DOCSLIB.ORG

Transactions of the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transactions of the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society V THE NATURAL HISTORY (Vh>®EUW - 9 AUC 2005 EXCHANGED r,PNFRAL LIB R.AR ) 1 Norfolk Bird Report - 2000 Editor: Giles Dunmore Editorial 95 Review of the Year 98 Wetland Bird Surveys 105 Norfolk Bird Atlas 108 Systematic List 110 Introductions, Escapes, Ferals and Hybrids 246 Earliest and Latest Dates of Summer Migrants 25 Latest and Earliest Dates of Winter Migrants 252 Non-accepted and non-submitted records 253 Contributors 254 Ringing Report 256 Seventy-five years ago - anecdotes from Norfolk birdwatchers in 1925 266 Norfolk Birdwatching in 1950 Remembered 269 Tweny-five years ago - Memories of 1975 271 Breydon Water and its Birdlife 273 Eleonora’s Falcon at Hickling Broad. July 1987 - the first record for Norfolk 282 Slender-billed Gulls at Cley - the second record for Norfolk 284 Isabelline Wheatear at Blakeney Point - the second record for Norfolk 285 The Burgh Castle Bee-eaters - a long-awaited opportunity for Norfolk birdwatchers 288 The House Sparrow in Norwich during autumn/winter 2000 - a population study 289 Norfolk Mammal Report - 2000 Editor: Roy Baker Editorial 294 The Stoat - Rabbit Enigma 294 Mammals of a Broadland Reserve - Wheatfen 295 What the Cat Brought In! 300 The Hazel Dormouse in Norfolk 303 Barbastelle Bats at Paston Great Barn 1998-2000 307 Published by NORFOLK AND NORWICH NATURALISTS’ SOCIETY Castle Museum, Norwich, NR I 3.IU { Transactions Volume 34 part 2 October 2001 ISSN 0375 7226 Keepsake back numbers arc available from David & Iris Pauli, 8 Lindford Drive, Eaton, Norwch NR4 6LT l-'ront cover photograph: Bearded Tit ( /?('g Jones) Hack cover photograph: (ircy I Icron ( Tony I /owes) NORFOLK BIRD REPORT - 2000 Editorial On behalf of the Society I am pleased to present the annual report on the Birds of Norfolk. To celebrate this special millennium edition articles looking back over the century are included, together with a special feature on Breydon Water. history IVH^vUi.-5 Acknowledgements I The Editorial Team continues to function and comprises: -9 AUC 2005 • myself - Editor and Joint County Recorder I EXCHANGED • Neil Lawton - Joint County Recorder, I GENERAL LIBRARY • - John Williamson liaison with Norfolk Bird Club and the p: • Julian Bhalerao - co-ordinating photographs and sketches, • Justin Lansdell - co-ordinating articles and dealing with Review of the Year. I am grateful to them for their encouragement, help, and support. It is pleasing to note that the 1999 Report was awarded third place in the ‘British Birds’ Report of the Year competition, the final year that it is to take place. The Report continues to be very much a team effort and without help from many people its production would not be possible. My thanks go to: • the other compilers of the monthly and annual Record Cards - Dave Bridges, Vince Hanlon, Justin Lansdell, Neil Lawton, Mick Saunt and John Williamson; • the other authors of the Systematic List - Peter Allard, Andy Benson, Andrew Bloomfield, Dave and Jacquie Bridges, Andy Brown, Pete Clement, Keith Dye, Mick Fiszer, Vince Hanlon, Phil Heath, Gary Hibberd, Ian Johnson, John Kemp, Justin Lansdell, Neil Lawton. Ben Murphy, Mick Saunt, Andy Stoddart. Moss Taylor, Peter Wilson and John Williamson; • members of the County Records Committee; • authors of the articles in the Report, in particular Peter Allard who was ‘commissioned’ to write the paper on Breydon Water; • the artists and photographers who have made their work freely available; • Moss Taylor for supplying breeding details from the first survey season of the Norfolk Bird Atlas; • Bob Ellis and especially Paul Westley for preparing the new location map on the inside back cover; • Steve Wakeman for the meteorological information; • Mike Rogers, Secretary of the British Birds Rarities Committee; • Pat Bonham for his invaluable help in proof-reading the draft Systematic List and correcting the grammar; • all the many individual contributors and clubs/societies, and in particular Birdline East Anglia, who have contributed records; • finally my wife Judy for her continued help in typing, layout and in many other w-ays. 95 The County Records Committee (Mick Fiszer, Steve Gantlett, Phil Heath, John Kemp and John Williamson) considered a total of 102 records in the year; 13 of these were rejected, mostly as a result of insufficient detail and not owing to an incorrect identification. Three species (Night Heron, American Wigeon and Rose-coloured Starling) will no longer be considered at national level as from 2002. The Committee also reviewed the list of species needing submission of a written