiger P & Beck A 1995. Observations on the habitat use for hunting by Plecotus austriacus (Fischer 1829). Myotis 32-33: 121-122.
Fuhrmann M & Seitz A 1992. Nocturnal activity of the brown long-eared bat (Plecotus auritus L. 1758): data from radio-tracking in the Lenneburg Forest near Mainz (Germany) In: Priede I & Swift S (eds.) 1992. Wildlife telemetry: Remote Monitoring and Tracking of Animals. Ellis Horwood, Chichester.
Harris S & Yalden D (eds.) 2008. Mammals of the British Isles: Handbook 4th Edition. The Mammal society, London.
Jones G, Duverge P & Ransome R 1995. Conservation biology of an endangered species: field studies of greater horseshoe bats. Symposium of the Zoological Society of London 67: 309-324. ______
- 95 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Mackie I & Racey P 2007. Habitat use varies with reproductive state in noctule bats (Nyctalus noctula): Implications for conservation. Biological Conservation, 140: 70-77.
Richardson P 1985. Nightly dispersal of Daubenton’s bats (Myotis daubentonii) from a summer roost site. Bat Research News 26(4):71.
Richardson P 2000. Bats. Whittet Books, Suffolk.
Robinson M & Stebbings R 1997. Home range and habitat use by the serotine bat, Eptesicus serotinus, in England. J. Zool. London, 243: 117-136.
Schober W & Grimmberger E 1997. The Bats of Europe & North America. T.F.H. Publications, Inc. U.S.A.
Schofield H & Mitchell-Jones A 2003. The Bats of Britain and Ireland. The Vincent Wildlife Trust, Herefordshire.
Smith P & Racey P 2005. The itinerant Natterer: physical and thermal characteristics of summer roosts of Myotis nattereri (Mammalia: Chiroptera). J. Zool. London, 266: 171-180.
Swift S & Racey P 1983. Resource partitioning in two species of vespertilionid bats (Chiroptera) occupying the same roost. J. Zool. London, 200: 249-259.
Vaughan N, Jones G & Harris S 1997. Habitat use by bats (Chiroptera) assessed by means of a broad-band acoustic method. Journal of Applied Ecology, 34: 716-730.
Waters D, Jones G & Furlong M 1999. Foraging ecology of Leisler’s bat (Nyctalus leisleri) at two sites in southern Britain. J. Zool. London, 249: 173-180.
______
______
- 96 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
APPENDIX B. PLANT SPECIES RECORDED AT THE EAST LEAKE QUARRY EXTENSION PHASE 1 SURVEY SITE OVER 8th SEPTEMBER 2014 BY KATHERINE MURKIN BSc GradCIEEM AND CHRISTY TOLLIDAY BSc MSc.
Acer pseudoplatanus Sycamore Aesculus hippocastanum Horse chestnut Alopecurus myosuroides Black grass Anagallis arvensis Scarlet pimpernel Anisantha sterilis Barren brome Anthriscus sylvestris Cow parsley Apium nodiflorum Fool’s water-cress Arctium minus agg. Burdock Artemisia vulgaris Mugwort Arum maculatum Lords-and-ladies Atriplex patula Common orache Betula pendula Silver birch Brassica napus Rape Buddleja davidii Buddleia Capsella bursa-pastoris Shepherd’s-purse Cardamine hirsuta Hairy bitter-cress Cirsium arvense Creeping thistle Cirsium vulgare Spear thistle Crataegus monogyna Hawthorn Cupressocyparis leylandii Leyland cypress Dactylis glomerata Cock’s-foot Digitalis purpurea Foxglove Elytregia repens Common couch Epilobium hirsutum Great willowherb Equisetum arvense Field horsetail Euphorbia peplus Petty spurge Fagus sylvatica Beech Fallopia convolvulus Black bindweed Fraxinus excelsior Ash Galium aparine Cleavers Geranium dissectum Cut-leaved cranesbill Geranium molle Dove’s-foot cranesbill Hedera helix Ivy Helminthotheca echioides Bristly oxtongue Heracleum sphondylium Hogweed Holcus lanatus Yorkshire-fog Ilex aquifolium Holly Juncus inflexus Hard rush Lamium purpureum Red dead-nettle Lolium perenne Perennial rye-grass Malus sylvestris Crab-apple Matricaria recutita Scented mayweed Papaver rhoeas Common poppy Persicaria maculosa Redshank Phleum pratense Timothy Pinus sylvestris Scots pine Pisum sativum Garden pea Plantago major Greater plantain Poa annua Annual meadow-grass Poa trivialis Rough meadow-grass Polygonum aviculare Knotgrass Populus tremula Aspen Prunella vulgaris Selfheal Prunus avium Wild cherry ______
- 97 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Prunus laurocerasus Cherry-laurel Prunus spinosa Blackthorn Pteridium aquilinum Bracken Quercus sp. Oak sp. Quercus robur Pedunculate oak Ranunculus ficaria Lesser celandine Ranunculus repens Creeping buttercup Rubus fruticosus agg. Bramble Rumex obtusifolius Broad-leaved dock Salix cinerea Grey willow Salix fragilis Crack willow Salix alba White willow Sambucus nigra Elder Schedonorus arundinacea Tall fescue Senecio jacobea Ragwort Senecio vulgaris Groundsel Solanum nigrum Black nightshade Sonchus arvensis Perennial sow-thistle Symphoricarpus albus Snowberry Taraxacum officinale Dandelion Teucrium scorodonia Wood sage Trifolium repens White clover Tripleurospermum inodorum Scentless mayweed Ulmus procera English elm Urtica dioica Stinging nettle Urtica urens Annual nettle Veronica persica Common speedwell Viola arvensis Field pansy
______
______
- 98 - ©AEcol 2014
CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
APPENDIX C. RESULTS OF HEDGEROW ASSESSMENT AT THE EAST LEAKE QUARRY EXTENSION PHASE 1 SURVEY SITE.
Table C1. The location of hedgerows within the East Leake Quarry Extension Phase 1 survey site and their respective Hedgerow reference number.
______
- 99 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Table C1. Hedgerow assessment at East Leake Quarry Extension Phase 1 survey site, according to criteria set out within the Hedgerow Regulations 1997.
IMPORTANT UK BAP WOODY WOODLAND UNDER No. FORM SPEC DESCRIPTION FEATURES PRIORITY SPECIES PLANTS HEDGEROW HABITAT REGULATIONS Hawthorn Crataegus monogyna L 430 m dominant, with blackthorn Prunus spinosa, elder Sambucus nigra and <10% gaps W Hedge H 2 – 5 m bramble Rubus fruticosus agg. Southern 3 0 No Yes Connections half is well maintained at c. 2 m height, W 2 m northern half poorly maintained at c. 5 m in height. L 200 m Hawthorn dominant, with blackthorn, elder, bramble and ivy Hedera helix. <10% gaps Hedge with H 5 m N1 Trees: aspen Populus tremula to c. 8 m, 4 0 Standard trees No Yes trees W 4 m apple Malus sp. to c. 9 m and ash to c. 12 Connections m height. Hawthorn dominant with elder. Trees: L 330 m <10% gaps Hedge with ash to c. 12 m, pedunculate oak Quercus N2 H 2 m 4 0 Standard trees No Yes trees robur to c. 8 m, crack willow Salix Connections W 2 m fragilis to c. 12 m height. L 310 m Hawthorn and blackthorn dominant, with English elm Ulmus procera and elder. Standard trees Hedge with N3 H 5 m Trees: grey willow Salix cinerea to c. 8 5 0 Ditch Yes No trees m, crack willow to c. 10 m and ash Connections W 2 m Fraxinus excelsior to c. 10 m height. L 27 m <10% gaps N4 Hedge H 1.5 m Hawthorn and blackthorn dominant. 2 0 No Yes Ditch W 1 m L 64 m Hawthorn and blackthorn dominant with N5 Defunct hedge H 1.5 m 2 0 Ditch No No elder. W 1 m
______
- 100 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
IMPORTANT UK BAP WOODY WOODLAND UNDER No. FORM SPEC DESCRIPTION FEATURES PRIORITY SPECIES PLANTS HEDGEROW HABITAT REGULATIONS L 103 m Hawthorn and blackthorn dominant with Hedge with <10% gaps N6 H 4 m English elm, elder and bramble. Trees to 3 0 No Yes trees Ditch W 1.5 m c. 6 m height. L 98 m Hawthorn dominant with English elm, Hedge with <10% gaps N7 H 8 m elder and bramble. Trees to c. 8 m 2 0 No Yes trees Ditch height. W 2 m L 227 m Hawthorn dominant with elm and elder. Hedge with 1.5 – 4 <10% gaps E1 H Horse chestnut Aesculus hippocastanum 3 0 No Yes trees m Standard trees trees to c. 6 m height. W 1 m L 100 m Lord’s-and- Hedge with E2 H 1 m English elm, elder and ivy. 2 ladies Arum <10% gaps No Yes trees W 1 m maculatum. L 90 m E3 Hedge H 3 m Leyland cypress Cupressus x leylandii. 0 0 <10% gaps No No W 2 m Butterfly bush Buddleja davidii, L 110 m snowberry Symphoricarpus albus, hawthorn, holly, Leyland cypress, cherry Hedge with laurel Prunus laurocerasus. Horse <10% gaps E4 H 10 m 4 0 No No trees chestnut trees to c. 6 m, grey willow to c. Standard trees 10 m, Scots pine Pinus sylvestris to c. 4 W 3 m m, wild cherry Prunus avium to c. 10 m height. L 190 m Hawthorn (to c. 4 m) and bramble dominant with hazel Corylus avellana, E5 Defunct hedge H N/A elder and ivy. Pedunculate oak trees to c. 5 0 Standard trees No No 8 m, horse chestnut to c. 7 m and ash to W N/A c. 11 m height. ______
- 101 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
IMPORTANT UK BAP WOODY WOODLAND UNDER No. FORM SPEC DESCRIPTION FEATURES PRIORITY SPECIES PLANTS HEDGEROW HABITAT REGULATIONS L 140 m Hawthorn, horse chestnut, elm, sycamore Hedge with <10% gaps E6 H 2.5 m Acer pseudoplantus, elder, bramble and 4 0 No Yes trees Standard trees W 2 m ivy. Ash trees to c. 10 m height. L 83 m Horse chestnut, holly Ilex aquifolium, Hedge with 3 – 15 beech Fagus sylvatica, pedunculate oak <10% gaps E7 H 6 0 Yes Yes trees m and sycamore trees over hawthorn, elder Standard trees and ivy. W 3 m L 58 m Tree line. Copper beech Fagus sylvatica Hedge with <10% gaps E8 H 5 – 8 m f. purpurea, cherry, beech, ash and silver 5 0 No Yes trees Standard trees W 1 m birch Betula pendula. L 60 m Hedge with <10% gaps E9 H 2 m Hawthorn dominant with elm and ivy. 2 0 No Yes trees Standard trees W 1 m L 780 m Hawthorn dominant with beech, Hedge with Lord’s-and- <10% gaps S H 3 m sycamore, elder and ivy. Horse chestnut 3 No Yes trees ladies. Standard trees W 1- 2 m to c. 10 m height. Note: L = Length; H = Height; W = Width.
