GUNNERSBURY TRIANGLE: PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE

A report prepared by London Wildlife Trust for the LB Hounslow following a 12 month local stakeholder consultation

Nina Arwitz Reserve Development Manager London Wildlife Trust

March 2007

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Executive Summary 3

Summary of Recommendations 4

List of Tables and Charts 6

List of Appendices 7

Introduction 8

Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve: Background and History 9

Stakeholders Consulted 10

Consultation Methodology 11

Results of Planning Research 13 1. Current Users 13 2. The Potential Audience: Research 18 3. The Potential Audience: Consultation 30

Recommendations 44 Visitor Centre 44 Entrance Area 45 Educational Provision 45 Additional Facilities 46 Events Provision 47 Other Service Provision 48 Attracting More Visitors 49 Safety 50 Engaging BME and Hard to Reach Communities 50 Social Exclusion 52 Partnership Working 53 Financial Breakdown and Funding Strategy 54 Timeline 56

Conclusion 57

Appendices 58

- 2 -

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report details the findings of a London Wildlife Trust 12-month community consultation process with key stakeholders, into developments at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve. The report aims to inform developments in relation to s106 funding received for the purpose of increasing the public amenity value of the site. The recommendations brought forth by the research are based on the central tenet of increasing public engagement at the reserve without, of course, compromising its natural value.

This objective fits well with LWT’s own strategic objectives, two of which are: to increase engagement of people living is areas of social disadvantage and to increase the quantity and quality of our volunteering programme. It is also a natural progression of LWT’s 25-year history at the site: it was local activists who originally fought to save the site from development, and it is local volunteers who have been integral to its development since then.

With this perspective of community engagement in mind, the 12-month research involved consultation with a broad breadth of stakeholders. This included visitors to the reserve, visitors to specific reserve events, visitors to the reserve summer open day, current reserve volunteers, other ‘friends of’ groups, local authority officers, schools, children and young people, LWT staff, mental health organisations, play schemes, black and minority ethnic communities, and local businesses (see Table 1 for full detail). A variety of consultation methods were employed, including: semi- structured interviews, questionnaire surveys, accompanied visits, focus groups, telephone interviews, photographic consultation, mapping exercises, chaired meetings and informal conversations (see Table 2 for full detail).

This report will summarise the background and history of the reserve, outline the stakeholders consulted and methodology employed, detail the results of the planning research and finally present a series of recommendations. The results from the consultation showed both a high degree of consensus in most areas, as well as some areas of contention. Regarding the latter, disparate answers were reconciled by approaching them from the perspective of the key objective outlined above: to increase public engagement at the site without compromising its natural integrity. The section below will list and summarise all 24 recommendations that have come out of the community consultation.

- 3 -

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

The recommendations below are drawn out in detail in the Recommendations section (p.44), with a background and justification for each recommendation.

1. Architects to be commissioned for drawings for a new ecological building with some modern and unusual aspects, as well as height, immediately adjacent to 2 Bollo Lane; 2 options – one with the scrap yard and one without – to be commissioned

2. Commission artists’ designs of a spectacular new entrance area, as well as designed interpretation board with map

3. Architects commissioned to be asked to design for a classroom accommodating approximately 30 children

4. An environmental educator to be asked to equip the classroom for primary school use, basic secondary school use and use of innovative educational technology

5. A separate secure metal container with walk-in door to be placed near the Visitor Centre, to provide safe storage of tools

6. Flower boxes, a safe cycle lock, benches, picnic tables and recycling and composting facilities to be introduced around the entrance area; no major infrastructure to be introduced inside the reserve proper

7. Improve existing posted nature trail and accompanying leaflet in the reserve, without installing any major interpretation boards inside the reserve

8. Once staffed, run a well-advertised programme of events for children and families at the reserve throughout the year, asking for a specific recommended donation from participants

9. Once staffed, expand on the service provision of the reserve and explore opportunities for targeting specific audiences such as mental health groups, community groups for retired people and youth groups

10. Invest in press, PR and advertising to make known the site and services provided to a wider audience

11. Ensure a consistent minimum 5 days per week staff presence, sense of activity and welcoming information at the reserve

12. Significantly improve the entrance area and interpretation to increase prominence of the site

13. Increase safety, and sense of safety, through staffing of the reserve; encourage those who feel uneasy about being alone to let members of staff know of their presence

- 4 -

14. Improve signage and entrance interpretation that makes clear what can be expected inside the reserve and that visiting is free

15. Conduct regular and broadly-advertised community open days at the reserve, targeting under-represented communities

16. Consider, and carefully cost, offering complementary leisure opportunities at the Visitor Centre such as a museum, kiosk/café, play area and picnic area in order to attract new visitors

17. A pro-active approach be taken be all members of staff at the reserve to ensure social inclusion and a friendly welcome to all members of society

18. Engage with local ‘friends of’ groups by supporting one another, but without a targeted effort to recruit regular volunteers from other ‘friends of’ groups

19. Develop links with the Crane Valley Partnership and other local charities and engage these actors in developments at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve.

20. Of the total £550,000 available from two s106 funds, set aside approximately £200,000 for staffing and revenue costs over 3-5 years, and use the remaining £350,000 for capital costs in particular construction of a Visitor Centre.

21. Actively pursue other sources of income in order to ‘free up’ and stretch out the amount of revenue funding available, as well as for use as match funding.

22. Build relationships with local businesses in order to develop a corporate volunteering and membership programme potentially worth over £24,000 per year.

23. Explore alternative sources of sustainable income from the reserve, specifically: selling of coffees and teas, a gift shop, and charging for certain events such as school visits and events.

24. LWT to write a Business Plan for Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve, ideally whilst s106 money release and planning permission are being processed.

- 5 -

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Page

Table 1: Stakeholders Consulted 10

Table 2: Consultation Methods 11

Table 3: Breakdown of Visitors by Post Code Area 13

Table 4: Records of School Visits over Past 5 Years 14

Table 5: Profile of Visitors 14

Table 6: Community Groups Questionnaire Respondents 32

Table 7: Focus Group Composition 35

Figure 1 : Ethnic Demographic Breakdown for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 19

Figure 2: Population by Age for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 20

Figure 3: Average Age of Population for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 20

Figure 4: Proportion of Single-Parent Families for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 21

Figure 5: Number of Economically Inactive People (16-74) for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 22

Figure 6: Number of Unemployed People (16-74) for LB Ealing, Hounslow, Hammersmith & Fulham 22

Figure 7: Other Measures of Deprivation for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 23

Figure 8: Ranks for District Level Summary Measures of IMD for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 24

Figure 9: Ethnic Group Population Projections for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 2006 25

Figure 10: Ethnic Group Population Projections for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 2016 26

- 6 -

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page

Appendix A: Sample Consultation Questionnaire 58

Appendix B: Map of Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve 60

Appendix C: Primary Schools in Catchment Area 61

Appendix D: Secondary Schools in Catchment Area 64

Appendix E: Private Schools and Colleges in Catchment Area 66

Appendix F: Special Needs Schools in Catchment Area 67

Appendix G: Community Groups 68

Appendix H: Focus Group Recruitment Questionnaire 74

Appendix I: Focus Group Topic Guide 77

- 7 -

INTRODUCTION

This report details the findings and recommendations of a 12-month community consultation with local stakeholders of the Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve. The report aims to directly guide the short- and medium-term developments at the reserve, in relation to s106 funding granted to develop the site for public amenity, and will of course indirectly also guide any long-term developments on the site. The focus of these developments is the construction of a Visitor Centre to replace a current dilapidated and poorly equipped portakabin. However the consultation quickly made it clear that a holistic approach including staffing, services, etc. will be integral to ensure the successful development of the reserve.

Central to all developments of the reserve is the fact that all s106 funding available for the reserve, is for the explicit purpose of increasing the public amenity value of the site. Most importantly, developments need to focus on engaging the local community in general and under-represented communities in particular. To date, the 25-year history of Gunnersbury Triangle as a nature reserve has been very successful in terms of nature conservation; but less so in terms of public awareness of, and broader community engagement with, the site. This community consultation was thus conducted from this perspective, and its recommendations are based on achieving the objective of increasing community engagement.

This perspective is perfectly in line with London Wildlife Trust’s strategic objectives. In particular, Objectives 5 and 6 of LWT’s Strategic Vision for the Capital, state:

Objective 5: Facilitate the participation of Londoners, especially those living in areas of social and economic deprivation, in the access to and improvement of their local natural environment

Objective 6: Significantly increase the quantity, quality and diversity of our volunteering effort to support the Trust’s biodiversity conservation objectives

Furthermore, LWT is developing another major strategic concept, Going Local. The core of this new approach will be to adopt a sub-regional model that allows a much greater focus on the needs and priorities of specific communities, and allows locally- based staff teams to respond proactively and imaginatively to those needs in direct partnership and consultation with local people and the organisations that represent them. This model accords with a number of initiatives at the strategic level in London, such as the Greater London Authority’s planned Sub-Regional Development Framework. The Going Local project will also allow London Wildlife Trust to work in much closer partnership with Local Authorities in order to increase our impact on protecting and enhancing local green spaces that have nature conservation and biodiversity value. Gunnersbury Triangle will in the future provide and excellent hub for the West London sub-region.

It is integral that all developments at the site are seen from these perspectives of increasing community engagement, while of course retaining the natural integrity and value of the reserve.

- 8 -

GUNNERSBURY TRIANGLE LOCAL NATURE RESERVE BACKGROUND and HISTORY

This stakeholder consultation also needs to be put in the context of the history of the reserve and London Wildlife Trust. Local activism has been integral throughout its history, from the very start of fighting for its protection.

During the 19 th century, map evidence shows Gunnersbury Triangle as an area of orchards with gravel extraction activity. In the 20th century, the site was used as railway allotments during the 1940s. After this it is thought that the site was left to colonise naturally, and anecdotal evidence tells of it being used by children for ‘various adventures’.

