Worcestershire Minerals Local Plan Background Document

Bird Strike

Background Document May 14th 2015

Document Details: Status: Final v2 Document Location: www.worcestershire.gov.uk/minerals Contact: Marianne Joynes, Worcestershire County Council, Business, Environment and Communities, Minerals Planning, County Hall, Worcester, WR5 2NP Email: [email protected] Tel: 01905 766374

1

Contents Page

1. Introduction ...... 3 Context ...... 3 Consultation ...... 3 2. Background ...... 4 Airfields in and near Worcestershire ...... 4 Bird strikes ...... 5 3. Policy Context ...... 8 UK National Policy ...... 8 European Policy ...... 8 National Planning Policy ...... 9 CAA advice ...... 11 Minerals Products Association ...... 11 Local Planning Policy ...... 12 Local Transport Plan 3 (2011-2026) ...... 12 City, Borough and District Planning Policies regarding airfields or bird strike within Worcestershire ...... 14 Planning Policies regarding airfields or bird strike in counties adjoining Worcestershire ...... 14 The Minerals Local Plan for Worcestershire and bird strike ...... 15 Bird strike: a risk assessment based approach ...... 15 4. Conclusions ...... 19 Appendix 1: Bodies consulted on initial draft document ...... 20 Appendix 2: Summary of comments received ...... 22 Appendix 3: UK Birdstrike Data ...... 23 Online Birdstrike Reporting System ...... 23

2

1. Introduction

Context

1.1. The Council has a statutory duty to produce a Minerals Local Plan (MLP) to deliver minerals development. The current Hereford and Worcester MLP was adopted in 1997 and needs to be updated to reflect current policy, practice and guidance. The new Minerals Local Plan will replace the existing Minerals Local Plan and will be a Development Plan Document which is used to guide new development and determine planning applications.

1.2. We need to consider ways to develop policies in the Plan in order to minimise the impacts the winning and working of minerals can produce. These can include direct or indirect effects on safety; one element of these could be the risk of bird-strike to aeroplanes.

1.3. There are no civil or military aerodromes in Worcestershire. There are however airfields in the adjoining counties. The UK is a signatory to international agreements requiring policy makers to address the risk of bird strike to aircraft safety.

1.4. This document explores the issues related to mineral workings and bird strike and the extent to which the Minerals Local Plan could address it.

Consultation

This is a consultation document which is intended to promote discussion and at this stage it does not draw firm conclusions about options the council will pursue. A draft of this report has already been sent to the bodies listed in Appendix1 and a note of their responses has been added.

1.5. All comments should be sent to [email protected] or addressed to: FREEPOST RTHC-XXCK-AJGY Minerals and Waste Planning Policy, Business Environment and Community, Worcestershire County Council, County Hall, Worcester, WR5 2NP.

1.6. For further details or to request copies of this document please contact Nick Dean, 01905 766374.

3

1.7. All comments will be taken into account in developing this document and the emerging Minerals Local Plan. The final version of the document will set out background evidence which will inform the Minerals Local Plan.

2. Background

Airfields in and near Worcestershire 2.1. There are no civil or military airfields in Worcestershire.

2.2. The following civilian airfields are in counties which adjoin Worcestershire, only 1 (one) Airport (/Staverton) is within 13 km/8 miles of Worcestershire: Licensed airfields within 13km/8m of Worcestershire Gloucestershire/ Staverton, (Glos)

Licensed airfields in counties adjoining Worcestershire Birmingham International Coventry (Warks) Wellesbourne Mountford, (Warks) Long Marston (Warks) Sleap (Shrops) Wolverhampton (Staffs) Tattenhill (Staffs)

There are also unlicensed airfields at: Ledbury (Hfds) Shobdon, Hfds Bidford upon Avon (Warks) Baxterley (Warks) Aston Down (Glos) Kemble (Glos) Sherlowe (Shrops) Rednall (Shrops) Chirk (Shrops) Church Stretton (Shrops) Milson (Shrops)

Military airfields There are no military airfields within 8 miles of Worcestershire but the following are in adjoining counties: RAF Fairford (Glos) RAF Little Rissington (Glos) RAF Coxford (Shrops) MoD helicopters also fly out of Hereford.

2.3. Other helipad, microlight and private airfields may also exist in Worcestershire and the adjoining counties. For the purpose of this paper however it has been assumed that the level of use and degree of risk of bird strike from mineral workings at these is too small to be significant.

4

Bird strikes

2.4. Bird strikes are a significant threat to flight safety, and have caused a number of accidents with human casualties1. The number of major accidents involving civil aircraft is however, low and it has been estimated that there is only about 1 accident resulting in human death in one billion flying hours2. The majority of bird strikes (65%) cause little damage to the aircraft3; however the collision is usually fatal to the bird(s) involved.

2.5. Most accidents occur when the bird hits the windscreen or flies into the engines. These cause annual damages that have been estimated at $400 million4 within the United States of America alone and up to $1.2 billion to commercial aircraft worldwide5.