______
______
- 102 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
APPENDIX D. SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AT THE EAST LEAKE QUARRY EXTENSION SITE.
Table D1. Summary of impacts resulting from permanent loss of habitats and features within the East Leake Quarry extension site.
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Loss of c. 0.03 ha of habitat for a suite Loss of habitat for a suite of of common and widespread common and widespread invertebrate species, potentially invertebrate species: including up to five UK BAP Priority Although no tall ruderal Potentially including up to five UK Species of moths. Probable that negative effect Permanent loss of c. habitat is envisaged within BAP Priority Species of moths. Magnitude: Low on conservation status at a 0.03 ha of C3.1 – Tall the restoration scheme, this Effect on conservation status: Zone of Influence scale not herb and fern / Other / is a common habitat type Tall ruderal habitat is common Negative (Direct) significant in long or short- Tall ruderal present throughout the throughout the wider countryside and Certainty: Probable term. wider landscape. supports a variety of common and Level of significant negative effect: widespread invertebrates, Zone of Influence only predominantly moths. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent loss) Reversibility: Probable Extent: Loss of habitat for a suite of Loss of c. 27.8 ha of habitat for a suite common and widespread of common and widespread Although no like-for-like invertebrate species: invertebrate species, potentially mitigation strategy is Potentially including up to 35 UK including up to 35 UK BAP Priority proposed, the inclusion of Probable that negative effect Permanent loss of c. BAP Priority Species. Species. a maximum of c. 11.97 ha on conservation status at a 27.8 ha of J1.1 – Magnitude: High of arable within the Local and Zone of Influence Miscellaneous / Arable habitat is common throughout Effect on conservation status: restoration scheme may scale not significant in long- Cultivated/disturbed / the wider countryside. The Negative (Direct) mitigate for the loss to term, but may be in short- Arable homogenous nature of arable land Certainty: Certain/near certain some extent. However, term. and the application of agrochemicals Level of significant negative effect: arable is common and will, in most cases, limit the potential Local and Zone of Influence widespread both locally invertebrate assemblage to common Duration of effect: and nationally. and widespread generalist species. Long-term (life of Quarry) Reversibility: Probable ______
- 103 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Loss of c. 27.8 ha of habitat for a suite of common and widespread breeding Although no like-for-like Loss of habitat for a suite of and/or wintering bird species, mitigation strategy is common and widespread breeding potentially including up to 19 UK BAP proposed, the inclusion of and/or wintering bird species: Probable that negative effect Priority Species. a maximum of c. 11.97 ha Potentially including up to 19 UK on conservation status at a Magnitude: High of arable within the BAP Priority Species. Local and Zone of Influence Effect on conservation status: restoration scheme may scale not significant in long- Negative (Direct) mitigate for the loss to All wild birds and their occupied term, but may be in short- Certainty: Certain/near certain some extent. However, nests are legally protected under the term. Level of significant negative effect: arable is common and Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Local and Zone of Influence widespread both locally Permanent loss of c. as amended). Duration of effect: and nationally. 27.8 ha of J1.1 – Long-term (life of Quarry) Miscellaneous / Reversibility: Probable Cultivated/disturbed / Extent: Arable Loss of c. 27.8 ha of habitat for two UK Although no like-for-like Loss of habitat for two mammal BAP Priority Species of mammal; mitigation strategy is species; brown hare and brown hare and potentially harvest proposed, the inclusion of potentially harvest mouse: mouse. Probable that negative effect a maximum of c. 11.97 ha Harvest mouse and brown hare are Magnitude: High on conservation status at a of arable within the UK BAP Priority Species. Effect on conservation status: Local and Zone of Influence restoration scheme may Negative (Direct) scale not significant in long- mitigate for the loss to Arable habitat is common throughout Certainty: Certain/near certain term, but may be in short- some extent. However, the wider countryside and the loss of Level of significant negative effect: term. arable is common and 27.8 ha is unlikely to have a major Local and Zone of Influence widespread both locally impact. Duration of effect: and nationally. Long-term (life of Quarry) Reversibility: Probable
______
- 104 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Loss of potentially suitable foraging habitat for one bat species; noctule: Noctule is a UK BAP Priority Extent: Species. Loss of c. 27.8 ha of potentially Although no like-for-like suitable foraging habitat for one UK mitigation strategy is All bat species are legally protected BAP Priority Species of bat; noctule. proposed, the inclusion of Probable that negative effect Permanent loss of c. under the Wildlife & Countryside Act Magnitude: High a maximum of c. 11.97 ha on conservation status at a 27.8 ha of J1.1 – 1981 (& as amended) and The Effect on conservation status: of arable within the Local and Zone of Influence Miscellaneous / Conservation of Habitats and Species Negative (Direct) restoration scheme may scale not significant in long- Cultivated/disturbed / Regulations 2010. Certainty: Certain/near certain mitigate for the loss to term, but may be in short- Arable Level of significant negative effect: some extent. However, term. Arable habitat is common throughout Local and Zone of Influence arable is common and the wider countryside. The Duration of effect: widespread both locally homogenous nature of arable land Long-term (life of Quarry) and nationally. and the application of agrochemicals Reversibility: Probable will, in most cases, limit the potential invertebrate assemblage for foraging noctule.