In 1981, a proposal was put forward to develop the site for commercial use. The development proposal met with strong opposition from the local community. The Chiswick Wildlife Group formed in March 1982, as a local group of the London Wildlife Trust, to challenge the proposal. The case went to a Public Inquiry in July 1983. The Inspector's decision in favour of nature conservation as the future land use for this site paved the way for the site to become a nature reserve and set an important precedent for urban nature conservation.

In the report summarising his conclusions from the Inquiry, the Inspector noted,

“I consider that the importance of the Gunnersbury Triangle from an ecological point of view is the variety of habitats in a fairly small area and the presence of a significant number of flora and fauna within them, including a limited number of locally uncommon species .”

He also acknowledged the significance of the site to the local community and the strength of local feeling:

“Many of those who live in the area clearly regard the site as being of ecological importance, as well as being a valuable amenity feature.”

The land was purchased from British Rail by London Borough of Hounslow in 1984 and the first Management Licence granted to London Wildlife Trust in spring 1985. After initial site preparation by local volunteers, the first public open day was held later that year. Local Nature Reserve status was formally granted for the part of the site within the Borough of Hounslow in 1987 (and the Ealing section was similarly designated in 1991). Please see Appendix B for a map of the reserve.

- 9 -

STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTED

This project aimed to consult all current and potential stakeholders in the future developments at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve. As such, the first phase of the project identified these stakeholders. In line with the project planning brief, a demographic analysis of the catchment area, consultation with local authority officers and local volunteers at the reserve, as well as analysis of preliminary quantitative data, the following stakeholders were identified and consulted:

Table 1: Stakeholders Consulted

STAKEHOLDERS SPECIFIC SUB-GROUPS Visitors to the Reserve Regular visitors to the reserve First time visitors to the reserve Visitors to Specific Reserve Event Bat Walk Butterfly Walk Summer School Visitors to Reserve Summer Regular Summer Open Day visitors Open Day First-Time Open Day visitors Current Reserve volunteers Regular Practical Volunteers Steering Committee of the Reserve Other ‘Friends of’ Groups Familiar with the reserve Not familiar with the reserve Local Authority Officers Hounslow Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Schools Headteachers Teachers Children Children and Young People Through schools Visiting with parents LWT Staff Staff working with community engagement Senior Management Team Mental Health Organisations Service providers / group leaders People with mental health problems Play Schemes Leaders Children Black and Minority Ethnic Community group leaders communities Individuals People with stated interest in conservation Business Chiswick Business Park Corporate Work Day participants Business in the Community

- 10 -

CONSULTATION METHODOLOGY

As outlined in the project planning brief, this consultation exercise involved both quantitative research of current users and the demographics of the catchment area, and qualitative consultation with current and potential users. The methodology for the quantitative research was straightforward: collection and compilation of data for analysis. The collection of qualitative data was more complex. Due to the nature of this project, in particular the breadth and diversity of stakeholders consulted, a wide variety of consultation methods had to be employed in order to ensure that all data was collected, that all stakeholders were consulted, and that the fine nuances of the responses were captured. The table below shows which methodology was used for which stakeholder group, as well as how many times each method was employed and the number of individuals consulted.

Table 2: Consultation Methods

CONSULTATION STAKEHOLDER QUANTITY INDIVIDUALS METHOD EMPLOYED CONSULTED Semi-structured Visitors to the Reserve 11 11 Interviews Visitor to specific reserve event 5 5 Visitors to Reserve Summer 6 6 Open Day Current Reserve volunteers 3 6 Other ‘Friends of’ Groups 3 3 Local Authority Officers 2 2 School 3 3 Children 3 7 Mental Health 1 7 Play Schemes 2 2 Questionnaire Survey Visitors to the Reserve 3 3 Visitors to Reserve Summer 4 4 Open Day Current Reserve Volunteers 2 2 Other ‘Friends of’ Groups 15 15 Children 2 5 Accompanied Visits Current Reserve Volunteers 2 6 Local Authority Officers 1 1 Schools 2 4 Children 2 7 LWT Staff 1 6 Mental Health 1 9 Play Schemes 1 14 Black and Minority Ethnic 2 10 Communities Business 1 17 Focus Groups Black and Minority Ethnic 1 10 Communities

- 11 -

Table 2: Consultation Methods; cont’d CONSULTATION STAKEHOLDER QUANTITY # METHOD EMPLOYED INDIVIDUALS Telephone interviews Schools 7 7 Black and Minority Ethnic 4 4 communities Local Authority Officers 4 4 Visitors’ Centre Visitors to the reserve 1 7 photographic Current reserve volunteers 1 5 consultation LWT Staff 1 4 Black and Minority Ethnic 1 10 communities Mapping exercise Visitors to the Reserve 4 4 Visitors to specific reserve event 2 5 Visitors to Reserve Summer 1 14 Open Day Current Reserve volunteers 5 5 Chaired meeting Current Reserve volunteers 4 7 LWT Staff 1 4 Business 1 3 Informal conversation Visitors to the reserve 7 7 (notes taken) Visitors to specific reserve event 3 3 Visitor to Reserve Summer 2 3 Open Day Children 3 3 Current Reserve volunteers 9 3 TOTAL PEOPLE CONSULTED 267

- 12 -

RESULTS OF PLANNING RESEARCH

This section will outline the results of the planning research conducted. It follows the format of the original project planning brief, and as such is divided into sections covering 1. Current Users ; 2. Potential Audience: Research ; and 3. Potential Audience: Consultation . Each section covers the specific data and stakeholder groups outlined in the project planning brief, as well as additional research and consultation identified during the course of the consultation. This section will summarise results only, while the following section will provide analysis and recommendations

1. Current Users

Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve has a strong history of community engagement. The very creation of the reserve has its roots in local action: it was local residents who fought a proposed development on the land in 1982, which led to the establishment of the reserve in 1983. Since then, London Wildlife Trust, who manages the reserve through an agreement with Hounslow, has depended on local volunteers – in particular for practical conservation on the reserve. Schools have also taken a very active part in the reserve, with many teachers visiting on a regular basis over the years. The project planning research therefore started by establishing the current situation, and by investigating the needs of current users of the reserve.

Reserve History Book

Table 3: Breakdown of Visitors by Post Code Area

Year Postcode Area 2005 W3 Acton 2005 W4 Chiswick 2005 W5 Ealing 2005 W7 Hanwell 2005 W13 Ealing 2005 W14 West Kensington 2005 SW14 East Sheen; North Sheen; Mortlake; Palewell 2005 N6 Highgate 2005 N7 Holloway; Islington; Lower Holloway; Tufnel Park 2005 TW4 Hounslow 2005 UB6 Greenford 2006 W3 Acton 2006 W4 Chiswick 2006 W5 Ealing 2006 W6 Fulham; Hammersmith 2006 W12 Shepherds Bush; White City 2006 W14 Barons Court; Kensington; West Kensington 2006 TW2 Twickenham 2006 TW8 Brentford 2006 HA4 Ruislip 2006 HA8 Edgeware

An analysis of the reserve history book showed that almost all current visitors come from the immediate local area, with a majority of visitors from postcodes W3, W4, W5, W6, W7, W12, W13, and W14. A handful of remaining visitors came from further away, notably North London and other areas of West London.

- 13 -

Schools Visits History

Table 4: Records of School Visits over Past 5 Years

Borough School Name Ealing Berrymede Junior School Derwentwater Primary School Grange Primary School Little Ealing Primary School Oaklands Primary School Southfield Primary School St. Benedict’s Junior School St. John’s Primary School St. Mark’s Primary School West Acton Primary School Acton High School Durston House School (private) Harvington School (private) St. Benedicts School (private) Springhallow School (special needs) Hounslow Belmont Primary School Cavendish Primary School Green Dragon Primary School Stand-on-the-Green Junior School St. Mary’s RC Primary School St. Paul’s C of E Primary School The William Hogarth Primary School Arts Educational School (secondary) Hammersmith and Fulham Brackenbury Primary School Flora Gardens Primary School John Betts Primary School Larmenier and Sacred Heart Primary School New Kings Primary School Old Oak Primary School Queens Manor Primary School St. Thomas of Canterbury Primary School The Good Shepherd RC Primary School Latymer Upper School (private) Kensington and Chelsea College

Over the past five years, i.e. 2002 – 2006, 34 different schools from the surrounding London boroughs visited the site. The greatest proportion of school visitors came from the borough of Ealing (44%), followed by Hammersmith and Fulham (32%), and then Hounslow (24%) (Table 4).

Visitor History

Table 5: Profile of Visitors

2005 2006 Recorded visitors 1935 995 School visits 20 5 Group visits 3 4 Events 13 7 Volunteers 23 13

- 14 -

There has been a substantial decrease in the number of visitors over the past couple of years to Gunnersbury Triangle. The number of recorded visitors decreased by 51%, the number of school visits decreased by 25%, the number of events decreased by 53% and the number of volunteers at the site decreased by 56% (Table 5). However, the number of group visits has remained approximately the same. The reason for this decrease can possibly be attributed to the late recruitment of the 2006 summer warden – indicating the importance of staff presence at the reserve.

Interviews with Current Visitors

Interviews with current visitors were an integral part of this research exercise, and were conducted in great breadth and depth. As outlined in the methodology section (see Table 2), several types of interviews were held with current users, which included: semi-structured interviews, questionnaires, accompanied visits, photographic consultation, mapping exercises, meetings and informal conversations. The current visitors consulted, as outlined in Table 1, included the following groups: regular visitors to the reserve, first time visitors to the reserve, bat walk attendees, butterfly walk attendees, summer school attendees, regular summer open day visitors and first-time summer open day visitors.

Almost all respondents, 90%, answered the question “what activities to you enjoy undertaking when visiting the reserve” with a reference to passive enjoyment such as:

“Just a walk in the woods”

“Having a breath of fresh air”

“Nothing, just walking”

Additional popular answers included: guided walks, events for children and bird watching. Participating in regular practical conservation workdays was notably not a common answer from visitors.