2.6. The UK is committed by international treaty6 to preserve air safety. Responsibility for achieving this is split between aerodrome operators and the Local Planning Authority. The aerodrome licence holder is required to take all reasonable steps to secure that the aerodrome and the airspace within which its visual traffic pattern is normally contained are safe at all times for use by aircraft (Article 128(5) of the Air Navigation Order (ANO) 2005). " Birdstrike risk management is an integral part of the aerodrome operator's safety management culture and its safety management system (SMS)"7.

2.7. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) recommends that "The aerodrome operator should develop a Bird Control Management Plan (BCMP) to assess the birdstrike risk, and to define and implement the appropriate bird control measures to reduce or mitigate the risk." and that this should include "… establishment of a safeguarding process with the local planning authority for consultation on proposed developments that have the potential to be bird attractant within 13 km of the aerodrome…"8

2.8. National policy (Circular 1/2003), requires LPAs to consult with the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and CAA where specified developments would be within 13km of a safeguarded aerodrome zone. Other provisions require the operator of the aerodrome to record all incidences of bird strike (see Appendix 2).

1 Thorpe, John (2003). "Fatalities and destroyed civil aircraft due to bird strikes, 1912-2002" (PDF). International Bird Strike Committee, IBSC 26 Warsaw. 2 Milson, T.P. & N. Horton (1995). Birdstrike. An assessment of the hazard on UK civil aerodromes 1976-1990. Central Science Laboratory, Sand Hutton, York, UK. 3Allan, John R.; Alex P. Orosz (2001-08-27). "The costs of birdstrikes to commercial aviation". DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska. Retrieved 2009-01-16. 4 b Allan, John R.; Alex P. Orosz (2001-08-27). "The costs of birdstrikes to commercial aviation". DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska. Retrieved 2009-01-16. 5 Allan, John R.; Alex P. Orosz (2001-08-27). "The costs of birdstrikes to commercial aviation". DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska. Retrieved 2009-01-16. 66 Convention on International Civil Aviation, Chicago 1944; specifically Annex 14 7 CAA Safety Regulation Group CAP 772 Bird Strike Risk Management for Aerodromes. CAA 1st September 2008 Page 1 8 CAA Safety Regulation Group CAP 772 Bird Strike Risk Management for Aerodromes. CAA 1st September 2008 Page 2

5

2.9. When planning applications are submitted that involve the restoration of former mineral workings, especially if these involve wetland creation and are located close to an airport, conflicts can result between the applicants` proposals and the safeguarding authorities tasked with preventing any increase in the risk to aircraft from birdstrikes. It is therefore in the interests of all parties to understand the potential implications site restorations might have on local bird populations and as a corollary, if there is any risk to aircraft safety.

2.10. A further consideration is that mineral extraction sites rarely occur in isolation. Sand and gravel deposits are often worked from a number of pits in close proximity, and restoration schemes must also take into consideration the potential effects of previously existing water bodies nearby. Unfortunately, the movement of birds between water bodies are poorly understood on a local scale, and research to establish how flocks of birds move at different times of day, or to show how many birds can be expected to move into an area with a new water body is badly needed.

2.11. Although critiques of mineral extraction restoration plans often concentrate on the numbers of birds that they are likely to attract, it is the behaviour of those birds that will actually govern the risk to aircraft. For this reason, the juxtaposition of features such as feeding and roosting sites in the environment strongly influences the birdstrike risk that will result from a development, and two apparently identical proposals could result in two different responses from the aviation regulators at different airports.

2.12. Changes in the ecology of bird populations are also likely to be significant. Canada Geese, for example, once limited to escaped birds from private collections, have developed growing populations of non-migratory birds. Non-migratory geese tend to inhabit areas of open parkland, golf courses and areas with both natural and man-made water features. They have also adapted to feed on open farmland. They are thus increasingly found near airports9.

2.13. Unfortunately, the way in which birds move around the environment is poorly understood. The average distance that common species such as pigeons, corvids and waterfowl fly on a daily basis from roosting or nesting sites to feeding grounds, remains largely unknown. Similarly the altitude, time of day and the influence of factors such as weather conditions on these movements are also not properly documented. A distinction also needs to be made between factors that might be measurable in a planning situation before extraction at a site is completed, such as the physical dimensions of a proposed waterbody and factors that are unpredictable, such as the development of aquatic vegetation or changes in water chemistry over time10.

9 Developing policy and best practice in relation to restoration following minerals extraction – resolving conflicts with aviation" (SAMP 1.015) Literature review. Richard Walls, Central Science Laboratory (CSL) York, U.K. http://www.sustainableaggregates.com/library/docs/samp/l0125_samp_1_015.pdf 10 "Modelling the birdstrike risk from hazardous birds attracted to restored mineral extraction sites". Andrew Paul Robinson Central Science Laboratory, Sand Hutton, York, YO41 1LZ, UK

6

2.14. The lack of data has led to regulators adopting a precautionary approach, assuming that birds will move between a new site and any other suitable site in the area. A better understanding of the routine movements of common birds in relation to features in the environment would allow more precise predictions of risk levels to be made and ensure that only those developments that will actually increase birdstrike risk will attract an objection.