Extent: This small loss will be Loss of c. 4 m of one UK BAP and one mitigated for by the Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority planting of c. 1250 m of Habitats. Permanent loss of c. 4 hedgerows (which will Magnitude: Negligible Probable that negative effect m of J2.3.2 – Loss of one UK BAP and one qualify as these Priority Effect on conservation status: on conservation status at a Miscellaneous / Nottinghamshire Local BAP Habitats) within the Negative (Direct) Zone of Influence scale not Boundaries / Hedge Priority Habitats: restoration. In addition, c. Certainty: Certain/near certain significant in long or short- with trees / Species- ‘Hedgerows’. 1905 m of hedgerows Level of significant negative effect: term. poor (which also qualify as Zone of Influence only these Priority Habitats) Duration of effect: will be retained within the Long-term (life of Quarry) working scheme. Reversibility: Probable
______
- 105 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Loss of habitat for a suite of Loss of c. 4 m of habitat for a suite of This small loss will be common and widespread common and widespread invertebrate mitigated for by the invertebrate species: species, potentially including up to 25 planting of c. 1250 m of Potentially including up to 25 UK UK BAP Priority Species. hedgerows (which will Probable that negative effect BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Negligible qualify as these Priority on conservation status at a Effect on conservation status: Habitats) within the Zone of Influence scale not The hedgerows present within the Negative (Direct) restoration. In addition, c. significant in long or short- extension site are generally species- Certainty: Certain/near certain 1905 m of hedgerows term. poor and are therefore likely to Level of significant negative effect: (which also qualify as support a limited assemblage of Zone of Influence only these Priority Habitats) Permanent loss of c. 4 common and widespread Duration of effect: will be retained within the m of J2.3.2 – invertebrates, predominantly moths. Long-term (life of Quarry) working scheme. Miscellaneous / Reversibility: Probable Boundaries / Hedge Extent: with trees / Species- Loss of c. 4 m of potentially suitable This small loss will be poor terrestrial habitat for one UK BAP mitigated for by the Priority Species of amphibian; common planting of c. 1250 m of toad. hedgerows (which will Loss of potentially suitable Probable that negative effect Magnitude: Negligible qualify as these Priority terrestrial habitat for one on conservation status at a Effect on conservation status: Habitats) within the amphibian species; common toad: Zone of Influence scale not Negative (Direct) restoration. In addition, c. Common toad is a UK BAP Priority significant in long or short- Certainty: Certain/near certain 1905 m of hedgerows Species. term. Level of significant negative effect: (which also qualify as Zone of Influence only these Priority Habitats) Duration of effect: will be retained within the Long-term (life of Quarry) working scheme. Reversibility: Probable
______
- 106 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Loss of c. 4 m of potentially suitable This small loss will be Loss of potentially suitable habitat habitat for two legally protected and mitigated for by the for two reptile species; slow-worm UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; planting of c. 1250 m of and grass snake: slow-worm and grass snake. hedgerows (which will Slow-worm and grass snake are UK Probable that negative effect Magnitude: Negligible qualify as these Priority BAP Priority Species. on conservation status at a Effect on conservation status: Habitats) within the Zone of Influence scale not Negative (Direct) restoration. In addition, c. Both species are legally protected significant in long or short- Certainty: Certain/near certain 1905 m of hedgerows against intentional and reckless term. Level of significant negative effect: (which also qualify as killing or injuring under the Wildlife Zone of Influence only these Priority Habitats) & Countryside Act 1981 (& as Duration of effect: will be retained within the amended). Permanent loss of c. 4 Long-term (life of Quarry) working scheme. m of J2.3.2 – Reversibility: Probable Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedge Loss of habitat for a suite of Extent: common and widespread breeding Loss of c. 4 m of habitat for a suite of with trees / Species- This small loss will be and/or wintering bird species: common and widespread breeding poor mitigated for by the Potentially including up to 11 UK and/or wintering bird species, planting of c. 1250 m of BAP Priority Species. potentially including up to 11 UK BAP hedgerows (which will Priority Species. Probable that negative effect qualify as these Priority All wild birds and their occupied Magnitude: Negligible on conservation status at a Habitats) within the nests are legally protected under the Effect on conservation status: Zone of Influence scale not restoration. In addition, c. Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Negative (Direct) significant in long or short- 1905 m of hedgerows as amended). Certainty: Certain/near certain term. (which also qualify as Level of significant negative effect: these Priority Habitats) The small amount of habitat loss is Zone of Influence only will be retained within the unlikely to have a high negative Duration of effect: working scheme. impact on breeding and wintering Long-term (life of Quarry) birds. Reversibility: Probable
______
- 107 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Loss of habitat for four mammal species; brown hares and Extent: potentially harvest mice, Loss of c. 4 m of habitat for four legally This small loss will be hedgehogs and badgers: protected or UK BAP Priority Species mitigated for by the Harvest mice, brown hares and of mammal; brown hare and potentially planting of c. 1250 m of hedgehogs are UK BAP Priority harvest mouse, hedgehog and badger. hedgerows (which will Probable that negative effect Species. Magnitude: Negligible qualify as these Priority on conservation status at a Effect on conservation status: Habitats) within the Zone of Influence scale not Badgers and their occupied setts are Negative (Direct) restoration. In addition, c. significant in long or short- legally protected under the Certainty: Certain/near certain 1905 m of hedgerows term. Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Level of significant negative effect: (which also qualify as Zone of Influence only these Priority Habitats) The small amount of habitat loss is Duration of effect: will be retained within the unlikely to have a high negative Long-term (life of Quarry) working scheme. Permanent loss of c. 4 impact on brown hares, or hedgehogs Reversibility: Probable m of J2.3.2 – and badgers if present. Miscellaneous / Loss of potentially suitable Boundaries / Hedge Extent: foraging and/or commuting habitat with trees / Species- Loss of c. 4 m of potentially suitable for a suite of common and poor foraging and/or commuting habitat for a This small loss will be widespread bat species: suite of common and widespread bat mitigated for by the Potentially including one UK BAP species, potentially including one UK planting of c. 1250 m of Priority Species; soprano pipistrelle. BAP Priority Species of bat; soprano hedgerows (which will Probable that negative effect pipistrelle. qualify as these Priority All bat species are legally protected on conservation status at a Magnitude: Negligible Habitats) within the under the Wildlife & Countryside Act Zone of Influence scale not Effect on conservation status: restoration. In addition, c. 1981 (& as amended) and The significant in long or short- Negative (Direct) 1905 m of hedgerows Conservation of Habitats and Species term. Certainty: Certain/near certain (which also qualify as Regulations 2010. Level of significant negative effect: these Priority Habitats)
Zone of Influence only will be retained within the A gap of up to 10 m in a hedgerow is Duration of effect: working scheme. unlikely to deter bats from utilising Long-term (life of Quarry) the hedgerow as a commuting route Reversibility: Probable (H. Andrews Pers. comm.).
Note: UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) Priority Habitats and Species. ______
- 108 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Table D2. Summary of impacts resulting from temporary loss of habitats and features within the East Leake Quarry extension site.
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Temporary loss of c. Loss of one c. 0.01 ha of improved 0.01 ha of B4 – grassland: N/A N/A N/A Grassland and marsh / No conservation status. Improved grassland
Extent: This small temporary loss Loss of habitat for a suite of Loss of c. 2.99 ha of habitat for a will be reinstated common and widespread suite of common and widespread following mineral invertebrate species: invertebrate species, potentially extraction and restoration. Potentially including up to 35 UK including up to 35 UK BAP Priority In addition, the restoration Temporary loss of c. BAP Priority Species. Species. Probable that negative effect on scheme envisages the 2.99 ha J1.1 – Magnitude: Low conservation status at Zone of creation of a maximum of Miscellaneous / Arable habitat is common throughout Effect on conservation status: Influence scale not significant c. 11.97 ha of arable land. Cultivated/disturbed / the wider countryside. The Negative (Direct) in long-term, but may be in There will therefore be no Arable homogenous nature of arable land Certainty: Probable short-term. net loss of this habitat and the application of agrochemicals Level of significant negative effect: within the extension site will, in most cases, limit the potential Zone of Influence only and arable land is present invertebrate assemblage to common Duration of effect: throughout the wider and widespread generalist species. Long-term (life of Quarry) locale. Reversibility: Probable
______
- 109 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: This small temporary loss Loss of c. 2.99 ha of habitat for a will be reinstated suite of common and widespread Loss of habitat for a suite of following mineral breeding and/or wintering bird common and widespread breeding extraction and restoration. species, potentially including up to and/or wintering bird species: In addition, the restoration 19 UK BAP Priority Species. Probable that negative effect on Potentially including up to 19 UK scheme envisages the Magnitude: Low conservation status at Zone of BAP Priority Species. creation of a maximum of Effect on conservation status: Influence scale not significant c. 11.97 ha of arable land. Negative (Direct) in long-term, but may be in All wild birds and their occupied There will therefore be no Certainty: Probable short-term. nests are legally protected under the net loss of this habitat Level of significant negative effect: Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& within the extension site Zone of Influence only as amended). and arable land is present Duration of effect: throughout the wider Long-term (life of Quarry) Temporary loss of c. locale. 2.99 ha J1.1 – Reversibility: Probable Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed / Extent: This small temporary loss Arable Loss of c. 2.99 ha of habitat for two will be reinstated Loss of habitat for two mammal UK BAP Priority Species of following mineral species; brown hare and mammal; brown hare and potentially extraction and restoration. potentially harvest mouse: harvest mouse. In addition, the restoration Probable that negative effect on Harvest mouse and brown hare are Magnitude: Low scheme envisages the conservation status at Zone of UK BAP Priority Species. Effect on conservation status: creation of a maximum of Influence scale not significant Negative (Direct) c. 11.97 ha of arable land. in long-term, but may be in Arable habitat is widely available in Certainty: Probable There will therefore be no short-term. the locality and the temporary loss of Level of significant negative effect: net loss of this habitat 2.99 ha is unlikely to have a major Zone of Influence only within the extension site impact. Duration of effect: and arable land is present Long-term (life of Quarry) throughout the wider Reversibility: Probable locale.
______
- 110 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Loss of potentially suitable foraging habitat for one bat species; noctule: This small temporary loss Extent: Noctule is a UK BAP Priority will be reinstated Loss of c. 2.99 ha of potentially Species. following mineral suitable foraging habitat for one UK extraction and restoration. BAP Priority Species of bat; noctule. All bat species are legally protected In addition, the restoration Temporary loss of c. Magnitude: Low Probable that negative effect on under the Wildlife & Countryside Act scheme envisages the 2.99 ha J1.1 – Effect on conservation status: conservation status at Zone of 1981 (& as amended) and The creation of a maximum of Miscellaneous / Negative (Direct) Influence scale not significant Conservation of Habitats and Species c. 11.97 ha of arable land. Cultivated/disturbed / Certainty: Probable in long-term, but may be in Regulations 2010. There will therefore be no Arable Level of significant negative effect: short-term. net loss of this habitat Zone of Influence only Arable habitat is common throughout within the extension site Duration of effect: the landscape. The homogenous and arable land is present Long-term (life of Quarry) nature of arable land and application throughout the wider Reversibility: Probable of agrochemicals will, in most cases, locale. limit the potential invertebrate assemblage for foraging noctule.
Note: UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) Priority Habitats and Species.
______
- 111 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Table D3. Summary of impacts resulting from the retention of habitats and features within the East Leake Quarry extension site.
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Retain c. 0.24 ha of B4 Retain c. 0.24 ha of improved – Grassland and marsh grassland: N/A N/A N/A / Improved grassland No conservation status.