description or photographic evidence (and subject to acceptance) prior to publication and decided to delete Green-winged Teal and Lesser Black- backed Gull {f'uscus race) from the list. The list is now as follows: Black-necked Grebe (at sea) Dark-breasted Barn Owl Cory’s Shearwater Bee-eater Great Shearwater Short-toed Lark Balearic Shearwater Tawny Pipit Storm Petrel Flava Wagtail (continental races except Night Heron Blue-headed and Grey-headed) Purple Heron Bluethroat (White-spotted only) White Stork Aquatic Warbler Greenland White-fronted Goose Marsh Warbler ‘Small’ Canada Goose Melodious Warbler American Wigeon Dartford Warbler Ring-necked Duck Pallas’s Warbler Surf Scoter Chiffchaff (tristis race) Spotted Crake Woodchat Shrike Corncrake Raven Buff-breasted Sandpiper Rose-coloured Starling Grey Phalarope (in flight at sea) Serin Sabine’s Gull Common Rosefmch Ring-billed Gull Ortolan Bunting Caspian Gull Little Bunting Ring-necked Parakeet With regard to the submission of details, obviously the Committee would expect a far more detailed description of a species such as Ring-billed Gull (which is not only rare in the county but difficult to identify) than a species such as a White Stork. Written descriptions should consist of a brief note of the circumstances of the observation (weather, distance from bird, any other observers, etc), followed by a description of the actual bird(s) and details of any other species nearby for comparison. Written notes should state clearly how a bird was identified. Observers are also requested to include a note of their previous experience of the species and, if relevant, a brief outline of how any confusable species were eliminated. Copies of field sketches (however poor artistically) are often invaluable together with written field notes. It should be noted that on occasions observers may be asked for further details of species not contained in the above list - if records relate to unusual dates, localities, etc. Editorial Material: Articles for consideration, artwork, photographs and transparencies should continue to be submitted to me at 49 Nelson Road, Sheringham, Norfolk NR26 8DA. 96 Submission of Records All records for the Systematic List should continue to be submitted to me at 49 Nelson Road, Sheringham, Norfolk NR26 8DA. Preferably these should be submitted on a monthly basis or, if this is not possible, on a 3-monthly or 6-monthly basis. Obviously records can be accepted annually after the end of the year but all observers are requested to submit their notes within a shorter time scale if possible to reduce the pressure of recording in January/ February the following year. Receipt of late records causes a major problem in drafting the Systematic List and observations received after February of the following year cannot be guaranteedfor inclusion in the Report. All records should be listed in the order of species appearing in this Report. Notes will not normally be acknowledged but names of all contributors will be published. To obtain as complete coverage as possible records ‘phoned- in’ to Birdline East Anglia have been frequently used in the compilation of the List. However, records of national and local rarities have only been included where considered and accepted by the appropriate Committee. During the year 1 spend a considerable amount of time ‘chasing’ descriptions of both county and national rarities. 1 would request that finders of such birds should submit details to me as soon as possible and certainly not left to the end of the year. In the case of national rarities these should be submitted in duplicate. Obviously if other observers have particularly good views of a rarity for example, but were not the finder, then additional descriptions would be gratefully received. As far as I am aware there are several outstanding records awaiting a decision from the British Birds Rarities Committee at the time of writing (August 2001). One of these still relates to the Blyth’s Pipit at Happisburgh in September 1999. In the 1999 Report I briefly mentioned the question of computerisation of records. Some progress has been made, but not as much as hoped. A great deal of time needs to be spent learning the software and ironing out problems before the final leap is taken. Giles Dunmore 97 Review of Year 2000 Justin Lansdell (with weather patterns provided by Steve Wakeham) The new Millennium began with wet weather as celebrations across the county gave way to a mild early January dominated by often strong west or south-westerly winds. As usual a selection of good birds gave an eager army of local birdwatchers much to enjoy and ensured Norfolk remained a favourite destination for visiting enthusiasts. Amongst