2.15. Attempts have been made to model the likelihood of bird strike from waterbodies; all found however that there were a very large number of uncertainties and variables and no method appears to have been regarded as reliable enough to have been endorsed by government or national aviation authorities. A literature review conducted by the Central Science Laboratory11 concluded, that the study "highlighted important areas of research needed to address the current gaps in knowledge".

2.16. One of the studies included in the review12 concluded that "… a blanket objection by safeguarding authorities to bird attracting developments in the outer reaches of safeguarding zones would appear inappropriate" and ….that "the results….were not sufficiently robust to inform guidance to safeguarding authorities, developers, planners and land managers on the likely consequences of land use decisions within safeguarding zones."

2.17. The absence of reliable modelling does not however negate the potential risks involved.

http://www.int-birdstrike.org/Athens_Papers/IBSC27%20WPVIII-3.pdf 11 Developing policy and best practice in relation to restoration following minerals extraction – resolving conflicts with aviation" (SAMP 1.015) Literature review. Richard Walls, Central Science Laboratory (CSL) York, U.K. http://www.sustainableaggregates.com/library/docs/samp/l0125_samp_1_015.pdf 12 "Modelling Bird Aircraft Strikes in Relation to Airfield Type and Surrounding Land Use" (RSPB) (page 15)

7

3. Policy Context

UK National Policy

3.1. The national Aviation Policy Framework (March 2013) sets out the government’s policy to allow the aviation sector to continue to make a significant contribution to economic growth across the country. It provides the baseline for the Airports Commission to take into account on important issues such as aircraft noise and climate change. It sets out government’s objectives on the issues which will challenge and support the development of aviation across the UK. It refers to the need to safeguard airports and buffer zones around them. It does not specifically refer to minerals planning and related issues.

European Policy

3.2. In the context of the Minerals Local Plan, one of the most important elements of EU policy regarding bird strike issues is the Habitats Directive and associated Regulations. The most significant elements for this paper are the EC Birds directive and the Ramsar Convention. Sites afforded protection under the 2010 Habitats Regulations (as amended) are designated in the UK as Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), candidate Special Areas of Conservation (cSACs) and Special Protection Areas (SPAs). As a matter of policy the government also applies the procedures described below to Ramsar sites and potential SPAs. These sites are generally referred to as "Natura 2000" sites.

3.3. The main aim of the Habitats Directive is to promote the maintenance of biodiversity by requiring Member States to take measures to maintain or restore natural habitats and wild species listed in the Annexes to the Directive at a favourable conservation status and introduce robust protection for those habitats and species. In applying these measures Member States are required to take account of economic, social and cultural requirements, as well as regional and local characteristics.

3.4. In summary, under Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive, an appropriate assessment is required where a plan or project is likely to have a significant effect upon a European site, either individually or in combination with other projects.

Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives. - Article 6(3)

This Article has been interpreted as meaning that any project is to be subject to an appropriate assessment if it cannot be proven, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no significant effect on that site (a precautionary approach), either alone or in combination with other plans or projects.

8

3.5. Further to this, Article 6(4) states that where an appropriate assessment has been carried out and results in a negative assessment (in other words, any proposed avoidance or mitigation measures anticipated are unable to reduce the potential impact so it is no longer significant) or if uncertainty remains over the significant effect, consent will only be granted if there are no alternative solutions, and there are imperative reasons of over-riding public interest (IROPI) for the development and compensatory measures have been secured. It is possible that the need to ensure aircraft safety could be interpreted as a matter of "overriding public interest". Any decisions to reduce potential bird strike by modifying existing waterbodies would nonetheless need to take account of the Habitats Regulations.

National Planning Policy

3.6. Paragraphs 143, 8th bullet point and 144, 4th bullet point in the National Planning Policy Framework state that: "In preparing Local Plans, Local authorities should….put in place policies to ensure worked land is reclaimed at the earliest opportunity, taking account of aviation safety," and "When determining planning applications, local planning authorities should…ensure, in granting planning permission for mineral development, that there are no unacceptable adverse impacts on …human health or aviation safety"

3.7. ODPM Circular 01/200313 is also still extant and sets out the system for safeguarding civil and military aerodromes. In summary, the Order requires LPAs to consult the Civil Aviation Authority or the MoD if they propose to grant planning permission on "…land forming the site of or in the neighbourhood of an aerodrome, technical site or military explosives storage area for which a safeguarding map has been furnished".