Extent: Retain c. 0.37 ha of habitat for a Retain habitat for a suite of suite of common and widespread common and widespread invertebrate species, potentially invertebrate species: including up to five UK BAP Retain c. 0.37 ha of Potentially including up to five UK Priority Species. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant C3.1 – Tall herb and BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: High compensation, or positive effect on conservation fern / Other / Tall Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Zone of Influence ruderal Tall ruderal habitat is suitable for a Positive (Indirect) required. scale in short- and long-term. suite of common and widespread Certainty: Probable invertebrate species, predominantly Level of significant positive effect: moths and butterflies. Zone of Influence only Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 112 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Retain habitat for a suite of Retain c. 9.56 ha of habitat for a common and widespread suite of common and widespread invertebrate species: invertebrate species, potentially Potentially including up to 35 UK including up to 35 UK BAP Priority BAP Priority Species. Species. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Magnitude: High compensation, or positive effect on conservation Arable habitat is suitable for a suite Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Zone of Influence of common and widespread Positive (Indirect) required. scale in short- and long-term. invertebrate species, although the Certainty: Probable potential number of invertebrates Level of significant positive effect: decreases with the application of Zone of Influence only agrochemicals. Duration of effect: Retain c. 9.56 ha of J1.1 Long-term (Permanent retention) – Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed Extent: land / Arable Retain c. 9.56 ha of habitat for a Loss of habitat for a suite of suite of common and widespread common and widespread breeding breeding and/or wintering bird and/or wintering bird species: species, potentially including up to Potentially including up to 19 UK 19 UK BAP Priority Species. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: High compensation, or positive effect on conservation Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Zone of Influence All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Indirect) required. level in short- and long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Probable Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). Zone of Influence only Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 113 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Retain c. 9.56 ha of habitat for two UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare and harvest Retain habitat for two mammal mouse. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant species; brown hare and Magnitude: High compensation, or positive effect on conservation potentially harvest mouse: Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Zone of Influence Harvest mouse and brown hare are Positive (Indirect) required. scale in short- and long-term. UK BAP Priority Species. Certainty: Probable Level of significant positive effect: Zone of Influence only Duration of effect: Retain c. 9.56 ha of J1.1 Long-term (Permanent retention) – Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed land / Arable Extent: Retain potentially suitable foraging Retain c. 9.56 ha of potentially habitat for one bat species; suitable foraging habitat for one UK noctule: BAP Priority Species of bat; noctule. Noctule is a UK BAP Priority Magnitude: High No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Species. Effect on conservation status: compensation, or positive effect on conservation
Positive (Indirect) enhancement measures status at a Zone of Influence All bat species are legally protected Certainty: Probable required. scale in short- and long-term. under the Wildlife & Countryside Act Level of significant positive effect: 1981 (& as amended) and The Zone of Influence only Conservation of Habitats and Species Duration of effect: Regulations 2010. Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 114 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Retain c. 420 m of one UK BAP and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat. Probable to have a significant Retain one UK BAP and one Magnitude: Very High No mitigation, positive effect on conservation Nottinghamshire Local Priority Effect on conservation status: compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Habitat: Positive (Indirect) enhancement measures Influence scale in short- and ‘Hedgerows’. Certainty: Probable required. long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention) Retain c. 420 m of J2.1.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Intact Extent: hedge / Species-poor Retain habitat for a suite of Retain c. 420 m of habitat for a suite common and widespread of common and widespread invertebrate species: invertebrate species, potentially Potentially including up to 25 UK including up to 25 UK BAP Priority Probable to have a significant BAP Priority Species. Species. No mitigation, positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of The hedgerows present within the Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Influence scale in short- and extension site are likely to support an Positive (Indirect) required. long-term. assemblage of common and Certainty: Probable widespread invertebrates, Level of significant positive effect: predominantly including UK BAP Local and Zone of Influence Priority Species of moths. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 115 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Retain c. 420 m of potentially suitable terrestrial habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of amphibian; Retain potentially suitable common toad. Probable to have a significant No mitigation, terrestrial habitat for one Magnitude: Very High positive effect on conservation compensation, or amphibian species; common toad: Effect on conservation status: status at a Local and Zone of enhancement measures Common toad is a UK BAP Priority Positive (Indirect) Influence scale in short- and required. Species. Certainty: Probable long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Retain c. 420 m of Long-term (Permanent retention) J2.1.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Intact Extent: hedge / Species-poor Retain c. 420 m of potentially Retain potentially suitable habitat suitable habitat for two legally for two reptile species; slow-worm protected and UK BAP Priority and grass snake: Species of reptile; slow-worm and Slow-worm and grass snake are UK Probable to have a significant grass snake. No mitigation, BAP Priority Species. positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Both species are legally protected Influence scale in short- and Positive (Indirect) required. against intentional and reckless long-term. Certainty: Probable killing or injuring under the Wildlife Level of significant positive effect: & Countryside Act 1981 (& as Local and Zone of Influence amended). Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 116 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Retain c. 420 m of habitat for a suite Retain habitat for a suite of of common and widespread breeding common and widespread breeding and wintering bird species, and wintering bird species: potentially including up to 10 UK Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 10 UK BAP Priority Species. No mitigation, positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Influence scale in short- and All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Indirect) required. long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Probable Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Retain c. 420 m of Long-term (Permanent retention) J2.1.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Intact hedge / Species-poor Extent: Retain c. 420 m of habitat for four Retain habitat for four mammal legally protected or UK BAP Priority species; brown hare and Species of mammal; brown hare and potentially harvest mouse, potentially harvest mouse, hedgehog hedgehog and badger: Probable to have a significant and badger. No mitigation, Harvest mouse, brown hare and positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High compensation, or hedgehog are UK BAP Priority status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Species. Influence scale in short- and Positive (Indirect) required. long-term. Certainty: Probable Badgers and their occupied setts are Level of significant positive effect: legally protected under the Local and Zone of Influence Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 117 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Retain c. 420 m of potentially Retain potentially suitable foraging suitable foraging and/or commuting and/or commuting and/or roosting and/or roosting habitat for a suite of habitat for a suite of common and common and widespread bat species, widespread bat species: potentially including one UK BAP Potentially including one UK BAP Probable to have a significant Retain c. 420 m of Priority Species of bat; soprano No mitigation, Priority Species; soprano pipistrelle. positive effect on conservation J2.1.2 – Miscellaneous / pipistrelle. compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Boundaries / Intact Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures All bat species and their roosts are Influence scale in short- and hedge / Species-poor Effect on conservation status: required. legally protected under the Wildlife long-term. Positive (Indirect) & Countryside Act 1981 (& as Certainty: Probable amended) and The Conservation of Level of significant positive effect: Habitats and Species Regulations Local and Zone of Influence 2010. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
Extent: Retain habitat for a suite of Retain c. 180 m of habitat for a suite common and widespread of common and widespread invertebrate species: invertebrate species, potentially Potentially including up to 24 UK including up to 24 UK BAP Priority Probable to have a significant Retain c. 180 m of BAP Priority Species. Species. No mitigation, positive effect on conservation J2.2.2 – Miscellaneous / Magnitude: Very High compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Boundaries / Defunct The hedgerows present within the Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Influence scale in short- and hedge / Species-poor extension site are likely to support an Positive (Indirect) required. long-term. assemblage of common and Certainty: Probable widespread invertebrates, Level of significant positive effect: predominantly including UK BAP Local and Zone of Influence Priority Species of moths. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 118 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Retain c. 180 m of potentially suitable terrestrial habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of amphibian; Retain potentially suitable common toad. Probable to have a significant No mitigation, terrestrial habitat for one Magnitude: Very High positive effect on conservation compensation, or amphibian species; common toad: Effect on conservation status: status at a Local and Zone of enhancement measures Common toad is a UK BAP Priority Positive (Indirect) Influence scale in short- and required. Species. Certainty: Probable long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Retain c. 180 m of Long-term (Permanent retention) J2.2.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Defunct hedge / Species-poor Extent: Retain potentially suitable habitat Retain c. 180 m of potentially for two reptile species; slow-worm suitable habitat for two UK BAP and grass snake: Priority Species of reptile; slow- Slow-worm and grass snake are UK worm and grass snake. Probable to have a significant No mitigation, BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High positive effect on conservation compensation, or Effect on conservation status: status at a Local and Zone of enhancement measures Both species are legally protected Positive (Indirect) Influence scale in short- and required. against intentional and reckless Certainty: Probable long-term. killing or injuring under the Wildlife Level of significant positive effect: & Countryside Act 1981 (& as Local and Zone of Influence amended). Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 119 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Retain c. 180 m of habitat for a suite Retain habitat for a suite of of common and widespread breeding common and widespread breeding and wintering bird species, and wintering bird species: potentially including up to 10 UK Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 10 UK BAP Priority Species. No mitigation, positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Influence scale in short- and All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Indirect) required. long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Probable Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). Local and Zone of Influence Retain c. 180 m of Duration of effect: J2.2.2 – Miscellaneous / Long-term (Permanent retention) Boundaries / Defunct hedge / Species-poor Extent: Retain c. 180 m of habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; brown hare. Probable to have a significant Retain habitat for one mammal Magnitude: Very High No mitigation, positive effect on conservation species; brown hare: Effect on conservation status: compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Brown hare is a UK BAP Priority Positive (Indirect) enhancement measures Influence scale in short- and Species. Certainty: Probable required. long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 120 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Retain c. 180 m of potentially Retain potentially suitable foraging suitable foraging and/or commuting and/or commuting and/or roosting and/or roosting habitat for a suite of habitat for a suite of common and common and widespread bat species, widespread bat species: potentially including one UK BAP Potentially including one UK BAP Probable to have a significant Retain c. 180 m of Priority Species of bat; soprano No mitigation, Priority Species; soprano pipistrelle. positive effect on conservation J2.2.2 – Miscellaneous / pipistrelle. compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Boundaries / Defunct Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures All bat species and their roosts are Influence scale in short- and hedge / Species-poor Effect on conservation status: required. legally protected under the Wildlife long-term. Positive (Indirect) & Countryside Act 1981 (& as Certainty: Probable amended) and The Conservation of Level of significant positive effect: Habitats and Species Regulations Local and Zone of Influence 2010. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