these, 3 Black Brants on the north coast, a sizeable flock of Shorelarks at Holkham Bay, small groups of Waxwings and the long-staying pale-headed Long-tailed Tit at Wiveton stood out joining familiar ‘friends’ the Black-winged Stilt and Broadland Cranes. Star of the show, however, remained the continuing presence of a wandering immature White-tailed Eagle in the west of the county which drew crowds wherever it lingered. Amazingly it was joined by our first adult since 1945 and both birds were witnessed circling together near Barrow Common, surely provided the spectacular of the winter. As always at this time wildfowl received much attention and with an anticyclone building over the Atlantic on the 13th a spell of cooler north to north-westerlies may have been responsible for record counts of Bewick’s and Whooper Swans at Welney while at the opposite end of the county 10,600 Golden Plovers at Breydon was both a county record and reward for diligent observers.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appropriate Assessment (Submission)
    June 2007 North Norfolk District Council Planning Policy Team Telephone: 01263 516318 E-Mail: [email protected] Write to: Jill Fisher, Planning Policy Manager, North Norfolk District Council, Holt Road, Cromer, NR27 9EN www.northnorfolk.org/ldf All of the LDF Documents can be made available in Braille, large print or in other languages. Please contact 01263 516321 to discuss your requirements. Core Strategy Appropriate Assessment (Submission) Contents 1 Introduction 4 2 The Appropriate Assessment Process 4 3 Consultation and Preparation 5 4 Evidence gathering for the Appropriate Assessment 6 European sites that may be affected 6 Characteristics and conservation objectives of the European sites 8 Other relevant plans or projects 25 5 Appropriate Assessment and Plan analysis 28 Tables Table 4.1 - Broadland SPA/SAC qualifying features 9 Table 4.2 - Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA/SAC 12 Table 4.3 - North Norfolk Coast SPA/SAC qualifying features 15 Table 4.4 - Norfolk Valley Fens SAC qualifying features 19 Table 4.5 - Overstrand Cliffs SAC qualifying features 21 Table 4.6 - Paston Great Barn SAC qualifying features 23 Table 4.7 - River Wensum SAC qualifying features 24 Table 4.8 - Neighbouring districts Core Strategy progress table 27 Table 5.1 - Screening for likely significant effects 29 Table 5.2 - Details of Settlements in policies SS1, SS3, SS5 and SS7 to SS14 and how policy amendments have resulted in no likely significant effects being identified 35 Maps Map 4.1 - Environmental Designations 7 Map 4.2 - Broadland Environmental
    [Show full text]
  • Norfolk Boreas Limited Document Reference: 5.1.9.17 Pursuant to APFP Regulation: 5(2)(Q)
    Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm Consultation Report Appendix 9.17 Norfolk Boreas Onshore Ecology and Ornithology outgoing documents Applicant: Norfolk Boreas Limited Document Reference: 5.1.9.17 Pursuant to APFP Regulation: 5(2)(q) Date: June 2019 Revision: Version 1 Author: Copper Consultancy Photo: Ormonde Offshore Wind Farm This page is intentionally blank. Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm Appendices Norfolk Boreas Offshore Wind Farm Environmental Impact Assessment Onshore Ecology and Ornithology Method Statement Document Reference: PB5640-004-005 Author: Royal HaskoningDHV Date: January 2018 Applicant: Norfolk Boreas Ltd Date Issue Remarks / Reason for Issue Author Checked Approved No. 10/11/2017 01D Internal draft for review GC DT AD 13/11/2017 02D Second Draft GC DT 20/11/2017 03D Draft provided to Vattenfall for review GC DT JL 19/02/2018 01F Issue to consultees GC CD JL 30/01/2018 02F Removed reference to agreement on odonata GC CD CD surveys in section 1.2.3. This method statement has been prepared by Royal HaskoningDHV on behalf of Norfolk Boreas Limited in order to build upon the information provided within the Norfolk Boreas Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Report. It has been produced following a full review of the Scoping Opinion provided by the Planning Inspectorate. All content and material within this document is draft for stakeholder consultation purposes, within the Evidence Plan Process. Many participants of the Norfolk Boreas Evidence Plan Process will also have participated in the Norfolk Vanguard Evidence Plan Process. This document is presented as a complete standalone document however in order to maximise resource and save duplication of effort, the main areas of deviation from what has already been presented through the Norfolk Vanguard Evidence Plan Process and PEIR or in the Norfolk Boreas Scoping Report are presented in orange text throughout this document.