3.8. Annex 1 to the Circular defines the terms and sets out the statutory duties for LPAs.

3.9. Schedule 2, paragraph 3 of the order states:

… Certain civil aerodromes, selected on the basis of their importance to the national air transport system, are therefore officially safeguarded, in order to ensure that their operation and development are not inhibited by buildings, structures, erections or works which infringe protected surfaces, obscure approach lights or have the potential to impair the performance of aerodrome navigation aids, radio aids or telecommunication systems; by lighting which has the potential to distract pilots; or by developments which have the potential to increase the number of birds or the bird hazard risk. A similar official safeguarding system applies to certain military aerodromes, selected on the basis of their strategic importance…

13 ODPM Circular 01/2003: Safeguarding Aerodromes, Technical Sites and Military Explosives Areas Storage Areas: The Town and Country Planning (Safeguarded Aerodromes, Technical Sites and Military Explosives Storage Areas) Direction 20024

9

3.10. Paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Schedule state:

The primary aim is to guard against new or increased hazards caused by development. The most important types of development in this respect are: facilities intended for the handling, compaction, treatment or disposal of household or commercial wastes, which attract a variety of species, including gulls, starlings, lapwings and corvids; the creation or modification of areas of water such as reservoirs, lakes, ponds, wetlands and marshes, which attract gulls and waterfowl; nature reserves and bird sanctuaries; and sewage disposal and treatment plant and outfalls, which can attract gulls and other species. Planting trees and bushes normally creates a bird hazard only when it takes place relatively near to an aerodrome, but a potential starling roost site further away from an aerodrome can create a hazard. Mineral extraction and quarrying can also create a bird hazard because, although these processes do not in themselves attract birds, the sites are commonly used for landfill or the creation of wetland.

In order to protect aerodromes against these hazards, safeguarding maps include, in addition to the requirements related to the height of buildings and structures, a dotted circle, with a 13 kilometre radius in the case of civil aerodromes and an eight mile (about 12.87 kilometre) radius in the case of military aerodromes, centred on the safeguarded aerodrome reference point to indicate the area within which developments likely to attract birds require similar consultation. Local planning authorities are required to consult the relevant consultee before granting planning permission for any development within the relevant radius of an officially safeguarded civil or military aerodrome which is likely to attract birds.

3.11. Neither the Annexes to the Circular, nor subsequent notifications to the county council show any safeguarded aerodromes, or other features referred to in the Circular, in Worcestershire or within 13km of the county boundary.

3.12. Para 13 of the Circular also states:

Operators of licensed aerodromes which are not officially safeguarded, and operators of unlicensed aerodromes and sites for other aviation activities (for example gliding or parachuting) should take steps to protect their locations from the effects of possible adverse development by establishing an agreed consultation procedure between themselves and the local planning authority or authorities. One method, recommended by the Civil Aviation Authority to aerodrome licensees, is to lodge a non-official safeguarding map with the local planning authority or authorities. Local planning authorities are asked to respond sympathetically to requests for non-official safeguarding. The general advice in this Annex is applicable to non-officially, as well as to officially, safeguarded aerodromes but the requirements of the Direction at Annex 1 will not apply.

No such notifications have been made to the county council at the time of writing.

10

3.13. Mineral Planning Policy Note 1 (MPS1), now rescinded, used to specify that all new mineral extraction proposals within 8 miles (13 km) of an active airfield must take the potential risk of bird strike to aircraft into account when deciding an end use. This "safeguarding zone" is still referred to by other organisations, such as the RSPB. In addition to national policy in the Circular, such references can be considered material considerations in the development and application of the plan.

3.14. The CLG`s advice14 is that "…the proliferation of airports within the UK means that almost two thirds of the country’s land area now falls within a bird strike safeguarding zone.). It's for local authorities to consider the policies in the NPPF and, as far as it's relevant, the 2003 Circular in formulating their local plans and in making decisions on individual applications…"

CAA advice 3.15. The CAA's advice is that:

"A safeguarding consultation process exists as part of the planning process1 to address proposed developments with the potential to affect the safety of aircraft operations at certain civil and military aerodromes, designated by the Government as 'officially safeguarded aerodromes'. The consultation process includes a means to address potential bird attractant developments within a 13 km radius circle of the aerodrome. Safeguarding maps are used to define the 13 km radius circle and are lodged with local planning authorities. The 13 km circle is based on a statistic that 99% of birdstrikes occur below a height 2000 ft, and that an aircraft on a normal approach would descend into this circle at approximately this distance from the runway. All licensed aerodromes, other than those designated, should establish their own safeguarding consultation procedures with their local planning authorities"15.

3.16. A very small area of Worcestershire near Tewkesbury, specifically, the settlements of The Mythe, Shuthonger, Bushley and Eldersfield, is just within 13km of Gloucestershire/Staverton Airport . This area includes 3 known sand and gravel resources; only one of these, the "Significant" resource at Hardrow House (resource 18/8) is within one of the Strategic Corridors for mineral development (the Avon Strategic Corridor) proposed in the "Third Consultation" on the Minerals Local Plan for Worcestershire. One "Key" resource at Bushley Green (resource 8/1) and one "Significant" resource at Bushley (resource 8/2) are also within 13km of the airport but neither is within one of the proposed Strategic Corridors.