A vast majority of respondents primarily value the natural integrity of the site. Most made reference to it high value of a reserve in the middle of this concrete city. This is well expressed in comments such as:

“An unspoiled and hidden haven”

“It is so nice to have a place like this in the city”

Though all respondents were very positively inclined toward the reserve, all current users also felt that some improvements would be welcome. Visitors’ feedback on the improvements that could be made focused on a well-equipped Visitor Centre, an improved entrance area, more events and increased staff presence on the reserve.

Interviews with Current Volunteers

Current volunteers, as expected, were in general very positive about the reserve and felt a strong sense of pride and ownership of it. About 80% of respondents referred to - 15 -

its wilderness as the most important aspect of the reserve, and emphasized the need to prioritise its natural values:

“If it’s like the wetlands centre – I hate that. All the men in the safari suits! I like it here because I can do what I want to do as a volunteers, it is much more isolated and wild”

Among current volunteers, another common theme running through responses was a very strong sentiment against developing too much.

“We need to make sure we don’t put in structures all over the park, this is a nature reserve ”

Though all but one agreed that a new building would be welcome, current volunteers were wary of commercialising the reserve, and of putting in any new infrastructure in the actual reserve. For example, all felt that there was no need for additional benches around the pond, for a tool store at the bottom of the reserve, and most importantly not for a picnic table in the meadow. All current volunteers agreed that if these provisions are made, they should be concentrated around the visitor centre.

The key improvements identified by volunteers were: a quality ecologically designed Visitor Centre, the importance of staffing the reserve throughout the year, and issues concerning the scrap yard. There was a consensus among volunteers that although we should fight to obtain the adjoining scrap yard, we should not stall allow the process of building a Visitor Centre to stall and rather should pursue the scrap yard concurrently to all other developments.

“I’m convinced that the way to go is… [to pursue scrap yard] while the work is happening; then the timing of a publicity campaign will be perfect.”

As for attracting more visitors and volunteers to the reserve, many current volunteer were wary of this, expressing concerns about opening up the reserve too much:

“I don’t want too many people. I’d like to keep it limited.”

“I think that what we have now is good.”

Finally safety and being alone on the reserve was mentioned by several current volunteers as a serious concern. Many volunteers, especially women, do not go in to the reserve alone and would very strongly support a regular staff presence to allow safer working:

“I don’t like walking around on my own. I’m scared that I could be mugged.”

Interviews with Current Teachers

Interviews with current teachers who visit the reserve with school classes were conducted in person and by telephone. Teachers were in general overwhelmingly

- 16 -

positive about the reserve, with about 75% of teacher respondents using the reserve regularly. The average amount of times a teacher had visited the reserve was 3 times.

“I’ve been coming here for years, I bring my class and my own kids”

In terms of activity preferences, pond dipping was by far the most popular, followed by plant related activities, habitats and woodland.

An interesting outcome from the teacher consultation was a desire from about 50% of teachers to expand on the curriculum links of outdoor education, for example by more closely tying the visit to the National Curriculum and using a cross-curricular approach. For example, one teacher, when asked what activities they would like to undertake when visiting the reserve again, stated:

“I would like to do bark-rubbing with masks, but put a literacy angle on it by including poetry and writing activities”

Several teachers also expressed a desire for more guidance on how the outdoor activities related to the National Curriculum, as well as a request for INSET sessions.

In terms of facilities, teachers suggested a covered or sheltered picnic area for all weather conditions, as well as a classroom for follow-up work and an area for storing children’s belongings and packed lunches. One teacher explained that they had been forced to cancel due to rain in the past and would consider a classroom a great asset.

“[Speaking of a colleague] she won’t come because she thinks it might rain and it is too difficult”

London Wildlife Trust Staff Consultation was also held with London Wildlife Trust members of staff; both to capture their extensive experience and insights, but also to ensure staff buy-in of any developments at the triangle. Consultation was held through specially arranged visits to the reserve, and through senior management team meetings. Staff consulted included the Head of Nature Reserves, Fundraising Manager, Business Development Manager, Gunnersbury Triangle Summer Warden and Chief Executive Officer. Discussions focused on the fundraising strategy, business plan and income-generating potential at the reserve – which all staff members agreed to be significant. Income-generation activity suggested included: social enterprise, selling of products such as local honey, corporate sponsorship potential and the potential of a café.

“It would be mad not to take advantage of the potential in such an affluent area; income-generation has to be part of a long term business plan”

- 17 -

2. The Potential Audience: Research

Before actually consulting the potential audience, research was conducted to establish what primary schools, educational institutions and community groups exist in the catchment area. A demographic profile was also done of Hounslow, Ealing and Hammersmith & Fulham, as well as research on expected demographic changes. The strategic policy documents of each of these boroughs were also reviewed thoroughly, in order to ensure that any consultation was in line with these and to learn from research already conducted.

ID of Primary Schools

There are 26 Primary Schools in the Ealing borough, 27 in the Hounslow borough, and 35 in the Hammersmith and Fulham borough (Appendix C). Thus, there are a total of 88 Primary Schools in the catchment area. 35% of the schools in the Ealing, 26% in the Hounslow and 26% in the Hammersmith and Fulham boroughs have visited the site before. Therefore, out of all the schools in the surrounding catchment, an average of 28% has visited Gunnersbury Triangle before.

ID of Other Educational Institutions

There are 26 Secondary Schools in the surrounding catchment, and 2 of these schools have visited Gunnersbury Triangle before, 1 from the Ealing borough and 1 from the Hounslow borough (Appendix D). There are 22 Private Schools and Colleges in the surrounding area, and 5 of these have visited the reserve before (Appendix E). Furthermore, there are 11 Special Needs Schools in the area (Appendix F), and 1 of them has visited Gunnersbury Triangle.

ID of Community Groups within Catchment Area

All relevant community groups of the area were identified through accessible databases on local authority websites. The details of each organisation were collated in an excel spreadsheet. A simple one-page questionnaire and cover letter was send to each organisation – about 250 in total – with a decent response rate at about 5%. A selection of groups was also contacted for more detailed conversations. A full list of the community groups consulted can be found in Appendix G. Results of the consultation will be detailed in the Potential Audience: Consultation section below.

Borough Demographic Profiles

Out of the 3 London boroughs, Ealing has the highest population (300 948), followed by Hounslow (212 341), and then Hammersmith and Fulham (165 242). In all three boroughs, white ethnic group contributes the highest proportion of the population (77.8% in LB Hammersmith and Fulham, 64.9% in LB Hounslow and 58.8% in LB Ealing). The Indian population contributes the second highest proportion in the LB of Hounslow (17.3%) and Ealing (16.5%). The proportions of all other ethnic groups in these boroughs are significantly lower (<5%) (Figure 1).

- 18 -

320000

300000 (100%) 280000 260000 240000

220000 (100%) 200000

180000 (58.8%) (100%) 160000

140000 (64.9%) (77.8%) 120000 100000 Ethnic group population 80000 60000 (16.5%)

40000 (17.3%) (4.5%) (3.7%) 20000 (3.7%) (3.9%) (3.6%) (3.1%) (4.3%) (5.2%) (4.9%) (3.8%) (2.7%) (3.1%) (2.6%) (2.1%) (2.0%) (1.2%) (1.7%) (1.3%) (1.1%) (1.0%) (1.1%) (0.9%) (0.6%) (0.6%) (0.8%) (0.3%) (0.5%) 0 (0.4%)

l r a an an hite c tani i Tot ri W bbean Indian inese Other Mixed i k Othe k Af Ch Car Pakis ther As lac ck Blac Bangladeshi O a B Bl Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Hounslow

Figure 1: Ethnic Demographic Breakdown for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham

- 19 -

80000 75000 70000 65000 60000 55000 50000 45000 40000 35000 30000 25000 20000

Population groups) by (key age 15000 10000 5000 0 15 0 0 to 4 5 to 7 8 to 9 10 to10 14 to16 17 to18 19 to20 24 to25 29 to30 44 to45 59 to60 64 to65 74 to75 84 to85 89 90 &90 over

Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Hounslow

Figure 2: Population by Age for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham.

35.7 35.6 35.5 35.4 35.3 35.2 35.1

Average age of population Average 35 Ealing Hammersmith and Hounslow Fulham

Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Hounslow

Figure 3: Average Age of Population for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham.

The average age of the population within all three LB’s, is 35 (Figure 3). The age groups with the highest proportion of people are the 25 to 29, 30 to 44, and 45 to 59 groups (Figure 2). The proportion of the other age groups is relatively low (<10%). In the LB of Ealing, 25.9% of the population is aged 30 to 44, 16.2% is aged 45 to 59, and 10.2% is - 20 -

aged 25 to 29. In the LB of Hounslow, 25.5% of the population is aged 30 to 44, 16.5% is aged 45 to 59, and 9.4% is aged 25 to 29. In the LB of Hammersmith and Fulham, 27.8% of the population is aged 30 to 44, 14.8% is aged 25 to 29, and 14.1% is aged 45 to 59.

9000

(6.6%) 8000

7000 (7.2%) 6000 (6.5%) 5000 (3.9%)

4000 (3.7%) (3.4%) 3000

2000 Number of single-parent Number families of single-parent 1000

0 Dependent children Non-dependent children

Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Hounslow

Figure 4: Proportion of Single-Parent Families for LB Ealing, Hounslow, Hammersmith & Fulham

In all three boroughs, the proportion of dependent children is higher than that of non- dependent children (Figure 4). The LB of Hounslow has the highest proportion of dependent children (7.2%) and Hammersmith and Fulham has the lowest (6.5%). Note: a dependent child is a person aged 0-15 in a household (whether or not in a family), or a person aged 16-18 who is a full-time student and in a family with parent(s). The LB of Ealing has the highest proportion of non-dependent children (3.9%) and Hammersmith and Fulham has the lowest (3.4%).