Extent: Retain c. 1485 m of one UK BAP and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat. Retain c. 1485 m of Probable to have a significant Retain one UK BAP and one Magnitude: Very High No mitigation, J2.3.2 – Miscellaneous / positive effect on conservation Nottinghamshire Local BAP Effect on conservation status: compensation, or Boundaries / Hedge status at a Local and Zone of Priority Habitat: Positive (Indirect) enhancement measures with trees / Species- Influence scale in short- and ‘Hedgerows’. Certainty: Probable required. poor long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 121 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Retain habitat for a suite of Retain c. 1485 m of habitat for a common and widespread suite of common and widespread invertebrate species: invertebrate species, potentially Potentially including up to 25 UK including up to 25 UK BAP Priority Probable to have a significant BAP Priority Species. Species. No mitigation, positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of The hedgerows present within the Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Influence scale in short- and extension site are likely to support an Positive (Indirect) required. long-term. assemblage of common and Certainty: Probable widespread invertebrates, Level of significant positive effect: predominantly including UK BAP Local and Zone of Influence Retain c. 1485 m of Priority Species of moths. Duration of effect: J2.3.2 – Miscellaneous / Long-term (Permanent retention) Boundaries / Hedge with trees / Species- poor Extent: Retain c. 1485 m of potentially suitable terrestrial habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of amphibian; Retain potentially suitable common toad. Probable to have a significant No mitigation, terrestrial habitat for one Magnitude: Very High positive effect on conservation compensation, or amphibian species; common toad: Effect on conservation status: status at a Local and Zone of enhancement measures Common toad is a UK BAP Priority Positive (Indirect) Influence scale in short- and required. Species. Certainty: Probable long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 122 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Retain c. 1485 m of potentially Retain potentially suitable habitat suitable habitat for two legally for two reptile species; slow-worm protected and UK BAP Priority and grass snake: Species of reptile; slow-worm and Slow-worm and grass snake are UK Probable to have a significant grass snake. No mitigation, BAP Priority Species. positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Both species are legally protected Influence scale in short- and Positive (Indirect) required. against intentional and reckless long-term. Certainty: Probable killing or injuring under the Wildlife Level of significant positive effect: & Countryside Act 1981 (& as Local and Zone of Influence amended). Duration of effect: Retain c. 1485 m of Long-term (Permanent retention) J2.3.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedge with trees / Species- poor Extent: Retain c. 1485 m of habitat for a Retain habitat for a suite of suite of common and widespread common and widespread breeding breeding and wintering bird species, and wintering bird species: potentially including up to 11 UK Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 11 UK BAP Priority Species. No mitigation, positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Influence scale in short- and All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Indirect) required. long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Probable Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 123 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Retain c. 1485 m for four legally Retain habitat for four mammal protected or UK BAP Priority species; brown hare and Species of mammal; brown hare and potentially harvest mouse, potentially harvest mouse, hedgehog hedgehog and badger: Probable to have a significant and badger. No mitigation, Harvest mouse, brown hare and positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High compensation, or hedgehog are UK BAP Priority status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Species. Influence scale in short- and Positive (Indirect) required. long-term. Certainty: Probable Badgers and their occupied setts are Level of significant positive effect: legally protected under the Local and Zone of Influence Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Duration of effect: Retain c. 1485 m of Long-term (Permanent retention) J2.3.2 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedge Extent: with trees / Species- Retain c. 1485 m of potentially Retain potentially suitable foraging poor suitable foraging and/or commuting and/or commuting and/or foraging and/or roosting habitat for a suite of habitat for a suite of common and common and widespread bat species, widespread bat species: potentially including one UK BAP Potentially including one UK BAP Probable to have a significant Priority Species of bat; soprano No mitigation, Priority Species; soprano pipistrelle. positive effect on conservation pipistrelle. compensation, or status at a Local and Zone of Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures All bat species and their roosts are Influence scale in short- and Effect on conservation status: required. legally protected under the Wildlife long-term. Positive (Indirect) & Countryside Act 1981 (& as Certainty: Probable amended) and The Conservation of Level of significant positive effect: Habitats and Species Regulations Local and Zone of Influence 2010. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent retention)
______
- 124 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Retain potentially suitable Extent: commuting habitat for one reptile Retain c. 700 m of potentially species; grass snake: suitable commuting habitat for one Grass snake is a UK BAP Priority legally protected and UK BAP Species. Priority Species of reptile; grass Probable to have a significant snake. No mitigation, Grass snakes are legally protected positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High compensation, or against intentional and reckless status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures killing or injuring under the Wildlife Influence scale in short- and Positive (Indirect) required. & Countryside Act 1981 (& as long-term. Certainty: Probable amended). Level of significant positive effect:
Local and Zone of Influence The Sheepwash brook has fluctuating Duration of effect: water levels and so is likely to hold Retain c. 700 m of J2.6 Long-term (Permanent retention) only transient individuals. – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Dry ditch Retain potentially suitable commuting habitat for one Extent: mammal species; otter: Retain c. 700 m of potentially Otters are UK BAP Priority Species. suitable commuting habitat for one legally protected and UK BAP Otters and their habitat are legally Priority Species of mammal; otter. Probable to have a significant No mitigation, protected under the Wildlife & Magnitude: Very High positive effect on conservation compensation, or Countryside Act 1981 (& as Effect on conservation status: status at a Local and Zone of enhancement measures amended) and The Conservation of Positive (Indirect) Influence scale in short- and required. Habitats and Species Regulations Certainty: Probable long-term. 2010. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence The Sheepwash brook has fluctuating Duration of effect: water levels and so is likely to hold Long-term (Permanent retention) only commuting individuals.
______
- 125 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Retain potentially suitable commuting habitat for a suite of Extent: common and widespread bat Retain c. 1485 m of potentially species: suitable commuting habitat for a Potentially including one UK BAP suite of common and widespread bat Priority Species, noctule. species, potentially including one Probable to have a significant UK BAP Priority Species; noctule. No mitigation, Retain c. 700 m of J2.6 positive effect on conservation All bat species are legally protected Magnitude: Very High compensation, or – Miscellaneous / status at a Local and Zone of under the Wildlife & Countryside Act Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures Boundaries / Dry ditch Influence scale in short- and 1981 (& as amended) and The Positive (Indirect) required. long-term. Conservation of Habitats and Species Certainty: Probable Regulations 2010. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Daubenton’s bat, whiskered bat, Duration of effect: Natterer’s bat and noctule may use Long-term (Permanent retention) the ditch for commuting.
Note: UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UK BAP) Priority Habitats and Species.
______
- 126 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Table D4. Summary of impacts resulting from the permanent gain of habitats and features within the East Leake Quarry extension site.
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain two UK BAP and one Gain c. 3.1 ha of two UK BAP and Nottinghamshire Local BAP one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitats: Priority Habitats. ‘Lowland Mixed Deciduous No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Magnitude: Very High Woodland’ (c. 2 ha) and ‘Wet compensation, or positive effect on conservation Effect on conservation status: Woodland’ (c.1.1 ha) are UK BAP enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Positive (Direct) Priority Habitats. required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. Level of significant positive effect: ‘Wet Broadleaved Woodland’ (c. 1.1 District, Local and Zone of Influence ha) is a Nottinghamshire Local BAP Duration of effect: Permanent gain of c. Priority Habitat. 3.1 ha of A1.1.2 – Long-term (Permanent restoration) Woodland and scrub / Woodland / Broadleaved / Extent: Plantation Gain c. 3.1 ha of potentially suitable habitat for a suite of invertebrate Gain potentially suitable habitat species, potentially including up to for a suite of invertebrate species: 55 UK BAP Priority Species. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 55 UK Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of
Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and A wide range of different taxonomic Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. orders of invertebrates are known to Level of significant positive effect: occur in woodland. Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 127 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 3.1 ha of potentially suitable terrestrial habitat for one UK BAP Gain potentially suitable terrestrial Priority Species of amphibian; habitat for one amphibian species; common toad. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant common toad: Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation Common toad is a UK BAP Priority Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Species. Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and
Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. Common toad both utilise woodland Level of significant positive effect: areas during their terrestrial phases. Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Permanent gain of c. Long-term (Permanent restoration) 3.1 ha of A1.1.2 – Woodland and scrub / Woodland / Broadleaved / Gain potentially suitable habitat Plantation for two reptile species; slow-worm Extent: and grass snake: Gain c. 3.1 ha of potentially suitable Slow-worm and grass snake are UK habitat for two legally protected and BAP Priority Species. UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; slow-worm and grass snake. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Both reptile species are legally Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation protected against intentional and Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of reckless killing or injuring under the Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. (as amended). Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Reptiles are typically found in open Duration of effect: woodland, on woodland edge and Long-term (Permanent restoration) glades.