Minerals Products Association 3.17. The Mineral Products Association (MPA) is the trade body representing parts of the UK minerals industry, it does not therefore have any official

14 E mail correspondence, Roger Wand of CLG 4th April 2014. 15 CAA Safety Regulation Group CAP 772 Bird Strike Risk Management for Aerodromes. CAA 1st September 2008 Chapter 4 page 15

11

standing, it`s policies can however be considered a material consideration in the determination of applications for planning permission.

3.18. The MPA has published guidance: "Mineral Sites and Bird strike Hazard & Risk Practice Guide Final Version March 2015" that summarises the issues from the industry`s perspective and states: "The general principle should be to use site restoration design to reduce hazard and risk, ensuring habitat selection, design and management does not attract species of specific concern to aviation interests while delivering biodiversity benefits appropriate to the location. The key issues to address to achieve an appropriate bird strike hazard mitigation approach include: Early and on-going dialogue between developers, planning authorities and aerodrome operators; Restoration design including landscaping, habitat creation and management to reduce and manage hazard and risk; Bird Management Plan preparation and implementation where necessary to ensure long-term residual risk management.

Bird strike Management Plans (BMPs) should be prepared to manage (residual) problems should they occur and be complementary to overall scheme design.

Local Planning Policy

Local Transport Plan 3 (2011-2026)

3.19. Worcestershire's third Local Transport Plan (LTP3) does not include references to flight in any form. It does however state that:

…an efficient, affordable and multimodal transport network is essential if Worcestershire is to be able to achieve its vision (as set out in the Worcestershire Sustainable Community Strategy) [of] a county with safe, cohesive, healthy and inclusive communities, a strong and diverse economy and a valued and cherished environment16.

3.20. One of LTP3's economic aims is to improve accessibility by all modes, particularly to Worcestershire's main urban areas, although the policies linked with this aim do not include air transport. The Plan also aims to improve journey time reliability and network efficiency by reducing congestion particularly with a view to enabling, the expeditious movement of freight in, out and across Worcestershire.

3.21. The county council has not stated any intention to develop aerodromes within the life of the LTP, or beyond. (Multimodal Freight Policy)17.

16 Worcestershire County Council, 2011, Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 3: The Worcestershire Transport Strategy, available from http://www.worcestershire.gov.uk/cms/local-transport-plan/the-local-transport-plan.aspx 17 Worcestershire County Council, 2011, Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 3: The Worcestershire Transport Strategy, available from http://www.worcestershire.gov.uk/cms/local-transport-plan/the-local-transport-plan.aspx

12

3.22. The environmental objective of LTP3 is to "reduce the impact of transport in Worcestershire on the local environment, by reducing noise and transport-related emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, with the desired outcomes of tackling climate change and reducing the impacts of transport on public health"18. Transport emissions (excluding motorways) in Worcestershire account for 28% of Worcestershire's CO2 emissions (in 2005)19.

3.23. LTP3's environmental aim to optimise the resilience of Worcestershire's transport networks to the negative impacts of climate change (in particular, flooding) with the desired outcome of developing our transport networks so that they maintain a reliable service during major weather events and temperature change is supported by the linked policy of identifying and promoting rail and water freight opportunities (Multimodal Freight Policy); Again, there are no suggestions that the council intends to develop, or encourage the development of airfields in the county.

3.24. A further environmental aim sets out to reduce the primary and secondary adverse impacts of transport on local communities, with the desired outcome of reducing transport's contribution towards climate change and wider environmental deterioration. Linked policies refer to understanding the transport causes of designated Air Quality Management Areas and developing schemes to mitigate localised poor air quality or to encourage less polluting modes of transport (Transport and Air Quality Policy). There is no suggestion that proposals to develop air traffic in the county would be achieved through this aim.

Multimodal Freight Policy 3.25. LTP3's Multimodal Freight Policy provides the strategic framework for the development of measures which will help to improve the efficient movement and operation of freight by all modes around the county, which will act to positively enhance the vitality of the local economy. In Worcestershire, the majority of freight is currently transported by road, particularly due to the fact that the road network is far denser than rail and water networks. However, the Multimodal Freight Policy states that the availability and rising costs of fuel resources, together with the environmental impacts of road transport in general are causing the government and freight operators to consider other, more sustainable transport modes for moving freight, such as by rail or water – particularly for bulk goods and waste20. Air transport is not, however, encouraged.

18 Worcestershire County Council, 2011, Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 3: The Worcestershire Transport Strategy, available from http://www.worcestershire.gov.uk/cms/local-transport-plan/the-local-transport-plan.aspx 19 Worcestershire County Council, 2011, Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 3: The Worcestershire Transport Strategy, available from http://www.worcestershire.gov.uk/cms/local-transport-plan/the-local-transport-plan.aspx 20 Worcestershire County Council, 2011, Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 3: Multimodal Freight Policy, available from http://www.worcestershire.gov.uk/cms/local-transport-plan/the- local-transport-plan.aspx

13

City, Borough and District Planning Policies regarding airfields or bird strike within Worcestershire

3.26. None of six District, Borough or City councils in Worcestershire propose the development of aerodromes in the county or expressly refer to air safety issues or the need to address issues of birdstrike.