- 21 -

22000 (9.1%) 20000 18000

16000 (6.8%) (9.4%) (6.6%) 14000 12000 (6.9%) (4.6%) (4.5%) (7.8%)

10000 (7.2%) (5.6%) 16-74) 8000 (6.3%) (4.5%) (4.0%) (4.7%) 6000 (4.6%) 4000 2000 0 Retired Full-time Looking after Permanently Other

Number Number of economically peopleinactive (aged student home/family sick/disabled

Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Hounslow

Figure 5: Number of Economically Inactive people (aged 16-74) for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham

Economically inactive people includes those who are retired, full-time students, those looking after their home/family, as well as permanently sick/disabled people. In all three LB’s, the highest proportion of economically inactive people are retired, and the lowest proportions are either permanently sick/disabled or have other reasons (Figure 5).

2600

2400 (28.5%) 2200 2000 (28.7%) (20.8%) 1800 1600 (16.5%) (25.9%)

1400 (25.5%) (18.4%) 1200 (13.2%) 1000 (15.4%) (15.3%)

800 (10.8%) 600 (11.8%) 400 200 0

Number Number of unemployed people 16-74) (aged Aged 16-24 Aged 50 and over Never worked Long-term unemployed

Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Hounslow

Figure 6: Number of Unemployed People (aged 16-74) for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham

- 22 -

In all three LB’s, the highest proportion of unemployed people fall into the category of ‘Long-term unemployed’, followed by people who are aged 16-24 (Figure 6). The lowest proportion of unemployed people falls into the category of ‘Never worked’ for all three boroughs.

29400 0.3 29200 29000 0.25 28800 0.2 28600 28400 0.15

28200 Extent 28000 0.1 27800 0.05 LocalConcentration 27600 27400 0 Ealing Hammersmith Hounslow Ealing Hammersmith Hounslow and Fulham and Fulham

60000 20000 18000 50000 16000 40000 14000 12000 30000 10000 8000 20000 6000 IncomeScale 4000

10000 EmploymentScale 2000 0 0 Ealing Hammersmith Hounslow Ealing Hammersmith Hounslow and Fulham and Fulham

23000 29 22500 28 22000 27 21500 21000 26 20500 25 20000 24 19500 23

Average Rank Average 19000 Average Score Average 22 18500 18000 21 17500 20 Ealing Hammersmith Hounslow Ealing Hammersmith Hounslow and Fulham and Fulham

Figure 7: Other Measures of Deprivation for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham

- 23 -

160

140

120

100

80 Ranks 60

40

20

0 Local Extent Income Scale Employment Average Rank Average Score Concentration Scale

Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Hounslow

Figure 8: Ranks for District Level Summary Measures of the Index of Multiple Deprivation for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham

There are six district summary measures of the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), which has a score and a rank. These IMD’s include: a) Local concentration – the population weighted average of the ranks of a district’s most deprived super output areas that contain exactly 10% of the district’s population. b) Extent – the proportion of a district’s population living in the most deprived super output areas in the country. c) Income scale – the number of people who are income deprived. d) Employment scale – the number of people who are employment deprived. e) Average of super output area ranks – the population weighted average of the combined ranks for the super output areas in a district. f) Average of super output area scores – the population weighted average of the combined scores for the super output areas in a district. It is important to note that no single summary measure is favoured over another, i.e. there is no single best way of describing or comparing England’s districts.

When comparing IMD scores of the three LB’s, Hammersmith and Fulham has the highest local concentration, extent, average rank, and average score, whereas Ealing has the highest income and employment scales (Figure 7). Hounslow has the lowest local concentration, extent, employment scale, and average score; Hammersmith and Fulham has the lowest income scale; and Ealing has the lowest average rank.

When comparing IMD ranks of the three LB’s, Hounslow has the highest local concentration, extent, employment scale, and average score; Hammersmith and Fulham has the highest income scale; and Ealing has the highest average rank (Figure 8). Hammersmith and Fulham has the lowest local concentration, extent, average rank, and average score; and Ealing has the lowest income and employment scale.

- 24 -

320000 300000 (100%) 280000 260000 240000 220000 (100%) 200000 (100%)

180000 (55.7%) 160000 (77.4%)

140000 (59.4%) 120000 100000 80000 60000 (15.9%) (20.1%)

Ethnic group population projections for 2006 40000 (6.9%) (5.6%) (4.4%) (3.9%)

20000 (3.6%) (4.8%) (4.3%) (3.8%) (4.9%) (4.6%) (3%) (2.2%) (3.7%) (2.9%) (2.5%) (1.4%) (1.6%) (1.3%) (1.4%) (0.8%) (0.9%) (1.1%) (0.9%) (0.6%) 0 (0.4%)

n n tal er ia ni a o ean h eshi T b si inese White Ot Ind kista A h Other k a C P nglad er lac a B Oth Black African B Black Carib Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Hounslow

Figure 9: Ethnic Group Population Projections for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 2006.

- 25 -

Expected Demographic Changes

340000

320000 (100%) 300000 280000 260000 240000 (100%) 220000 200000

180000 (100%) (51.8%) 160000

140000 (76.3%)

120000 (52.5%) 100000 80000 (23.8%)

60000 (15.3%) Ethnic group population projections for 2016 40000 (10.7%) (6.2%) (4.2%) (4.0%) (5.9%) 20000 (3.6%) (5.4%) (3.9%) (5.0%) (4.6%) (4.0%) (2.2%) (3.3%) (3.0%) (2.9%) (1.6%) (1.8%) (1.3%) (1.2%) (1.3%) (1.2%) (1.0%) (0.9%) (0.7%) 0 (0.4%)

n r i tal e a e n th To rican deshi sian inese Whit f Indian A h Other akista gla C P her an Black O Ot Black A B Black Caribbe Ealing Hammersmith and Fulham Hounslow

Figure 10: Ethnic Group Population Projections for LB Ealing, Hounslow and Hammersmith & Fulham 2016

- 26 -

These graphs (Figures 9 and 10) project the population changes over the next 10 years. The total population is projected to increase in all 3 LB’s, and the white ethnic group remains the group with the highest population. There are some specific changes projected to take place in each borough. In the Ealing LB, the ethnic groups with the highest populations are White (projected to decrease); Indian (projected to decrease); other Asian (projected to increase); and other ethnic group (projected to increase). In the Hammersmith and Fulham LB, the ethnic groups with the highest populations are White (projected to decrease); Black Caribbean (projected to decrease); and Black African (projected to increase). In the Hounslow LB, the ethnic groups with the highest populations are White (projected to decrease); Indian (projected to increase); Pakistani (projected to increase); and other ethnic group (projected to increase).

Strategic Policy Documents of LB Hounslow, Ealing and Hammersmith & Fulham

LB Hounslow’s Local Cultural Strategy, Creating our Future Together, supports the developments at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve by confirming the importance of leisure provision, engaging the voluntary sector and promoting the use of all local assets. The Strategy’s Community Development Action Plan emphasises the need to:

“Continue to promote sensitive leisure provision within the Borough, i.e. provision of targeted programmes and events linked to overall programme of action.”

“Promote the use of all assets, such as neighbourhood centres, libraries and schools as a focus for social, cultural and community action.”

“Engage the voluntary sector in the planning and programmes of cultural activity such as supporting the many arts and sports organisations in the Borough, including ‘Friends of’ groups and faith groups.”

Furthermore, the Strategy specifically addresses the importance of open green spaces, which:

“…provide scope for creating a diverse range of opportunities for learning about and enjoying nature conservation and biodiversity pursuits and taking part in outdoor recreational activities.”

The Strategy also promises that the Borough will:

“…ensure that through out cultural strategy we continue to bring forward proposals for the enhancement and improvement of the available open spaces for use by local people and the business community.”

These objectives are certainly ones that could, and should, be met by Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve.

- 27 -

LB Ealing’s Sustainable Communities Strategy 2006 -2016, Success through Diversity, likewise emphasises the importance of engaging diverse communities and of providing valuable open green spaces. The Strategy aims to:

“Increase the proportion of local people who feel that their neighbourhood is a place where people from different backgrounds get along.”

“Increase the number of people who do voluntary work.”

“Increase in the percentage of residents who think that for their local area, over the past three years, parks and open spaces have got better or stayed the same.”

“Increase in the percentage of conservation areas with a) up-to-date character appraisals and b) published management proposals.”

With part of the Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve falling in Ealing, with expected additional s106 funding from a development neighbouring the reserve in Ealing, and most importantly with a significant catchment area of potential audiences residents in the LB Ealing, it is significant that the reserve provides several key outputs to meet Ealing’s Sustainable Communities Strategy.

LB Hammersmith and Fulham’s 2001 ten-year Community Strategy also informs development at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve. Although no part of the reserve falls within this borough, the reserve’s catchment area does capture LB Hammersmith and Fulham residents. At the start of developing their community strategy, the borough consulted residents on their needs and preferences. Top requests coming out of this consultation included:

“A safe, clean and green borough – to reduce fear of crime and promote a healthier, more sustainable environmental in which to live”

“A fair chance – to help people overcome deprivation and disadvantage and give everyone in the borough the opportunity to share in its prosperity”

Furthermore, the survey showed that:

“Across all groups, but particularly amongst the most excluded, residents express a strong interest in more facilities and activities for children and young people both for their intrinsic value to the children and young people themselves, their families and communities and as a potential diversion from anti-social behaviour and crime”

- 28 -

The priorities and objectives for the three key boroughs of Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve’s catchment area, all point to the same thing: that the planned developments at the reserve provide an excellent opportunity to meet already identified targets in the boroughs.

- 29 -

3. The Potential Audience: Consultation

As specified in the Methodology Section above, the potential audience was consulted extensively through a breadth of consultative methods – see Tables 1 and 2. These consultative visits and interviews were organised with several specific target groups identified in the research outlined above, all those specified in the project planning brief and additional groups identified throughout the course of the consultation project. The section below will highlight the key results of the potential audience consultation, group by group; recommendations arising from the consultation will not be detailed here, but rather will be outlined in the recommendations section below.