______
- 128 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 3.1 ha of potentially suitable Gain potentially suitable breeding breeding and/or wintering habitat for and/or wintering habitat for a suite a suite of bird species, potentially of bird species: including up to 19 UK BAP Priority. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 19 UK Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a District, Local and
Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in All wild birds and their occupied Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. nests are legally protected under the Level of significant positive effect: Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& District, Local and Zone of Influence as amended). Duration of effect: Permanent gain of c. Long-term (Permanent restoration) 3.1 ha of A1.1.2 – Woodland and scrub / Woodland / Broadleaved / Extent: Gain c. 3.1 ha of potentially suitable Plantation Gain potentially suitable habitat habitat for four legally protected for four mammal species; harvest and/or UK BAP Priority Species; mice, brown hares, hedgehogs and harvest mouse, brown hare, badgers: No mitigation, Probable to have a significant hedgehog and badger. Harvest mice, brown hares and compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High hedgehogs are UK BAP Priority enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: Species. required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. Certainty: Certain/near certain Badgers and their occupied setts are Level of significant positive effect: legally protected under the Local and Zone of Influence Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 129 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Gain potentially suitable foraging Gain c. 3.1 ha of potentially suitable and/or roosting habitat for a suite foraging and/or roosting habitat for a of bat species: suite of bat species, potentially Potentially including three UK BAP including three UK BAP Priority Permanent gain of c. Priority Species; noctule, soprano Species of bat; noctule, soprano No mitigation, Probable to have a significant 3.1 ha of A1.1.2 – pipistrelle and brown long-eared bat. pipistrelle and brown long-eared bat. compensation, or positive effect on conservation Woodland and scrub / Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Woodland / All bat species and their roosts are Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Broadleaved / legally protected under the Wildlife Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. Plantation & Countryside Act 1981 (as Certainty: Certain/near certain amended) and The Conservation of Level of significant positive effect: Habitats and Species Regulations Local and Zone of Influence 2010. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
Extent: Gain of c. 6.83 ha of one UK BAP Gain one UK BAP and one and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat. Permanent gain of c. Priority Habitats: No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Magnitude: Very High 6.83 ha of B2.2 – ‘Lowland Meadows’ is a UK BAP compensation, or positive effect on conservation Effect on conservation status: Grassland and marsh / Priority Habitat and enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Positive (Direct) Neutral grassland / ‘Lowland Neutral Grassland’ is a required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in Certainty: Certain/near certain Semi-improved Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Habitat. District, Local and Zone of Influence
Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 130 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Gain c. 6.83 ha of potentially suitable habitat for a suite of Gain potentially suitable habitat invertebrate species, potentially for a suite of invertebrate species: including up to 29 UK BAP Priority No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 29 UK Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Additional grassland habitat is likely Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. to benefit a range of invertebrates, Certainty: Certain/near certain predominantly moths and butterflies. Level of significant positive effect: Permanent gain of c. Local and Zone of Influence 6.83 ha of B2.2 – Duration of effect: Grassland and marsh / Long-term (Permanent restoration) Neutral grassland / Extent: Semi-improved Gain c. 6.83 ha of potentially Gain potentially suitable terrestrial suitable terrestrial habitat for one UK habitat for one amphibian species; BAP Priority Species of amphibian; common toad: common toad. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Common toad is a UK BAP Priority Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation Species. Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Common toad utilise neutral Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. grassland during their terrestrial Level of significant positive effect: phases for foraging and hibernation. Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 131 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Gain c. 6.83 ha of potentially Gain potentially suitable habitat suitable habitat for one legally for one reptile species; slow-worm: protected and UK BAP Priority Slow-worm is a UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; slow-worm. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Species. Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation
Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Slow-worms are legally protected Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and against intentional and reckless Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. killing or injuring under the Wildlife Level of significant positive effect: and Countryside Act 1981 (as Local and Zone of Influence amended). Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration) Permanent gain of c. 6.83 ha of B2.2 – Grassland and marsh / Extent: Neutral grassland / Gain c. 6.83 ha of potentially Semi-improved Gain potentially suitable breeding suitable breeding and/or wintering and/or wintering habitat for a suite habitat for a suite of bird species, of bird species: potentially up to 17 UK BAP Priority No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 17 UK Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Certain/near certain Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). District, Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 132 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 6.83 ha of potentially Gain potentially suitable habitat suitable habitat for four legally for four mammal species; harvest protected and/or UK BAP Priority mice, brown hares, hedgehogs and Species; harvest mouse, brown hare, badgers: No mitigation, Probable to have a significant hedgehog and badger. Harvest mice, brown hares and compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High hedgehogs are UK BAP Priority enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: Species. required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. Certainty: Certain/near certain Badgers and their occupied setts are Level of significant positive effect: legally protected under the Local and Zone of Influence Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Duration of effect: Permanent gain of c. Long-term (Permanent restoration) 6.83 ha of B2.2 – Grassland and marsh / Neutral grassland / Semi-improved Extent: Gain c. 6.83 ha of potentially Gain potentially suitable foraging suitable foraging habitat for a suite habitat for a suite of bat species: of bat species, potentially including Potentially including one UK BAP one UK BAP Priority Species of bat; No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Priority Species; noctule. noctule. compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of All bat species are legally protected Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and under the Wildlife & Countryside Act Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. 1981 (as amended) and The Certainty: Certain/near certain Conservation of Habitats and Species Level of significant positive effect: Regulations 2010. Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 133 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Gain potentially one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Extent: Priority Habitat: Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of ‘Farmland: Arable farmland, arable one Nottinghamshire Local BAP field margins and improved Priority Habitat. grassland’. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation Effect on conservation status: It may qualify as ‘improved enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Positive (Direct) grassland’ under the overarching required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in Certainty: Certain/near certain Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Habitat; ‘Farmland: Arable farmland, District, Local and Zone of Influence arable field margins and improved Duration of effect: grassland’, depending upon the final Long-term (Permanent restoration) Permanent gain of a post-development land-use and the maximum of c. 11.97 ha intensity of management. of B4 – Grassland and marsh / Improved Extent: grassland Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of potentially suitable habitat for a suite Gain potentially suitable habitat of invertebrate species, potentially for a suite of invertebrate species: including up to 27 UK BAP Priority No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 27 UK Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Additional grassland habitat is likely Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. to benefit a range of invertebrates, Certainty: Certain/near certain predominantly moths. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 134 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of Gain potentially suitable habitat potentially suitable habitat for one for one reptile species; slow-worm: legally protected and UK BAP Slow-worm is a UK BAP Priority Priority Species of reptile; slow- No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Species. worm. compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Slow-worms are legally protected Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and against intentional and reckless Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. killing or injuring under the Wildlife Certainty: Certain/near certain and Countryside Act 1981 (as Level of significant positive effect: amended). Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Permanent gain of a Long-term (Permanent restoration) maximum of c. 11.97 ha of B4 – Grassland and marsh / Improved Extent: grassland Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of Gain potentially suitable breeding potentially suitable breeding and/or and/or wintering habitat for a suite wintering habitat for a suite of bird of bird species: species, potentially including up to No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 17 UK 17 UK BAP Priority Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Certain/near certain Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). District, Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 135 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of potentially suitable habitat for three Gain potentially suitable habitat legally protected or UK BAP Priority for three mammal species; brown Species; brown hare, hedgehog and hares, hedgehogs and badgers: No mitigation, Probable to have a significant badger. Brown hares and hedgehogs are UK compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High BAP Priority Species. enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Positive (Direct) Badgers and their occupied setts are within restoration scheme. long-term. Certainty: Certain/near certain legally protected under the Level of significant positive effect: Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Permanent gain of a Long-term (Permanent restoration) maximum of c. 11.97 ha of B4 – Grassland and marsh / Improved Extent: grassland Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of Gain potentially suitable foraging potentially suitable foraging habitat habitat for a suite of bat species: for a suite of bat species, potentially Potentially including one UK BAP including one UK BAP Priority No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Priority Species; noctule. Species of bat; noctule. compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of All bat species are legally protected Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and under the Wildlife & Countryside Act Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. 1981 (as amended) and The Certainty: Certain/near certain Conservation of Habitats and Species Level of significant positive effect: Regulations 2010. Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 136 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain of c. 0.9 ha of one UK BAP and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Gain one UK BAP and one Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation Nottinghamshire Local BAP Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Priority Habitat: Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in ‘Reedbed’. Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. Level of significant positive effect: District, Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration) Permanent gain of c. 0.9 ha of F1 – Swamp, marginal and inundation / Swamp Extent: Gain c. 0.9 ha of potentially suitable habitat for a suite of invertebrate Gain potentially suitable habitat species, potentially including up to for a suite of invertebrate species: seven UK BAP Priority Species. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to seven UK Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of
Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and New reedbed habitat is likely to Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. benefit a range of invertebrates, Level of significant positive effect: predominantly moths. Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 137 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 0.9 ha of potentially suitable terrestrial habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of amphibian; Gain potentially suitable terrestrial common toad. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant habitat for one amphibian species; Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation common toad: Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Common toad is a UK BAP Priority Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Species. Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration) Permanent gain of c. 0.9 ha of F1 – Swamp, marginal and inundation / Swamp Extent: Gain c. 0.9 ha of potentially suitable Gain potentially suitable habitat habitat for one legally protected and for one reptile species; grass snake: UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; Grass snake is a UK BAP Priority grass snake. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Species. Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation
Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Grass snakes are legally protected Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and against intentional and reckless Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. killing or injuring under the Wildlife Level of significant positive effect: and Countryside Act 1981 (as Local and Zone of Influence amended). Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 138 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 0.9 ha of potentially suitable Gain potentially suitable breeding breeding and/or wintering habitat for and/or wintering habitat for a suite a suite of bird species, potentially of bird species: including up to five UK BAP No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to five UK Priority Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Certain/near certain Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration) Permanent gain of c. 0.9 ha of F1 – Swamp, marginal and inundation / Swamp Extent: Gain c. 0.9 ha of potentially suitable habitat for one UK BAP Priority Gain potentially suitable habitat Species of mammal; harvest mouse. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant for one mammal species; harvest Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation mouse: Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Harvest mouse is a UK BAP Priority Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Species. Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 139 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain potentially suitable foraging Gain c. 0.9 ha of potentially suitable habitat for a suite of bat species, foraging habitat for a suite of bat potentially including two UK BAP species, potentially including two Priority Species: UK BAP Priority Species of bat; No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Permanent gain of c. Noctule and soprano pipistrelle are noctule and soprano pipistrelle. compensation, or positive effect on conservation 0.9 ha of F1 – Swamp, UK BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of marginal and Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and inundation / Swamp All bat species are legally protected Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. under the Wildlife & Countryside Act Certainty: Certain/near certain 1981 (as amended) and The Level of significant positive effect: Conservation of Habitats and Species Local and Zone of Influence Regulations 2010. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
Extent: Gain of c. 4.7 ha of one UK BAP and Gain one UK BAP and one one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitats. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Permanent gain of c. Priority Habitat: Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation 4.7 ha of G1.1 – Open ‘Eutrophic Standing Waters’ is a UK Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a District, Local and water / Standing water BAP Priority Habitat and ‘Eutrophic Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in / Eutrophic and Mesotrophic Standing Waters is Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. a Nottinghamshire Local BAP Level of significant positive effect: Priority Habitat. District, Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 140 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 4.7 ha of potentially suitable habitat for a suite of invertebrate Gain potentially suitable habitat species, potentially including up to for a suite of invertebrate species: three UK BAP Priority Species. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to three UK Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and New open water habitat is likely to Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. benefit a range of invertebrates. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration) Permanent gain of c. 4.7 ha of G1.1 – Open water / Standing water / Eutrophic Extent: Gain c. 4.7 ha of potentially suitable breeding habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of amphibian; Gain potentially suitable breeding common toad. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant habitat for one amphibian species; Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation common toad: Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Common toad is a UK BAP Priority Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in Species. Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. Level of significant positive effect: District, Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 141 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 4.7 ha of potentially suitable Gain potentially suitable habitat habitat for one legally protected and for one reptile species; grass snake: UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; Grass snake is a UK BAP Priority grass snake. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Species. Magnitude: Very High compensation, or positive effect on conservation
Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Grass snakes are legally protected Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in against intentional and reckless Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. killing or injuring under the Wildlife Level of significant positive effect: and Countryside Act 1981 (as District, Local and Zone of Influence amended). Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration) Permanent gain of c. 4.7 ha of G1.1 – Open water / Standing water Extent: / Eutrophic Gain c. 4.7 ha of potentially suitable Gain potentially suitable breeding breeding and/or wintering habitat for and/or wintering habitat for a suite a suite of bird species, potentially of bird species: including up to 10 UK BAP Priority No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 10 UK Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Certain/near certain Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). District, Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 142 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 4.7 ha of potentially suitable Gain potentially suitable foraging foraging habitat for a suite of bat habitat for a suite of bat species: species, potentially including two Potentially including two UK BAP UK BAP Priority Species of bat; Priority Species; noctule and soprano No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Permanent gain of c. noctule and soprano pipistrelle. pipistrelle. compensation, or positive effect on conservation 4.7 ha of G1.1 – Open Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a District, Local and water / Standing water Effect on conservation status: All bat species are legally protected required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in / Eutrophic Positive (Direct) under the Wildlife & Countryside Act within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. Certainty: Certain/near certain 1981 (as amended) and The Level of significant positive effect: Conservation of Habitats and Species District, Local and Zone of Influence Regulations 2010. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
Gain potentially one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Extent: Priority Habitat: Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of ‘Farmland: Arable farmland, arable one Nottinghamshire Local BAP field margins and improved Permanent gain of a Priority Habitat. grassland’. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant maximum of Magnitude: High compensation, or positive effect on conservation approximately 11.97 ha Effect on conservation status: It may qualify as ‘arable farmland’ enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of of J1.1 – Miscellaneous Positive (Direct) under the overarching required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and / Cultivated/disturbed Certainty: Probable Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority within restoration scheme. long-term. land / Arable Level of significant positive effect: Habitat; ‘Farmland: Arable farmland, Local and Zone of Influence arable field margins and improved Duration of effect: grassland’, depending upon the final Long-term (Permanent restoration) post-development land-use and the intensity of management.
______
- 143 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of Gain potentially suitable habitat potentially suitable habitat for a suite for a suite of invertebrate species: of invertebrate species, potentially Potentially including up to 35 UK including up to 35 UK BAP Priority BAP Priority Species. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: High Arable habitat is suitable for a suite enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: of common and widespread required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Positive (Direct) invertebrate species, although the within restoration scheme. long-term. Certainty: Probable potential number of invertebrates Level of significant positive effect: decreases with the application of Local and Zone of Influence agrochemicals. Duration of effect: Permanent gain of a Long-term (Permanent restoration) maximum of approximately 11.97 ha of J1.1 – Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed Extent: land / Arable Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of Gain potentially suitable breeding potentially suitable breeding and/or and/or wintering habitat for a suite wintering habitat for a suite of bird of bird species: species, potentially up to 21 UK No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 21 UK BAP Priority Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Probable Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 144 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of potentially suitable habitat for two UK BAP Priority Species of mammal; harvest mouse and brown Gain potentially suitable habitat No mitigation, Probable to have a significant hare. for two mammal species; harvest compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: High mice and brown hares: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: Harvest mice and brown hares are required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Positive (Direct) UK BAP Priority Species. within restoration scheme. long-term. Certainty: Probable Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Permanent gain of a Duration of effect: maximum of Long-term (Permanent restoration) approximately 11.97 ha of J1.1 – Miscellaneous / Cultivated/disturbed Extent: land / Arable Gain a maximum of c. 11.97 ha of potentially suitable foraging habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of Gain potentially suitable foraging bat; noctule. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant habitat for one bat species; Magnitude: High compensation, or positive effect on conservation noctule: Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Noctule is a UK BAP Priority Positive (Indirect) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Species. Certainty: Probable within restoration scheme. long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 145 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain of c. 1250 m of one UK BAP and one Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Gain one UK BAP and one Magnitude: High compensation, or positive effect on conservation Nottinghamshire Local BAP Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a District, Local and Priority Habitat: Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Zone of Influence scale in ‘Hedgerows’. Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. short- and long-term. Level of significant positive effect: District, Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Permanent gain of 1250 Long-term (Permanent restoration) m of J2.3 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedgerow Extent: with trees Gain c. 1250 m of potentially suitable habitat for a suite of Gain potentially suitable habitat invertebrate species, potentially for a suite of invertebrate species: including up to 25 UK BAP Priority Potentially including up to 25 UK No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Species. BAP Priority Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: The hedgerows present on the East required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Positive (Direct) Leake site are likely to hold a variety within restoration scheme. long-term. Certainty: Certain/near certain of UK BAP Priority Species of Level of significant positive effect: invertebrate, predominantly moths. Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 146 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 1250 m of potentially suitable terrestrial habitat for one UK BAP Priority Species of amphibian; Gain potentially suitable terrestrial common toad. No mitigation, Probable to have a significant habitat for one amphibian species; Magnitude: High compensation, or positive effect on conservation common toad: Effect on conservation status: enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Common toad is a UK BAP Priority Positive (Direct) required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Species. Certainty: Certain/near certain within restoration scheme. long-term. Level of significant positive effect: Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Permanent gain of 1250 Long-term (Permanent restoration) m of J2.3 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedgerow with trees Extent: Gain c. 1250 m of potentially Gain potentially suitable habitat suitable habitat for two legally for two reptile species; slow-worm protected and UK BAP Priority and grass snake: Species of reptile; slow-worm and Slow-worm and grass snake are UK No mitigation, Probable to have a significant grass snake. BAP Priority Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: Very High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: Both species are legally protected required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Positive (Direct) against intentional and reckless within restoration scheme. long-term. Certainty: Certain/near certain killing or injuring under the Wildlife Level of significant positive effect: and Countryside Act 1981 (as Local and Zone of Influence amended). Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 147 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL
Extent: Gain c. 1250 m of potentially Gain potentially suitable breeding suitable breeding and/or wintering and/or wintering habitat for a suite habitat for a suite of bird species, of bird species: potentially including up to 13 UK No mitigation, Probable to have a significant Potentially including up to 13 UK BAP Priority Species. compensation, or positive effect on conservation BAP Priority Species. Magnitude: High enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Certain/near certain Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: as amended). Local and Zone of Influence Duration of effect: Permanent gain of 1250 Long-term (Permanent restoration) m of J2.3 – Miscellaneous / Boundaries / Hedgerow with trees Extent: Gain c. 1250 m of potentially Gain potentially suitable habitat suitable habitat for four legally for four mammal species; harvest protected and/or UK BAP Priority mouse, brown hare, hedgehog and Species; harvest mouse, brown hare, badger: No mitigation, Probable to have a significant hedgehog and badger. Harvest mouse, brown hare and compensation, or positive effect on conservation Magnitude: High hedgehog are UK BAP Priority enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Effect on conservation status: Species. required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Positive (Direct) within restoration scheme. long-term. Certainty: Certain/near certain Badgers and their occupied setts are Level of significant positive effect: legally protected under the Local and Zone of Influence Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 148 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, RESIDUAL PROPOSED UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & SIGNIFICANCE & ACTIVITY THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT CONFIDENCE LEVEL Extent: Gain c. 1250 m of potentially Gain potentially suitable foraging suitable foraging and/or roosting and/or roosting habitat for a suite habitat for a suite of bat species, of bat species: potentially including three UK BAP Potentially including three UK BAP Priority Species of bat; noctule, Permanent gain of 1250 Priority Species; noctule, soprano No mitigation, Probable to have a significant soprano pipistrelle and brown long- m of J2.3 – pipistrelle and brown long-eared bat. compensation, or positive effect on conservation eared bat. Miscellaneous / enhancement measures status at a Local and Zone of Magnitude: High Boundaries / Hedgerow All bat species and their roosts are required. Habitat gained Influence scale in short- and Effect on conservation status: with trees legally protected under the Wildlife within restoration scheme. long-term. Positive (Direct) & Countryside Act 1981 (as Certainty: Certain/near certain amended) and The Conservation of Level of significant positive effect: Habitats and Species Regulations Local and Zone of Influence 2010. Duration of effect: Long-term (Permanent restoration)
______
- 149 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
Table D5. Summary of impacts resulting from the temporary gain of habitats and features within the East Leake Quarry extension site.