    [Show full text]
  • D1: Swaffham Heath
    D1: SWAFFHAM HEATH B6 B6 B7 E9 B7 E9 B6 A4 B7 F1 B7 E7 E8 B6 F1 F1 B6 A5 E6 D1 B5 E5 B5 B4 B4 A2 B4 B5 B8 E4 A3 B2 B3 E3 D2 D3 E2 B2 C1 A1 E2 E1 D3 B1 D1: SWAFFHAM HEATH Location and Boundaries D1.1 A large area of the Breckland Heathland with Plantation landscape type located to the north-west, west and south west of Swaffham, with character defined primarily by the land use of arable farmland, historic parklands and plantation woodland and distinctive Scot’s pine belts. To the north the character area boundary is marked by the adjacent River Nar character area and to the west by the district boundary and a change in character to a more settled area of farmland and plantations. To the south and east the landform falls towards the River Wissey. Key Characteristics • Drift deposits of sand, clay and gravel create a gently undulating landscape, with topography ranging from 10-70m AOD across the character area. • Free draining sandy soils support the functional land cover of arable cultivation, pig farming and plantation woodland. • Ancient, contorted scots pine shelterbelts and screening belts of trees provide shelter to the easily eroded brown soils and are a prominent landscape feature. • At Cockleycley Heath and Swaffham Heath, the woodland plantation blocks create a visually prominent feature in the landscape. • The large scale arable fields are delineated by hedgerows in variable condition from occasional species rich intact hedgerows with hedgerow trees, thorn hedges and pine lines. • Breckland Farmland SSSI covers a large part of the character area – the cultivated land proving a habitat for stone curlew.
    [Show full text]
  • Accounting for National Nature Reserves
    Natural England Research Report NERR078 Accounting for National Nature Reserves: A Natural Capital Account of the National Nature Reserves managed by Natural England www.gov.uk/naturalACCOUNTING FOR-england NATIONAL NATURE RESERVES Natural England Research Report NERR078 Accounting for National Nature Reserves: A Natural Capital Account of the National Nature Reserves managed by Natural England Tim Sunderland1, Ruth Waters1, Dan Marsh2, Cat Hudson1 and Jane Lusardi1 Published 21st February 2019 1 Natural England 2 University of Waikato, New Zealand This report is published by Natural England under the Open Government Licence - OGLv3.0 for public sector information. You are encouraged to use, and reuse, information subject to certain conditions. For details of the licence visit Copyright. Natural England photographs are only available for non commercial purposes. If any other information such as maps or data cannot be used commercially this will be made clear within the report. ISBN 978-1-78354-518-6 © Natural England 2018 ACCOUNTING FOR NATIONAL NATURE RESERVES Project details This report should be cited as: SUNDERLAND, T., WATERS, R.D., MARSH, D. V. K., HUDSON, C., AND LUSARDI, J. (2018). Accounting for National Nature Reserves: A natural capital account of the National Nature Reserves managed by Natural England. Natural England Research Report, Number 078 Project manager Tim Sunderland Principal Specialist in Economics Horizon House Bristol BS1 5TL [email protected] Acknowledgements We would like to thank everyone who contributed to this report both within Natural England and externally. ii Natural England Research Report 078 Foreword England’s National Nature Reserves (NNRs) are the crown jewels of our natural heritage.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulations Assessment of the South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan
    Habitats Regulations Assessment of the South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan Regulation 18 HRA Report May 2021 Habitats Regulations Assessment of the South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan Regulation 18 HRA Report LC- 654 Document Control Box Client South Norfolk Council Habitats Regulations Assessment Report Title Regulation 18 – HRA Report Status FINAL Filename LC-654_South Norfolk_Regulation 18_HRA Report_8_140521SC.docx Date May 2021 Author SC Reviewed ND Approved ND Photo: Female broad bodied chaser by Shutterstock Regulation 18 – HRA Report May 2021 LC-654_South Norfolk_Regulation 18_HRA Report_8_140521SC.docx Contents 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose of this report ............................................................................................................................................... 1 2 The South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan ................................................................... 3 2.1 Greater Norwich Local Plan .................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 South Norfolk Village Cluster Housing Allocations Plan ................................................................................ 3 2.3 Village Clusters ..........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hannah Booth Report Greater Norwich Water Cycle Study 2020-01-23