Primary School Teachers

Primary School teachers who had not used the site previously were specifically asked about their experience of the site. All primary school teachers expressed an interest in principle in making use of the site; some for sessions led by a LWT environmental educator, and others for sessions led by themselves.

Teachers expressed concern over lack of facilities in case of rain. Toilets were also mentioned, though no teacher expressed a need for a toilet inside the actual reserve. Thought toilets and wash basins in any Visitor Centre are needed, teachers also told that they usually ask all children to use toilets before leaving the school and that children are disciplined enough to do so.

“We’ll manage if nobody is here, I’ll ask the kids to go to the bathroom before we leave”

Several teachers felt insecure about how to use outdoor space and teach environmental subjects, and would value guidance, resources, and assistance from an experienced environmental educator. Teachers said that any such resources should be tied to the National Curriculum and QCAs, which would make the outdoor experience more relevant and useful in terms of attaining targets. Training, in particular INSET, would be welcome.

Children Children from schools, play groups and organised events were consulted directly about their use of the reserve. Most children visiting the reserve enjoyed it very much and were very enthusiastic about their visit. All children expressed a desire to see big animals such as foxes, but also a surprising knowledge and interest of insects and spiders. Many primary school children were also very aware of environmental issues and conservation. When asked why we want to conserve and protect nature, children displayed a sophisticated understanding and vocabulary; one 8-year old explained:

“Because otherwise species would be extinct and we would not get to see them”

- 30 -

However, some children of many ages were confused about native as opposed to exotic wildlife, for example asking if they would see crocodiles or in one case even lions at the reserve. Clearly there is a need for both formal and informal education to make children growing up in this urban environment aware of British flora and fauna and its value.

Young People Young people were also asked of their interest in the reserve. Three young people aged 15 expressed an interest in volunteering during the summer; one of these as part of the Duke of Edinburgh awards, one who was planning a career in conservation, and the third to improve university applications. All young people’s interest focused on Biology- related subjects, with a primary interest in conducting surveys and recording.

Local ‘Friends of’ Groups Additional potential users consulted included other local ‘Friends of’ groups, who were asked of their interest in working in partnership with Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve. Of the 15 representatives from ‘Friends of’ groups consulted, most had heard of both London Wildlife Trust and Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve; but had not visited it. This indicates that for the audience already involved in conservation; publicity is not the barrier to engagement. Reasons given for not visiting the reserve included:

“It looks grim from the outside”

“Not on radar when planning my leisure time”

When asked what might interest this audience in visiting the reserve, the top two uses listed were:

1. For a walk or picnic 2. For an organised specialised event; e.g. led walks

Many respondents also referred to their current involvement and commitment with another park, and their lack of time.

Community Groups Local communities groups (see Appendix G) were consulted through interviews and a mail-out questionnaire (chosen due to the high number of groups). The response rate to this questionnaire was good, at about 5%. Groups that responded to the questionnaire are listed in the table below:

- 31 -

Table 6: Community Groups Questionnaire Respondents

Community Group Address Type of Group Name Chiswick Recycling Action 25 Balfern Grove Environmental Group London W4 2JX Disability Network 121 High Street Disability Hounslow London TW8 8AT Owl Housing Ltd. Owl Housing Ltd. Disability Grove House 551 London Road London TW4 7DE Barnardos Spectrum Project 93A Inwood Road Disability London TW Awaaz Youth Project Hounslow Youth Centre, Youth Kingsley Road London TW3 1NX Brentford Recycling Action 63 Windmill Road Environmental Group London TW8 0QQ West Chiswick and 28 Thorney Hedge Road Residents Gunnersbury Society London W4 5SD Civil Service Retirement 7 Deepwell Close Retirement Fellowship London TW7 5EN Air Training Corps HQ RAF Uxbridge Youth Middlesex Wing Hillingdon Road London UB10 ORZ Depression Alliance 181 Valetta Road Mental Health London W3 7TA

Isleworth Explorers Club Twickenham Road Environmental London TW7 7EU Young People Friends of Osterley Park c/o 45 Wood Lane Community London TW7 5EF

The three key outcomes from the responses to this questionnaire were: an overwhelming preference for the reserve to be open during both Saturdays and Sundays, a lack of awareness of the reserve coupled with an awareness of London Wildlife Trust, and a surprising preference amongst 30% of respondents for a café and seating area.

“Seating and café and a place for tea and coffee would be nice”

Groups representing people with physical disabilities stated a strong preference for, as expected, disability access facilities to be present at the reserve.

- 32 -

As for activities, the most popular response was again simply a preference for walking around, observing and bird watching. In addition, volunteer opportunities, educational visits, guided tours, play schemes and bat watching were also requested.

Mental Health Organisations

An extensive full-morning consultation was held with seven potential users with severe mental disabilities from a local organisation, the Learning Curve. All of these respondents were positively inclined toward the reserve and enjoyed visiting it. When asked what they liked about the reserve, responses included:

“The work and the trees”

“Walking around”

Five of these seven expressed an interest in volunteering regularly, with one of these being an avid and talented gardener. All agreed that they prefer to volunteer during the summer months, and would be less inclined to come during the winter. Preference was expressed for simpler tasks, for example:

“Digging, weeding, tidying”

The leader of the group, an employee of the Learning Curve, was asked not to interfere during the consultation but in a separate interview after the event expressed a high interest in bringing the group to the reserve both for practical workdays and for more relaxed activity:

“It would be great to just come for walks around the reserve; it is nice to get out and do something different.”

“The peace and tranquillity is really good”

Local Businesses

Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve is situated next to a large business complex, the Chiswick Business Park (indeed, the very s106 funding which is enabling the current development at the reserve, came from this development). The managers of Chiswick Business Park take a novel approach to workspace, with the slogan “Enjoy Work.” They are very keen to develop links with ‘their local reserve’ and develop corporate volunteering opportunities. A long site visit was conducted with two Chiswick Business Park managers, who expressed a very strong interest in brokering corporate volunteering opportunities at the reserve for the 40+ businesses housed in the business park. The Chiswick Business Park representatives emphasized the importance of developing a strong link and sense of ownership for corporate volunteers, with regular repeated involvement rather than one-off days. For example, quarterly sessions with a chance to see the reserve change throughout the seasons were

- 33 -

suggested. In addition to the volunteer workforce, the relationship may also develop to include corporate membership, sponsorship and donation of equipment or materials.

Another local business that was approached is Ribena, which is part of GSK headquartered close the reserve. Ribena also expressed a keen interest in engaging with Gunnersbury Triangle, with a preference for a gardening programme. Ribena employees would take an active role in this, as gardening volunteers.

BSkyB, another local business, was invited for two introductory walks around the reserve, as well as a full-day corporate volunteer day. Again, feedback was very positive and confirmed that the opportunities for expanding such corporate relationships are vast.

Black and Minority Ethnic Groups

A large push was made to consult with Black and Minority Ethnic groups, and thus this section of the report is quite extensive. Although the demographic research (see Figure 1) showed that Indian, Pakistani, Black African and Black Caribbean communities make up the top minority ethnic groups in the three boroughs, these communities are vastly under-represented among local users and volunteers. BME groups were consulted through interviews with individual visitors, leaders of local community groups, and a focus group facilitated by a local Market Research company, Accent.

Accent conducted one focus group comprising ethnic minority respondents held at the Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve on the 2 February 2007, between 10am and 12 noon.

Seventeen respondents were recruited on-street using a recruitment questionnaire (see Appendix F) and ten respondents attended on the day.

Recruitment was undertaken in Ealing and Hounslow and all respondents came from an ethnic minority background. All respondents were required to be able to comfortably converse in English in order to contribute to the group. Recruitment was undertaken by three main age groups, namely young adults aged 18 to 25 without children; couples in their 20s to early 40s with primary aged school children or year 1 secondary school children; and retired adults i.e. those aged 55 or over. All respondents were also required to be potentially interested in visiting a nature reserve.

When the ten respondents arrived at the reserve, a representative of the LWT escorted them in a group on a short circular walk around the reserve so that they would understand what the reserve looked like and what it felt like. Respondents were then invited into a portakabin onsite where the group was conducted. The group was audio-recorded and analysis was conducted both from listening to the tape and also from notes made whilst the group was taking place.

The group composition is shown in Table 7 below.

- 34 -

Table 7: Focus Group Composition Gender Age Employment Where Interests Nature Children Ethnicity Live ‘reserves’ visited Male 18 A level student Acton Sport Burnham No Pakistani Beeches, Richmond Park, Hanwell Bunny Park Male 63 Retired Hounslow Read Richmond Aged 37 Other businessman Watch TV Park, and 32 Asian Green Park Male 25 Manager petrol Hounslow Sport No Indian station Movies Male 34 Not working Acton Seeing Kew No African friends Gardens, Hampstead Heath, Richmond Park Male 64 Retired Hounslow Interested in Kew Aged 31, Indian nature Gardens 33 and 38 Male 53 Driving instructor Finchley Sport Aged 20 Indian and 21 Female 40 Not working Chiswick Cinema, Barnes Aged 7 African reading Wetlands, and 17 Kew Gardens Female 40 Social worker Richmond Watching Richmond Aged 14 African movies Park, and 17 Barnes Wetlands, Kew Gardens Female 46 Self employed Greenford Walking Hyde Park, Aged 12 African beautician, and running Hanwell Bunny Park Female 37 Nurse Acton Cinema Kew Aged 6 African Gardens and 7

Respondents were given a £40 incentive to thank them for attending the group.

The topic guide used for this group can be seen at Appendix I.

Knowledge of London Wildlife Trust All respondents had visited a variety of nature reserves or parks previously, e.g. Kew Gardens, Richmond Park, Burnham Beeches and the Hanwell Bunny Park were frequent mentions. However, frequency of visiting these reserve and parks was quite low, with most saying they visited about once a year or when visitors came.