Planning Policies regarding airfields or bird strike in counties adjoining Worcestershire

Gloucestershire 3.27. The LTP3 for Gloucestershire has one reference to airfields which states:

Gloucestershire has a rich aviation history, with several former military air bases located within the County and many aviation engineering companies are still based in the area. Today there remains one major military air base (RAF Fairford), one smaller military facility (Upper Rissington), one commercial airport focussed primarily on business travel (Gloucestershire Airport, located between and Gloucester), an airfield that primarily operates as a centre for gliding (Aston Down) and at Kemble, which serves a range of private and preservation interests.

…Constraints formed by surrounding development mean that Gloucestershire Airport is unlikely to significantly expand operations during the LTP3 period. Therefore, the focus for commercial air travel to and from Gloucestershire will continue to be on the major airports located in the South East, West Midlands, and at Bristol and Cardiff21.

3.28. The "Preferred Options report22" for the emerging Minerals Local Plan for Gloucestershire includes the following reference to birds strike:

Numerous interests and influences for securing after-uses have also caused a degree of spatial conflict. This has been a key issue in the Upper Thames Valley, where support for water-based restoration and biodiversity after-uses has raised concern over ‘birdstrike’ risks with the nearby military airbase – RAF Fairford.

The same point is made in a background paper to the plan "MCS F: After Minerals- Restoration Aftercare Afteruse23.

Warwickshire

21 Gloucestershire’s Local Transport Plan 2011-26 Promoting a safe and sustainable transport system paras 3.47 and 3.49 22 Gloucestershire County Council: Minerals Core Strategy Preferred Options (January 2008) http://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/extra/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=22184&p=0 23 http://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/extra/article/107668/Evidence-Base-for-the-MLP

14

3.29. The LTP3 for Warwickshire (2011) has one reference to airfields which states:

There are currently two operational airfields within Warwickshire, at Wellesbourne and Long Marston, neither of which experience any movement of freight. Until recently (located near Baginton in Warwick District) handled substantial domestic and international cargo traffic movements, which predominantly arrived and departed at night. However, the main airport operator went into receivership at the end of 2009 and a new operator is currently being sought.24.

The Minerals Core Strategy- Revised Spatial Options report 25 does not refer to bird strike or aerodrome safety issues.

Shropshire 3.30. Neither the LTP3 for Shropshire or the Core Strategy for Shropshire refer to airfields or flight in any way.

Herefordshire 3.31. Neither the LTP for Herefordshire (2013-2015) nor the emerging Core Strategy refer to airfields or flight in any way.

Staffordshire 3.32. Neither the LTP3 for Staffordshire nor the Minerals Core Strategy Development Plan Document Consultation on Issues and Options (2) (September 2008)26 refer to bird strike, airfields or flight in any way.

The Minerals Local Plan for Worcestershire and bird strike

3.33. There are no airfield safeguarded zones in Worcestershire at present, a small part of the county and 3 known mineral resources are within 13km of Gloucestershire/Staverton airport, the Minerals Local Plan should therefore refer to the need for any proposal for mineral related development within this area to expressly address the risks that might arise both during the operation, restoration and subsequent afteruse of the site.

3.34. The Plan should also acknowledge the potential risks of birdstrike to aircraft in a precautionary way in case new aerodromes or new safeguarded zones are created in or near the county during the life of the Plan. The following issues could be relevant.

Bird strike: a risk assessment based approach

24 Warwickshire CC Local Transport Plan 2011-2026 page 6 25 Warwickshire County Council Minerals Core Strategy- Revised Spatial Options report http://apps.warwickshire.gov.uk/api/documents/WCCC-680-25 26 The Minerals Core Strategy Development Plan Document Consultation on Issues and Options (2) (September 2008) http://www.staffordshire.gov.uk/environment/planning/policy/mineralscorestrategy/Minerals- Core-Strategy-Issues-and-Options-2.pdf

15

3.35. The RSPB/MIRO "Nature After Minerals"27 report (2006) states that

…extracting minerals in river floodplains inevitably leads to wet restoration of some description. The assessment of risk of bird strike brought by a new extraction should not be regarded as a block to habitat creation; rather it should enable end-uses that don't add to the background risk. The creation of predominantly dry or even wet (e.g. reedbed) habitats of high biodiversity value, should, if planned well, not increase the risk to aircraft. The current risk elimination approach of some safeguarding authorities means opportunities to create high quality habitat, without increasing bird-strike risk, are being missed unnecessarily. A case by case assessment of risk, and early dialogue between stakeholders, can enable creative solutions to be agreed, and should be adopted across the country.