    Greater Norwich Water Cycle Study Greater Norwich Authorities Draft for consultation Project number: 60593120 February 2020 Greater Norwich Water Cycle Study Draft for consultation Greater Norwich Authorities AECOM Quality information Prepared by Checked by Verified by Approved by Hannah Booth Amy Ruocco Carl Pelling Amy Ruocco Graduate Water Senior Water Consultant Regional Director Senior Water Consultant Consultant Laura Soothill Graduate Engineer Christina Bakopoulou Flood Risk Engineer Revision History Revision Revision date Details Authorized Name Position 01 27/11/2019 Draft for comment CP Carl Pelling Regional Director 02 28/01/2020 Draft for CP Carl Pelling Regional Director consultation 03 05/02/2020 Draft for CP Carl Pelling Regional Director consultation Position statement February 2020 This report represents a working draft of the GNLP Outline Water Cycle Study. Consultation is ongoing with Anglian Water Services, the Environment Agency and Natural England who have not yet signed off the study conclusions and it is therefore subject to change. Further updates are also required to align with some recent changes to housing numbers and extension of the plan period to 2038 agreed in December 2019. These will be incorporated into the final report. Prepared for: Broadland District Council, Norwich City Council and South Norfolk District Council Prepared by: AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited Midpoint, Alencon Link Basingstoke Hampshire RG21 7PP United Kingdom T: +44(0)1256 310200 aecom.com © 2020 AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited. All Rights Reserved. This document has been prepared by AECOM Infrastructure & Environment UK Limited (“AECOM”) for sole use of our client (the “Client”) in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and the terms of reference agreed between AECOM and the Client.
    [Show full text]
  • David Tyldesley and Associates Planning, Landscape and Environmental Consultants
    DAVID TYLDESLEY AND ASSOCIATES PLANNING, LANDSCAPE AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS Habitat Regulations Assessment: Breckland Council Submission Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Document Durwyn Liley, Rachel Hoskin, John Underhill-Day & David Tyldesley 1 DRAFT Date: 7th November 2008 Version: Draft Recommended Citation: Liley, D., Hoskin, R., Underhill-Day, J. & Tyldesley, D. (2008). Habitat Regulations Assessment: Breckland Council Submission Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Document. Footprint Ecology, Wareham, Dorset. Report for Breckland District Council. 2 Summary This document records the results of a Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) of Breckland District Council’s Core Strategy. The Breckland District lies in an area of considerable importance for nature conservation with a number of European Sites located within and just outside the District. The range of sites, habitats and designations is complex. Taking an area of search of 20km around the District boundary as an initial screening for relevant protected sites the assessment identified five different SPAs, ten different SACs and eight different Ramsar sites. Following on from this initial screening the assessment identifies the following potential adverse effects which are addressed within the appropriate assessment: • Reduction in the density of Breckland SPA Annex I bird species (stone curlew, nightjar, woodlark) near to new housing. • Increased levels of recreational activity resulting in increased disturbance to Breckland SPA Annex I bird species (stone curlew, nightjar, woodlark). • Increased levels of people on and around the heaths, resulting in an increase in urban effects such as increased fire risk, fly-tipping, trampling. • Increased levels of recreation to the Norfolk Coast (including the Wash), potentially resulting in disturbance to interest features and other recreational impacts.