- 35 -

All respondents had heard of the London Wildlife Trust (LWT) and awareness of the LWT was gained mainly from the media and principally from TV and radio advertising. However, there was also some word of mouth mention of LWT from ‘other mums’ of school age children. One respondent had heard of LWT from material delivered with the post.

Knowledge of Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve None of the respondents had heard of Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve prior to recruitment and, especially those who lived nearly, were surprised to discover that the reserve existed. A few of the respondents actually passed the reserve quite frequently and were fairly incredulous that they had not noticed its existence previously. Furthermore, parents with children at the local primary schools were surprised that they had not heard of the reserve either via the school or from other mothers.

“I pass by all the time .. Is there a sign outside?”

“I would have walked past it had (recruiter) not been standing outside. It all blends in.”

First Impressions of Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve The overwhelming feeling was that the sign outside the reserve and the general entrance way were ‘underwhelming’.

Currently the impression given by the front entrance to the reserve did not engender confidence. It was felt that the rather dilapidated and understated entrance to the reserve did not inspire confidence in the reserve and the appearance of the entrance also generated a certain degree of concern about the level of safety within.

There was a call from respondents for the outside of the reserve to be eye-catching and ‘warm and inviting’. Suggestions for improving the presentation of the outside of the reserve included the use of pictures, for example, of butterflies and of ‘billboards near the gate where you can see what is inside’. Respondents also felt that in order to illustrate to people what they could see if they were to visit the reserve information about, for example, events held at the reserve needed to be situated closer to the road to inform people of what lay beyond the gate.

Respondents felt that the wooden sign advertising the reserve needed to be more prominent, that is, to be ‘brighter’ and ‘bolder’ so that it was had more impact to passers-by.

“I have just noticed that there is a big white sign for the train guys i.e. commuters) to read but it doesn’t give you any information. Perhaps a little bit more information would be useful saying, ‘Come and see the species’. That sign is big, bright and eye catching but doesn’t send the message about what it is about.”

- 36 -

“There is nothing to entice customers to come in here.”

Indeed for some the first impression of the reserve was, ‘is this it?’ Some of the respondents felt that the concrete entranceway where the portakabin is located was all that the reserve entailed and were initially unaware that it extended much further back.

“I look at that concrete (in the entrance way) and it doesn’t look like nature at all. I have never been in there (the reserve). I thought that that was it (the entrance).

“My impression is it is an ignored place. It requires redesign in a very nice way.”

A further recommendation was to have a large natural looking hut at the entrance to the reserve with a café, small museum and toilets. A shop was also suggested where children could buy something “anything” that would act as a souvenir of their visit.

“It needs to be developed in a natural way, like in Old Deer Park in Richmond Park with a playground made from natural materials.”

“There is nowhere to eat at the moment. Where do the kids eat? Where would they sit down?”

Initially the feeling was that the ideal age for visitors to the reserve would be school age i.e. 4 to 12. However, the view was then expressed that all ages would appreciate the reserve, such as workers on their lunch break.

“(give opportunity) to breathe fresh air and have a nice walk.”

Advertising the Reserve A “well advertised open day” was suggested as a way of advertising the reserve to the local residents. This would tell respondents what was available within the reserve.

Respondents further suggested placing posters at the local stations, in local supermarkets and also by going into schools “to offer the personal touch” as other potential ways of advertising. Also advertising or a feature in the local free newspapers was recommended but one respondent suggested this would be better when “ the place was more presentable” .

The Internet was also recommended a possible way to advertise the reserve. This included setting up an annual programme of events at the reserve and showing this programme on the web so that potential visitors could consult it and book their time around it.

“You will need to do some heavy advertising to promote this place as it really is quite good.”

- 37 -

For the summer there was general approval that the reserve would be a very good place for a picnic, and a call for a discrete picnic area gained firm approval from most respondents. There was also a call for more seating dotted around the reserve so that visitors could sit, relax and simply enjoy the reserve.

Recommended Visitor Facilities Respondents felt that visitors to the reserve would be encouraged to come if there were, for example, a mini museum, a café kiosk, a leisure or play area for children and a picnic area. What was important for parents of younger children was knowledge that their children would have sufficient to entertain or occupy them whilst at the reserve in order to make the journey to the reserve worthwhile. Respondents felt that currently they could justify spending about an hour of their time at the reserve but probably no longer than this. However, with children a potential visit of about two hours would be preferred so that adults could justify travelling there and have some time to relax whilst the children were enjoying the reserve.

“I would need to know how long I can keep my son occupied. Is it going to be an hour, or two or three? Or is it not going to be a worthwhile journey. “

To facilitate spending time at the reserve it was felt that there needed to be a shop or kiosk on site selling drinks and light snacks, including ice cream in the summer. Furthermore, it was felt that if this shop were positioned at the entrance of the reserve it would also attract local workers who could sit in the grounds and get a break from the ‘concrete jungle’ or a ‘little bit of peace’. A note of caution was issued though with regard to prices as respondents were emphatic that they did not want to pay ‘Hyde Park prices’ for their beverages. Indoor seating at the café was not felt to be an essential provision with respondents stating they would prefer to take beverages and food away into the reserve to consume. Although a few did concede that it might be sensible in the summer months to have some seating available by the kiosk.

Female respondents in particular were emphatic that clean and presentable permanent toilet facilities were required within the reserve. Respondents were not enthusiastic about the possibility of using portable toilets.

“The toilets would need to be up to scratch. Somewhere to buy snacks. Somewhere to sit.”

“The toilets are portakabins? That would be a put-off.”

One respondent also suggested that water fountains be placed in the reserve in the summer for drinking water.

Events at the Reserve The majority of respondents felt that ‘structured events’ lasting about 30 minutes would attract visitors to the reserve, especially in summer. All respondents expressed an interest in attending special events at the reserve and special themed events such as

- 38 -

‘birds migrating’, bat walks and butterfly walks were suggested. The woodland craft events also gathered some interest. For some respondents a more ‘formal reason’ for coming to the reserve, such as led walks, was essential as “the walk itself would not be enough to entice me.”

“The bat trail. You just don’t know about it. [I would be] interested in that.”

The ability to have summer picnics at the reserve was also regarded as enticing.

On leaving the reserve some of the female respondents also noticed the sign for the summer holiday events for 7 to 11 year olds and there was much interest expressed in children attending this.

In principle respondents would be willing to pay £2 to £3 for adults, but less for children, to attend a special event.

Safety A few respondents mentioned that some of the overhanging branches on the trees were relatively low and this could be a source of danger for those using the reserve. Also if the path was slippery then visitors could potentially fall and so wire meshing on the path was suggested as a deterrent to this. Also one respondent suggested installing a concrete path and removing any steps around the site in order to permit disabled access or mothers with pushchairs to access the reserve.

“Children are very boisterous. With the branches low that can be dangerous.” “You want to make the path completely safe”

“It is not a place for small toddlers.”

There was also some concern that the reserve currently seemed like an isolated place and that many respondents, both male and female, expressed a reticence about visiting the reserve unless they knew that a member of staff was present in the portakabin in case a problem arose. The female participants in particular said that they would only come to the reserve if they were with another adult, as they felt a little vulnerable on their own.

“It is a bit deserted. You are left to do it on your own at the moment.”

“It has to be manned for sure.”

“That little bit of security knowing someone is in the office (would be good).”

“I personally wouldn’t come here on my own with my child. It is too derelict. It is just scary.”

- 39 -

A younger respondent also suggested a Helpline with phone points be located around the reserve where people could call if they had a problem.

Signage The signage around the reserve was regarded as minimal and in significant need of updating. Furthermore, respondents were interested in maps denoting where they currently were situated in the reserve and having succinct information available that they could read and then, for example, explain to their children about the area and what the plants where in that area. It was felt that if the reserve was to be perceived as an educational area then it must provide information to support this claim.

“This is an area where children will be learning a lot about nature.”

“I would expect to see a bit more about what’s here.”

Opening Times Respondents were asked to conjecture that if they were only able to visit the reserve on five days, which days should these be. If the reserve could only be open five days a week the recommended days were Thursday through to Monday. Furthermore, if the reserve could only be open one day at the weekend, the overwhelming preference was for it to be open on a Sunday because Saturday was perceived as the day for getting things done and Sunday the day for relaxing with family members.

“You want to relax on a Sunday and you can come here with your family.”

In winter, respondents felt that the reserve should be open from 9am or 10am to about 4pm or ‘whenever it gets dark’. In summer the preference was for the reserve to open until about 8pm, that is, ‘to have extended hours’ as long as there was a staff member present.

Interest was highest in visiting the reserve from the Easter half-term break until the October half-term break.

Barriers to Visiting the Reserve Currently the main perceived barrier to visiting the reserve is simply a lack of awareness of its existence. Others barriers were lack of knowledge about what there is to do at the reserve and possibly the lack of facilities currently available.

“It is an unknown place.”

“We didn’t know it existed. That is the problem.”

Funding and Volunteering Respondents suggested approaching the providers of services, for example, bench makers or playground manufacturers, and asking them to donate equipment to the reserve to assist with funding the modifications to the reserve.

- 40 -

A couple of respondents were interested in volunteering some of their time to help out at the reserve. For some this would be once a week during school hours, or on a Saturday morning. Others preferred a more flexible approach to volunteering where they were able to come to the reserve when they had the time.

There was general interest in clearing the ground, gardening and planting at the reserve.

Revisiting the Reserve Most respondents felt that they would be back to visit the reserve on another occasion.

“Now I know it is here. Definitely.”