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, PROPOSED RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANCE UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & ACTIVITY & CONFIDENCE LEVEL THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT
Extent: This temporary gain will Gain c. 3.33 ha of one UK BAP and be as a result of the Gain one UK BAP and one one Nottinghamshire Local BAP seeding of soil storage Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Habitat. mounds and screening Priority Habitats: Magnitude: Very High bunds during extraction Probable to have a significant ‘Lowland Meadows’ is a UK BAP Effect on conservation status: works with a ‘Traditional positive effect on conservation Priority Habitat and ‘Lowland Positive (Direct) Hay Meadow’ seed-mix. status at a Local and Zone of Neutral Grassland’ is a Certainty: Certain/near certain Following extraction, Influence scale in short-term. Nottinghamshire Local BAP Priority Level of significant positive effect: these mounds/bunds will Habitat. Local and Zone of Influence be taken down in order to Duration of effect: progress with the Temporary gain of c. Long-term (life of Quarry) restoration. 3.33 ha of B2.2 – Grassland and marsh / Extent: Neutral grassland / This temporary gain will Gain c. 3.3 ha of potentially suitable Semi-improved be as a result of the habitat for a suite of invertebrate Gain potentially suitable habitat seeding of soil storage species, potentially including up to for a suite of invertebrate species: mounds and screening 29 UK BAP Priority Species. Potentially including up to 29 UK bunds during extraction Probable to have a significant Magnitude: Very High BAP Priority Species. works with a ‘Traditional positive effect on conservation Effect on conservation status: Hay Meadow’ seed-mix. status at a Local and Zone of Positive (Direct) Additional grassland habitat is likely Following extraction, Influence scale in short-term. Certainty: Certain/near certain to benefit a range of invertebrates, these mounds/bunds will Level of significant positive effect: predominantly moths and butterflies. be taken down in order to Local and Zone of Influence progress with the Duration of effect: restoration. Long-term (life of Quarry)
______
- 150 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, PROPOSED RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANCE UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & ACTIVITY & CONFIDENCE LEVEL THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT
Extent: This temporary gain will Gain c. 3.3 ha of potentially suitable be as a result of the Gain potentially suitable terrestrial terrestrial habitat for one UK BAP seeding of soil storage habitat for one amphibian species; Priority Species of amphibian; mounds and screening common toad: common toad. bunds during extraction Probable to have a significant Common toad is a UK BAP Priority Magnitude: Very High works with a ‘Traditional positive effect on conservation Species. Effect on conservation status: Hay Meadow’ seed-mix. status at a Local and Zone of Positive (Direct) Following extraction, Influence scale in short-term. Common toad utilise neutral Certainty: Certain/near certain these mounds/bunds will grassland during their terrestrial Level of significant positive effect: be taken down in order to phases for foraging and hibernation. Local and Zone of Influence progress with the Duration of effect: restoration. Temporary gain of c. Long-term (life of Quarry) 3.33 ha of B2.2 – Grassland and marsh / Neutral grassland / Semi-improved Extent: This temporary gain will Gain c. 3.3 ha of potentially suitable Gain potentially suitable habitat be as a result of the habitat for one legally protected and for one reptile species; slow-worm: seeding of soil storage UK BAP Priority Species of reptile; Slow-worm is a UK BAP Priority mounds and screening slow-worm. Species. bunds during extraction Probable to have a significant Magnitude: Very High works with a ‘Traditional positive effect on conservation Effect on conservation status: Slow-worms are legally protected Hay Meadow’ seed-mix. status at a Local and Zone of Positive (Direct) against intentional and reckless Following extraction, Influence scale in short-term. Certainty: Certain/near certain killing or injuring under the Wildlife these mounds/bunds will Level of significant positive effect: and Countryside Act 1981 (as be taken down in order to Local and Zone of Influence amended). progress with the Duration of effect: restoration. Long-term (life of Quarry)
______
- 151 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, PROPOSED RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANCE UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & ACTIVITY & CONFIDENCE LEVEL THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT
Extent: Gain c. 3.3 ha of potentially suitable This temporary gain will Gain potentially suitable breeding breeding and/or wintering habitat for be as a result of the and/or wintering habitat for a suite a suite of bird species, potentially seeding of soil storage of bird species: including up to 17 UK BAP Priority mounds and screening Potentially up to 17 UK BAP Priority Species. bunds during extraction Probable to have a significant Species. Magnitude: Very High works with a ‘Traditional positive effect on conservation Effect on conservation status: Hay Meadow’ seed-mix. status at a Local and Zone of All wild birds and their occupied Positive (Direct) Following extraction, Influence scale in short-term. nests are legally protected under the Certainty: Certain/near certain these mounds/bunds will Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (& Level of significant positive effect: be taken down in order to as amended). Local and Zone of Influence progress with the Duration of effect: restoration. Temporary gain of c. Long-term (life of Quarry) 3.33 ha of B2.2 – Grassland and marsh / Neutral grassland / Semi-improved Extent: Gain c. 3.3 ha of potentially suitable This temporary gain will Gain potentially suitable habitat habitat for four legally protected be as a result of the for four mammal species; harvest and/or UK BAP Priority Species; seeding of soil storage mice, brown hares, hedgehogs and harvest mouse, brown hare, mounds and screening badgers: hedgehog and badger. bunds during extraction Probable to have a significant Harvest mice, brown hares and Magnitude: Very High works with a ‘Traditional positive effect on conservation hedgehogs are UK BAP Priority Effect on conservation status: Hay Meadow’ seed-mix. status at a Local and Zone of Species. Positive (Direct) Following extraction, Influence scale in short-term.
Certainty: Certain/near certain these mounds/bunds will Badgers and their occupied setts are Level of significant positive effect: be taken down in order to legally protected under the Local and Zone of Influence progress with the Protection of Badgers Act 1992. Duration of effect: restoration. Long-term (life of Quarry)
______
- 152 - © AEcol 2014 CEMEX UK Materials Ltd ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT East Leake Quarry Extension ______
CHARACTERISATION OF SIGNIFICANCE WITHOUT MITIGATION, PROPOSED RESIDUAL SIGNIFICANCE UNMITIGATED IMPACT ON MITIGATION & CONFIDENCE COMPENSATION & ACTIVITY & CONFIDENCE LEVEL THE FEATURE LEVEL ENHANCEMENT
Extent: Gain c. 3.3 ha of potentially suitable This temporary gain will Gain potentially suitable foraging foraging habitat for a suite of bat be as a result of the habitat for a suite of bat species: species, potentially including one seeding of soil storage Potentially including one UK BAP UK BAP Priority Species of bat; mounds and screening Temporary gain of c. Priority Species; noctule. noctule. bunds during extraction Probable to have a significant 3.33 ha of B2.2 – Magnitude: Very High works with a ‘Traditional positive effect on conservation Grassland and marsh / All bat species are legally protected Effect on conservation status: Hay Meadow’ seed-mix. status at a Local and Zone of Neutral grassland / under the Wildlife & Countryside Act Positive (Direct) Following extraction, Influence scale in short-term. Semi-improved 1981 (as amended) and The Certainty: Certain/near certain these mounds/bunds will Conservation of Habitats and Species Level of significant positive effect: be taken down in order to Regulations 2010. Local and Zone of Influence progress with the Duration of effect: restoration. Long-term (life of Quarry)
______
______
- 153 - © AEcol 2014