    [Show full text]
  • 233 08 SD50 Environment Permitting Decision Document
    Environment Agency permitting decisions Bespoke permit We have decided to grant the permit for Didlington Farm Poultry Unit operated by Mr Robert Anderson, Mrs Rosamond Anderson and Mr Marcus Anderson. The permit number is EPR/EP3937EP. We consider in reaching that decision we have taken into account all relevant considerations and legal requirements and that the permit will ensure that the appropriate level of environmental protection is provided. Purpose of this document This decision document: • explains how the application has been determined • provides a record of the decision-making process • shows how all relevant factors have been taken into account • justifies the specific conditions in the permit other than those in our generic permit template. Unless the decision document specifies otherwise we have accepted the applicant’s proposals. Structure of this document • Key issues • Annex 1 the decision checklist • Annex 2 the consultation, web publicising responses. EPR/EP3937EP/A001 Page 1 of 12 Key Issues 1) Ammonia Impacts There are two Special Areas for Conservation (SAC) within 3.4km, one Special Protection Area (SPA) within 850m, seven Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) within 4.9km and six Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) within 1.4km of the facility, one of which is within 250m. Assessment of SAC and SPA If the Process Contribution (PC) is below 4% of the relevant critical level (CLe) or critical load (CLo) then the farm can be permitted with no further assessment. Initial screening using Ammonia Screening Tool (AST) v4.4 has indicated that the PC for Breckland SAC, Norfolk Valley Fens SAC and Breckland SPA is predicted to be greater than 4% of the CLe for ammonia.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitats Regulations Assessment: Draft Scoping Report
    North Norfolk 2016 - 2036 HABITATS REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT Draft Scoping Report May 2017 North Norfolk District Council Planning Policy Team Telephone: 01263 516318 E-Mail: [email protected] Write to: Planning Policy Manager, North Norfolk District Council, Holt Road, Cromer, NR27 9EN www.north-norfolk.gov.uk/localplan All documents can be made available in Braille, audio, large print or in other languages. Please contact 01263 516318 to discuss your requirements. Draft HRA Scoping - North Norfolk District Council – Emerging Local Plan Executive Summary Habitats Regulations Assessment is required in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, (amended 2012); in order to ensure that plans and projects do not have a likely significant effect on any European designated sites for nature conservation. Such plans or projects can only proceed if the competent authority is convinced they will not have an “adverse effect on the integrity of a European site”. Where there is uncertainty over the effects then the competent authority will need to demonstrate how these can be avoided and what mitigation can be put in place. A Local Plan is the subject of Habitats Regulations Assessment, which is the responsibility of the plan-making body (in this case North Norfolk District Council) to produce. This scoping report provides the background and review of evidence to support the commencement of screening and the final Habitats Regulations Assessment of the North Norfolk Core Strategy and Site Allocations documents. This report considers: • The European designated sites within and outside the plan area affected. • The characteristics of these sites and their conservation objectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Transactions of the Norfolk and Norwich Naturalists' Society
    20 NOV 2Q02 I FXCHA^O'-"> 1 Norfolk Bird Report - 2001 Editor: Giles Dunmore Editorial 95 Review of the Year 98 Wetland Bird Surveys for Breydon and The Wash 1 05 Norfolk Bird Atlas 1 07 Systematic List 1 09 Introductions, Escapes, Ferals and Hybrids 248 Earliest and Latest Dates of Summer Migrants 253 Latest and Earliest Dates of Winter Migrants 254 Non-accepted and non-submitted records 255 Contributors 256 Ringing Report 258 Hunstanton Cliffs: a Forgotten Migration Hotspot 268 1 Yellow-legged Gulls in Norfolk: 1 96 -200 1 273 Marmora’s Warbler on Scolt Head - a first for Norfolk 28 Pallas’s Grasshopper Warbler at Blakeney Point - the second for Norfolk 283 Blyth’s Pipit at Happisburgh in September 1 999 - the second for Norfolk 285 Norfolk Mammal Report - 2001 Editor: Ian Keymer Editorial 287 Bats at Paston Great Barn 288 Memories of an ex-editor 298 Harvest Mice: more common than suspected? 