Local Authority Officers: Local Authority Officers from London Boroughs of Hounslow, Ealing and Hammersmith and Fulham were interviewed as part of this consultation:

London Borough of Hounslow From Hounslow, Head of Leisure and Cultural Strategy Nick Pratt was the most actively involved local authority officer, who provided valuable support throughout the project. The focus of conversations with Nick Pratt included the need to ensure that all stakeholders be properly included in any developments at the reserve. It is clear that Hounslow values social inclusion and that any developments at the reserve engage a cross-section of the community. As far as LB Hounslow is concerned, Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve is a public amenity and should be developed as such; it is there for the protection of wildlife but also for the enjoyment of Hounslow residents.

Discussions with Nick Pratt also covered issues with the adjoining scrap yard, which technically is part of Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve. The scrap yard next to the reserve is currently leased to a scrap merchant in an arrangement that currently gives him an indefinite right to the land. In return for this, practice has always been that the £4,000+ lease paid by the scrap merchant is passed on to the reserve. However, through conversations with several local authority officers, it has become clear that the lease can be broken by the courts if a need to develop it for public amenity can be proven. It can also be broken if an alternative site can be found for, and accepted by, the current scrap yard merchant. This would, however, prove difficult and possibly costly.

Doug Napier, Head of Development with CIP in Hounslow, was consulted due to his expertise in park management, and also as a former active member of the Gunnersbury Triangle steering committee. In terms of the building, structures, and location of a Visitor Centre, Napier’s feedback generally confirmed other respondents’ views. For example, the visitor’s centre should be high and visible it is clear that any infrastructure should be focused around the centre

“…because the rest of the reserve should be left wild”

- 41 -

A large part of the conversation centred on a few key additional key issues: the balance between capital and revenue costs; the long-term financial sustainability of the reserve; and finally providing services and engaging communities.

In terms of the capital and revenue costs – how to break down the use of the s106 funding - Napier’s advice can be summarised as follows: there is no use having a building without staff, and there needs to be a healthy balance between capital and revenue costs.

Some of the funding clearly has to be put aside for revenue costs such as salaries, but alternative long-term sources of income also need to be identified. These could certainly be from foundations and government bodies, but other sources of income were also discussed: charging for walks and talks; getting schools in throughout the year; local businesses; renting out space for functions; and a strong endorsement for a shop selling ‘souvenirs’ such as honey,

“…which has the potential to provide a good source of income”

While a shop of some sort was endorsed, a café was less so – generally because of the financial risks involved. Napier told of another site in which he is involved, where a 40,000 person per year visitor rate still was not enough to sustain a café! Another issue to keep in mind is that a £20,000 profit is required to pay for basic staffing alone.

In terms of providing services and community engagement, Napier strongly confirmed the idea that Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve should be for the benefit of the public, and that a pro-active approach needs to be taken to engage the entire community. However, this should be limited geographically to the Eastern half of Hounslow, as the Western half rarely travels east unless travelling further in towards the centre of London. Engagement should also “piggy back on other activities” such as local libraries, the town hall and other ‘friends of’ groups. Furthermore the education mission is of course very important and we should capitalise on the need among Chiswick schools for open green spaces. In terms of some concerns raised about the ‘carrying capacity’ of the reserve, Napier assured that

“I don’t think you’ll ever be in a situation where you’ll attract more people that you can cope with”

London Borough of Ealing From the LB Ealing, Planning Officer Simon O’Connor was consulted on developments at the reserve in relation to a proposed development at 2 Bollo Lane. London Wildlife Trust, as well as local volunteers at the reserve, submitted several objections to this development on the grounds of:

• The expected uncontrolled rise in visitor numbers to the site from offices and residences will increase litter, vandalism and trampling of sensitive habitats at the site.

- 42 -

• The existence of a large development next to the nature reserve will create noise pollution and light pollution at night (which may affect, for example, the important population of bats). • The development will remove a valuable ‘buffer’ currently surrounding the nature reserve • The development will have potential negative effects on drainage, flooding and erosion. • The development will result in potential air and water pollution. • The mere visual impact of a large development looming over the site will take away from its inherent and aesthetic value as a nature reserve. • The construction phase is likely to exacerbate all of the above problems.

Though planning permission for the development was granted in February 2007, London Wildlife Trust secured an active role in the design of this building in order to ensure ecological and biodiversity components are included; potential s106 funds may also be granted and would serve as a contribution to the Visitor Centre.

The “Ealing Rangers,” in particular Karen Roberts who is an active member of the Gunnersbury Triangle steering committee and recently appointed Chair of the committee, play a very supportive role in the reserve. The Ealing Rangers patrol the reserve as part of their schedule, and conduct all tree work as needed. This involves a minimum of one major workday a year, where damaged or dangerous trees are taken down. Tree surgery such as this is very expensive to bring in, and the Ealing Rangers expertise and work is very valuable. In a consultation meeting, Karen Roberts confirmed the continued commitment by the Ealing Rangers for the reserve and its developments.

LB Hammersmith and Fulham Paul Clay, Nature Conservation Officer from LB Hammersmith and Fulham, was also invited for an accompanied reserve visit. Paul Clay works with nature conservation volunteers at Little Wormwood Scrubs, Wormwood Scrubs, a Conservation Area at Ravenscourt Park and Old Oak Sidings. The potential for ‘sharing volunteers’, by for example bringing Gunnersbury Triangle volunteers to nature reserves mentioned above and vice versa, was the focus of dialogue. It was noted that several volunteers have expressed an interest in working on new reserves and meeting new people, and that this could be quite easily arranged. Paul Clay also emphasised the potential in recruiting volunteers from other local services, such as the Youth Offending Team and Community Centres.

- 43 -

RECOMMENDATIONS

The research detailed above was very productive. It both confirmed existing theories of barriers to engagement, and contributed new information and innovative ideas for increasing community use of Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve. On many topics, it was surprising to see the consistency of responses from varied and diverse stakeholders groups, and recommendations were easy to draw out.

On a few of the topics it was less straight-forward, with different stakeholder groups feeling radically different about the way to proceed. These issues were reconciled by addressing them from the fundamental perspective and goal of this research: to increase community use of the reserve as a public amenity, without compromising its natural integrity.

Visitor Centre

The type of Visitor Centre to build at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve was a key component of all consultations through questions, mapping exercises and by looking at pictures and details of four options. These options included:

1. Another Portakabin 2. Recycled Sea Containers making one larger building 3. A ‘real’ building with ecological designs 4. A ‘real’ building with modern and unusual designs

A majority of respondents, around 75%, expressed preference for a real building, with variation on the details of this building. Almost all agreed that all possible ecological designs should be incorporated, within reason. These would include: a green roof, solar panels, grey water recycling, and bat boxes. Many respondents also discussed the need for a building of some height, for two reasons: in order to accommodate the space required (see below) on a relatively small area, and in order to make the reserve more visible and prominent from Chiswick Park tube station and the street.

The size of the building must be large enough to accommodate a classroom – most respondents emphasized the importance of the reserve’s educational provision – as well as office space able to accommodate a minimum of two workers, a well-equipped kitchen, a reception and museum area, and indoor toilets that are handicap accessible.

About 50% of respondents, mostly people who had not used the reserve in the past but may be interested in doing so in the future, also expressed a preference for a comfortable social area in which to relax after volunteering but also for informal conservation talks; some suggested this could be combined with a library focused on ecology and conservation.

The location of the Visitor Centre was most debated by those who know the reserve well – in particular in terms of issues with the scrap yard. A majority of respondents

- 44 -

suggested that the building should not be located where the current portakabin stands, but rather should stand with its back towards 2 Bollo Lane, to the right when entering the reserve. The main reason for this location is the continued uncertainty regarding the scrap yard: construction of the building must commence without knowing if the scrap yard can be obtained. If it is obtained in the future, and the building is located where the portakabin now stands, it will be strangely placed in the middle of the front entrance area and not make good use of space. If however it is placed with its back to 2 Bollo Lane, a large and appealing front entrance area can be created, with a gate as close as possible to the tube station across the street. Another more practical reason for this location is that the current portakabin could then possibly continue to be used in its current location during construction. Though this general idea was endorsed, most respondents also suggested allowing an architect to explore the exact location and direction that the building should face in terms of hard standing, sunlight and any other technical factors. A minimum of two designs, one for a scenario where the scrap yard is secured and one for a scenario where it is not, would allow architects to explore different options.

RECOMMENDATION 1 : Architects to be commissioned for drawings for a new ecological building with some modern and unusual aspects, as well as height, immediately adjacent to 2 Bollo Lane; 2 options – one with the scrap yard and one without – to be commissioned.

Entrance Area The entrance area was a subject of many discussions in the consultation process, with a vast majority of respondents citing its current state as a major obstacle. Suggestions for improvements to the entrance area focused on the entrance gate. Although many respondents like the current wooden structure, 60% of respondents suggested an arch above in order to increase prominence. This arch, it was suggested, ought to be designed by an artist and perhaps have an environmental theme such as leaves or painted birds. The entrance area, it was also suggested, should have a notice board and a new and clear interpretation board with a map of the reserve and enough text to make it clear to visitors what to expect from the reserve. Furthermore, it was suggested from a few respondents that the fact that the reserve is free should be clearer to passer-bys.

RECOMMENDATION 2 : Commission artists’ designs of a spectacular new entrance area, as well as designed interpretation board with map

Educational Provision Due to the high significance allocated by most respondents to the educational provision at the reserve, a specific section addressing this service will be detailed below.

London Wildlife Trust has an extensive education programme, which is focused on primary schools but slowly developing to secondary education. Responses in this consultation confirmed that the focus of educational provision should be on primary education because it is the strength of the trust, because the reserve is most suited to it, and because secondary schools tend to undertake less class field trips of this nature.

- 45 -

Even secondary school teachers confirmed this view, explaining that organising a whole or half day away from classes is much more complicated at this level.

However, many respondents did not want to rule out secondary education entirely, and suggested that while a less active approach might be taken to recruiting secondary schools they should certainly be welcomed. In addition the option of sometimes in the future investing more resources into secondary education was not ruled out.