3.36. The report includes the following Case study:

Reducing bird strike risk in Surrey: The skies above Surrey are extremely busy with commercial air traffic with two of the world’s busiest airports (Heathrow and Gatwick) and several other significant airfields nearby. Here, the Mineral Planning Authority, Surrey County Council, has developed a close relationship with BAA, consulting them on all planning applications for mineral sites after-use as conflicts of interest can arise, particularly regarding the risk of bird-strike. However, these can be resolved to a positive outcome, by assessing restoration plans on a case-by-case basis. As an aerodrome operator, BAA has a statutory responsibility to ensure that their aerodromes and surrounding airspace are safe at all times for use by aircraft. However this does not preclude the creation of suitable priority BAP habitats which will not attract birds likely to present a bird strike risk. Priority BAP habitats can be created which do not attract large or flocking birds and an early dialogue, such as that between Surrey County Council and BAA, can provide results which are acceptable to both parties."

3.37. Research shows that this approach can be successful, even where mineral workings are close to aerodrome protection zones. For example, 54% of active sand and gravel workings in the Trent Valley occur within safeguarding zones28.

3.38. The MPA "Mineral Sites and Bird strike Hazard & Risk Practice Guide" states: " a balance may be struck and the aim should be to maximise biodiversity benefits while managing hazard and risk… The best examples of restoration in

27 RSPB/MIRO "Nature After Minerals" (2006) Page 18 http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/natureaftermineralsreport_tcm9-257075.pdf 28 Henney P J, Cameron D G, Mankelow J M, Spencer N A, Highley D E and Steadman E J. 2003. Implications of CAA Birdstrike Safeguard Zones for River Sand and Gravel Resources in the Trent Valley. Keyworth, Nottingham, UK.

16

safeguarding zones…..deliver wildlife benefits while reducing potential bird strike hazard and risk.29" The guide includes the following30:

Higher Hazard • Large area of open shallow water • Large area of reedbed • Shallow slopes to banks • Large area of short grass suitable for grazing waterfowl • Public feeding of birds onsite

• Semi-enclosed water bodies - part surrounded by scrub or reedbeds • Tall surrounding grass • Hedgerows used to break up surrounding fields. • Fringing reedbeds

Lower Hazard • Steep banks planted with scrub • Limited public access and hence feeding • Enclosed water body surrounded by reedbed or wet woodland • Small water bodies - less than 200m x 200m of open water • No islands • Specific deterrent actions until habitats have matured onsite.

It advises: "There is no set template or formula for BMPs, in part due to the differences between developers, aerodrome operators and local authorities around the country. It is important that the BMP has the scope to be reviewed regularly and the ability to be modified to fit changing circumstances. Some principles for BMPs are proposed below: aerodrome operator is compliant with reducing risk for the lifetime of the aerodrome. the BMP is a requirement of a Section 106 agreement, then the signatories should be the mineral operator, the aerodrome operator, the local planning authority where relevant, and the land owner (if not the mineral operator).

29 Mineral Products Association: Mineral Sites and Bird strike Hazard & Risk Practice Guide Final Version March 2015 page 9 30 Mineral Products Association: Mineral Sites and Bird strike Hazard & Risk Practice Guide Final Version March 2015 page 10 17

d within the operations management plan for the site. "

The MPA is considering preparing further guidance specifically on Bird Management Plans. The Council will take the current and any future guidance into account when considering proposals within aerodrome safeguarding zones.

18

4. Conclusions

4.1. There is considerable research that bird strike is a potential threat to aircraft safety. Landfills, lakes and other waterbodies often support large populations of bird species, such as wildfowl and starlings, which represent specific risks to aircraft due to the size of individual birds or their tendency to form large flocks. Mineral workings are often restored bylandfilling or to waterbodies and so represent a possible source of species hazardous to aircraft.

4.2. There are no aerodrome safeguarding zones in Worcestershire. A small part of Worcestershire and 3 known mineral resources are within 13km/8m of Gloucestershire/Staverton airport, the Minerals Local Plan will therefore need to include reference to the risks birdstrike poses to aircraft safety and to ensure that proposals address the risks bird strike might pose to aircraft during site working, restoration and afteruse It is also possible that new airfields or protection zones could be developed during the life of the plan and it would therefore be prudent to include some policy reference to the need to ensure that the issues are addressed in future.

19

Appendix 1: Bodies consulted on initial draft document

Bold text indicates the bodies who made comments on the initial draft. Their comments have been incorporated in this version of the document.