299 Are we under-recording the Norfolk mink population? 301 National Key Sites for Water Voles in Norfolk 304 A Guide to identification of Shrews and Rodents 309 Published by NORFOLK AND NORWICH NATURALISTS’ SOCIETY Castle Museum, Norwich, NRl 3JU (Transactions Volume 35 part 2 October 2002) Please note that the page numbering in this report follows on from part 1 of the Transactions pub- lished in July 2002 ISSN 0375 7226 www.nnns.org.uk Keepsake back numbers are available from David & Iris Pauli, 8 Lindford Drive, Eaton, Norwich NR4 6LT Front cover photograph: Tree Sparrow (Richard Brooks) Back cover photograph: Grey Seal (Graeme Cresswell) NORFOLK BIRD REPORT - 2001 Editorial x On behalf of the Society 1 am pleased to present the annual report on the Birds of Norfolk.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambridgeshire & Essex Butterfly Conservation
    Butterfly Conservation Regional Action Plan For Anglia (Cambridgeshire, Essex, Suffolk & Norfolk) This action plan was produced in response to the Action for Butterflies project funded by WWF, EN, SNH and CCW This regional project has been supported by Action for Biodiversity Cambridgeshire and Essex Branch Suffolk branch BC Norfolk branch BC Acknowledgements The Cambridgeshire and Essex branch, Norfolk branch and Suffolk branch constitute Butterfly Conservation’s Anglia region. This regional plan has been compiled from individual branch plans which are initially drawn up from 1997-1999. As the majority of the information included in this action plan has been directly lifted from these original plans, credit for this material should go to the authors of these reports. They were John Dawson (Cambridgeshire & Essex Plan, 1997), James Mann and Tony Prichard (Suffolk Plan, 1998), and Jane Harris (Norfolk Plan, 1999). County butterfly updates have largely been provided by Iris Newbery and Dr Val Perrin (Cambridgeshire and Essex), Roland Rogers and Brian Mcllwrath (Norfolk) and Richard Stewart (Suffolk). Some of the moth information included in the plan has been provided by Dr Paul Waring, David Green and Mark Parsons (BC Moth Conservation Officers) with additional county moth data obtained from John Dawson (Cambridgeshire), Brian Goodey and Robin Field (Essex), Barry Dickerson (Huntingdon Moth and Butterfly Group), Michael Hall and Ken Saul (Norfolk Moth Survey) and Tony Prichard (Suffolk Moth Group). Some of the micro-moth information included in the plan was kindly provided by A. M. Emmet. Other individuals targeted with specific requests include Graham Bailey (BC Cambs. & Essex), Ruth Edwards, Dr Chris Gibson (EN), Dr Andrew Pullin (Birmingham University), Estella Roberts (BC, Assistant Conservation Officer, Wareham), Matthew Shardlow (RSPB) and Ken Ulrich (BC Cambs.
    [Show full text]
  • Site Improvement Plan Breckland
    Improvement Programme for England's Natura 2000 Sites (IPENS) Planning for the Future Site Improvement Plan Breckland Site Improvement Plans (SIPs) have been developed for each Natura 2000 site in England as part of the Improvement Programme for England's Natura 2000 sites (IPENS). Natura 2000 sites is the combined term for sites designated as Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protected Areas (SPA). This work has been financially supported by LIFE, a financial instrument of the European Community. The plan provides a high level overview of the issues (both current and predicted) affecting the condition of the Natura 2000 features on the site(s) and outlines the priority measures required to improve the condition of the features. It does not cover issues where remedial actions are already in place or ongoing management activities which are required for maintenance. The SIP consists of three parts: a Summary table, which sets out the priority Issues and Measures; a detailed Actions table, which sets out who needs to do what, when and how much it is estimated to cost; and a set of tables containing contextual information and links. Once this current programme ends, it is anticipated that Natural England and others, working with landowners and managers, will all play a role in delivering the priority measures to improve the condition of the features on these sites. The SIPs are based on Natural England's current evidence and knowledge. The SIPs are not legal documents, they are live documents that will be updated to reflect changes in our evidence/knowledge and as actions get underway.
    [Show full text]