 Defence Infrastructure Association  Navigation Services Section, National Air Traffic Services Ltd  Aerodrome Standards Department, Civil Aviation Authority  Directorate of Airspace Policy, Civil Aviation Authority  UKGA http://ukga.com/content/new  Mineral Products Association,  British Aggregates Association,  Environment Agency (west area),  Worcestershire Wildlife Trust,  Worcestershire County Council's highways department,  Worcestershire Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEP)  Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP  Environment Agency  English Heritage  Natural England  Mineral operators in the county: o Weinerberger o Wildmoor Quary (Cinetic Sand) Ltd o Cemex UK o Smiths & Sons o Lafarge Tarmac o Veolia Environmental Services o MV Kelly o Hills Waste o Salop Sand and Gravel  Mineral Planning Authorities adjoining Worcestershire: o Gloucestershire County Council o Warwickshire County Council o Herefordshire Council o Staffordshire County Council o Shropshire Council o Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council o Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council o Birmingham City Council  Local Planning Authorities in and adjoining Worcestershire: o Bromsgrove District Council o Malvern Hills District Council o Redditch Borough Council o Wychavon District Council o Wyre Forest District Council o Worcester City Council  Local Planning Authorities adjoining Worcestershire: o Forest of Dean District Council o Tewkesbury Borough Council

20

o Cotswold District Council o Stratford-on-Avon District Council o South Staffordshire District Council

DCLG (Planning Policy and Aviation Policy), MoD and the CAA were also asked to provide details of relevant policies and guidance. [email protected] Gloucestershire Airport Ltd Staverton Cheltenham Gloucestershire GL51 6SR

Were also consulted on 9th April 2015 on the revised (8th April 2015) version of this report.

21

Appendix 2: Summary of comments received

Natural England  We note that there are no significant airfields or aerodrome safeguarding areas in or near to Worcestershire, and therefore do not consider the risk of bird strike to be a significant consideration when considering minerals allocations or restoration schemes.

Gloucestershire County Council  The runway at Gloucestershire airport may also be within 8 miles of the Worcestershire border.  Long Marston airfield is in Warwickshire not Gloucestershire

CAA  Referred WCC to chapter 5 of CAP 168 and  CAP 172 Aerodrome Wildlife Strike Hazard Management and Reduction.

CLG  Referred WCC to parts of the NPPF and to  the Town and Country Planning (Safeguarded Aerodromes, Technical Sites and Military Explosives Storage Areas) Direction 2002 covered by Circular 01/2003,

 Changes made to the Consultation draft, July 2014 (25/07/2014 as a result of these comments:Para 2.2 Addition of reference to Gloucestershire/Staverton Airport being within 13km/8m of part of Worcestershire and to the 3 mineral resources within this zone.  -Para 3.1 Insertion of para, referring to National Aviation Policy  -Subsequent paras re-numbered.  -Para 3.16 Insertion of para referring to areas and mineral resources within 13km of Gloucestershire/Staverton Airport  -Insertion of paras 3.30 and 3.31 setting out what the minerals Local Plan will need to address.  -Insertion of para 4.2 setting out what the minerals Local Plan will need to address.

22

Appendix 3: UK Birdstrike Data 31 Online Birdstrike Reporting System Mandatory Reporting of Birdstrikes in the UK came into force on 16 December 2003. Article 227 of the Air Navigation Order refers to the mandatory requirement to report birdstrikes in the UK.

The CAA (Mandatory Occurrence Reporting Scheme, (Article 226 of the Air Navigation Order 2009) states "If an aircraft suffers a birdstrike which results in damage to the aircraft or loss or malfunction of any essential service, this would be such an occurrence which should be reported under the scheme. As well as the Mandatory Reporting scheme…any aircraft commander flying in UK airspace who believes his aircraft has collided with one or more birds will have to inform the Civil Aviation Authority where the data is collected on a separate database to improve the existing knowledge base of birdstrike events in the UK32."

Following successful trials involving several UK licensed aerodromes, online reporting for Birdstrike Occurrence was introduced on 1 January 2008.

NUMBER OF CONFIRMED REPORTED UK BIRDSTRIKES33 2011-2013 Year Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sept Oct-Dec Total 2011 160 388 664 317 1259 2012 172 351 598 283 1404 2013 153 413 721 1287

The CAA's view is that the volume of birdstrikes reported at a particular airport or aerodrome does not imply greater hazard. Due to the limitations of unanalysed raw data, users should exercise extreme caution in forming any conclusion or opinion based on quantitative data alone. Further details can be found on the CAA News Release: CAA Introduces Online Birdstrike Reporting System. The CAA's view is that the volume of birdstrikes reported at a particular airport or aerodrome does not imply greater hazard and that due to the limitations of unanalysed raw data, users should exercise extreme caution in forming any conclusion or opinion based on quantitative data alone.

The following CAA document provides information on the increasing threat of large flocking birds: Large Flocking Birds: An International Conflict Between Conservation and Air Safety (CAA Safety Regulation Group, undated. http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/1437/srg_acp_00018-01-030303.pdf

31 http://caa.searchimprove.com/search.aspx?pckid=263320194&aid=267271&sw= bird%20strikes&swtype=all

32 http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?gid=1854 33http://caa.searchimprove.com/search.aspx?pckid=263320194&aid=267271&sw=bird%20stri kes&swtype=all

23