Further education and adult education should also be provided at the reserve. In particular, many respondents suggested allowed research students to use the reserve for specific ecology, biology, botany and conservation projects. This research, such as detailed survey work, would of course also benefit the reserve. Such arrangement may also include gap year volunteers or Duke of Edinburgh volunteers conducting valuable survey work

A few respondents debated the size of this classroom – should it be able to accommodate one class of 30 children or two classes of 60? Teachers and most respondents assured that a classroom for 30 would suffice, as most activity would occur in the reserve.

The classroom must also be well-equipped, with desks and chairs for 30 students but also all necessary equipment for primary education, and basic equipment for secondary education and beyond. Technologically innovative equipment was also mentioned by some, such as cameras in bird boxes and use of mobile and IT technology.

RECOMMENDATION 3: Architects commissioned to be asked to design for a classroom accommodating approximately 30 children

RECOMMENDATION 4: An environmental educator to be asked to equip the classroom for primary school use, basic secondary school use and use of innovative educational technology

Additional Facilities

Several additional facilities were recommended or requested by respondents. A secure tool store was the most common response when asked for suggestions of additional facilities. The current tool shed is quite insecure and has been broken into twice. There are two main options for a tool store: containing it within the Visitor Centre, or creating a separate building. Perhaps surprisingly, most respondents with an understanding of tool storage and safety issues, recommended a separate tool store container made out of metal, with a walk-in door. This is considered the safest option with lower frequency of break-in at other sites. A few respondents noted that this avoids taking up valuable and expensive room from the Visitor Centre. Furthermore one respondent with knowledge of health and safety issues noted that it is a legal requirement to store certain chemicals and paints in a separate structure.

- 46 -

RECOMMENDATION 5: A separate secure metal container with walk-in door to be placed near the Visitor Centre, to provide safe storage of tools

A minority of respondents suggested that infrastructure be placed within the reserve. Suggestions included a small tools and educational materials storage area inside the reserve, compost toilets inside the reserve, additional benches and a possible picnic bench in the ‘picnic meadow’. All of these suggestions were overwhelmingly rejected by a majority of respondents, representing a breadth of stakeholders. The feelings expressed were that the reserve should be kept as “wild” as possible and that any infrastructure be centred on the Visitor Centre and entrance area.

Suggestions for additional infrastructure that could be placed around the entrance area included flower boxes and wildflower garden areas, a safe cycle lock, benches and one or two picnic tables. Ethnic minority respondents in particular were keen on additional facilities around the Visitor Centre, in order that children could be taken care of and that meals could be had if visiting the reserve for a day or a few hours. Finally, recycling and composting facilities were encouraged as part of the green credentials of the reserve; these would also be best suited outside, but close to, the Visitor Centre for practical and educational purposes.

RECOMMENDATION 6: Flower boxes, a safe cycle lock, benches, picnic tables and recycling and composting facilities to be introduced around the entrance area; no major infrastructure to be introduced inside the reserve proper

Finally the consultation suggested that although interpretation is needed in the entrance area (as outlined above); there is no need for interpretation boards inside the reserve along the nature trail. This is partially due to risk of vandalism, but also because it would remove from the sense of wilderness in the reserve. Current numbered signposts that correspond to a trail leaflet were deemed adequate and appropriate by most respondents, though these may need to be improved / maintained.

RECOMMENDATION 7: Improve existing posted nature trail and accompanying leaflet in the reserve, without installing any major interpretation boards inside the reserve

Events Provision Not a single respondent to the consultation claimed that the services currently provided suffice; in fact most participants talked at length about current limits and missed opportunities. In addition to the educational provision detailed above, organised walks and talks were a popular recommendation. About 70% of respondent expressed an interest in attending organised events.

When prompted to suggest topics, specific walks aimed at amateurs were most often suggested, in particular bat walks, butterfly walks and fungal forays. People who had

- 47 -

come on such walks in the past tended to have had a very positive experience, citing the importance of well-qualified leaders and the friendly informal atmosphere. Most respondents suggested increasing the number of events, advertising them more thoroughly, covering more subjects and expanding by starting with optional slide show presentations or lectures. However, many participants also valued the approach of catering to an audience with varying previous knowledge and interest. It is important to use a good volunteer or employee leader able to address both casual attendees as well as professional ecologists.

Events for children were also high on the wishing list. Again, previous participants in the walks mentioned above cited the value of allowing children to come along and tailoring walks and talks to the needs of children. Family activities in general were also highly valued, with many respondents citing fun and meaningful family events as a main attraction to the reserve. Children were also very positive about the experience, with many children who had visited through school returning with their family during the weekend.

Children-only events were also requested by many parents. In particular, summer schools with full-day programmes were popular. In the summer of 2006 a pilot programme of summer school events for children only was run at the reserve; these proved popular with a handful of families, but highlighted the need for good advertisement, structure and volunteer parents to help run events.

In terms of costing, most respondents were willing to pay for their own and their children’s participation in events. On average, adults were willing to pay £4 per event, and £2 for children. For a five full day of children’s summer schools unaccompanied by parents, respondents were willing to pay a range between £30 and £150; with an average of £85. Many respondents noted that when asking for payment at an event, it tends to be much more effective to ask for a specific amount donation rather than any ‘donation’.

RECOMMENDATION 8: Once staffed, run a well-advertised programme of events for children and families at the reserve throughout the year, asking for a specific recommended donation from participants

Other Service Provision

The consultation process also highlighted a demand and missed opportunity for provision of other services. Several specific user groups expressed a desire to be more involved in the reserve. The mental health charity consulted was very keen to come for weekly volunteering sessions. LWT already runs mental health groups at two other reserves, and this expertise could certainly guide the creation of a mental health programme at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve. When consulting community groups, several groups representing retired people expressed in interest in regular visits, as did youth groups. Preventative health was also mentioned by

- 48 -

respondents: partnering with local Primary Care Trusts by asking doctors and nurses to recommend use of the reserve to patients. Finally there is also the potentially to provide services on behalf of local authorities; funding is also available from places like the lottery and foundations, to provide support for specific groups.

RECOMMENDATION 9 : Once staffed, expand on the service provision of the reserve and explore opportunities for targeting specific audiences such as mental health groups, community groups for retired people and youth groups

Attracting More Visitors

The very mission of this consultation process was ultimately to explore ways of expanding the public amenity of this site. Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve exists for the protection of wildlife and for the enjoyment of people, and as such it is our responsibility to make the reserve inclusive and ensure public enjoyment of the site.

At present, one cannot claim that the reserve does this to its full potential. Many people who have passed the reserve every day for several decades, do not know if its existence. Several people who venture inside the gates, misunderstand that the paved entrance areas is the entire reserve, and leave again. Visitor numbers, especially in the winter, are extremely low.

The good news is that 95% of respondents had positive attitudes to the reserve, and expressed an interest in increasing their use of it. Current users are interested in taking part in more events, and those respondents who had not previously heard of the reserve were very positively inclined. Respondents were also generally amazed at the lack of vandalism, and most notably 80% of respondents gave great emphasis to the reserve’s tranquillity and sense of wilderness in the middle of the city.

However, awareness and use of the reserve remains low. Respondents cited the following as key obstacles: other time pressures, distance, confusion about opening times of reserve, poor signage, poor advertising, lack of understanding the size of the reserve, and feeling that it was ‘not for them’.

Several professional ecologists and park managers consulted were asked if we need to be concerned about the visitor carrying capacity of the reserve; all responded that this would not be an issue and that maximising visitors at this stage would not compromise the natural integrity of the site.

Since lack of awareness was the most commonly cited obstacle, improved advertising will be integral to change. This advertising would take the form of PR exercises with local media, TV interviews and reports (aided by LWT Press and PR Team), local leafleting, local advertisement on public notice boards, internet avenues such as the W4 website and LWT website, and advertisement of events at the reserve entrance.

- 49 -

RECOMMENDATION 10: Invest in press, PR and advertising to make known the site and services provided to a wider audience

A more consistent presence at the reserve was also suggested to overcome lack of awareness and understanding of the reserve. Having a staffed presence, especially during the weekends, which would give a sense of activity at the reserve as well as provide friendly welcoming information, was thought by most respondents to make a large difference.

RECOMMENDATION 11: Ensure a consistent minimum 5 days per week staff presence, sense of activity and welcoming information at the reserve

The improved entrance area, signage and interpretation detailed above would also serve to better advertise the reserve. However this must be reconciled with the public’s high value for a sense of wilderness, and should (as outlined above) be restricted to around the Visitor Centre.

RECOMMENDATION 12: Significantly improve the entrance area and interpretation to increase prominence of the site

Safety

Safety was brought up by several respondents in this consultation, in particular but not exclusively by women. Many current volunteers and visitors expressed an unwillingness to go into the reserve alone. Many are comforted by the fact that there is only one entry and exit point to the reserve, feeling that this limits threats to some degree. However, the reserve is open to the public 24 hours a day seven days a week through an open gate, and this gives a sense of apprehension that anybody could be “lurking” in the reserve. Several helpful suggestions for limiting risks were put forth, most commonly that of having the reserve staffed regularly. A couple of respondents suggested a system of signing in and out, so that anybody missing or unaccounted for would be noticed. However, others expressed concerns that a signing in and out system would be unworkable, intrusive and unwelcoming to the public.

RECOMMENDATION 13: Increase safety, and sense of safety, through staffing of the reserve; encourage those who feel uneasy about being alone to let members of staff know of their presence

Engaging BME Communities and other Hard to Reach Communities

Attracting new demographics – in particular Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) groups, hard to reach communities and people from areas of high socio-economic deprivation – will be integral to ensuring that a representative cross-section of the community enjoy the site. As it stands, users of the site are predominately white and middle class. It is

- 50 -

integral that all communities are engaged in and enjoy Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve, because the reserve exists for the public amenity and enjoyment of all; because it will be integral to strong community ownership and support for the reserve; and because working toward environmental justice is the right thing to do.

The Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve clearly has a considerable potential to grow its visitor base with people from ethnic minorities. Results from the consultation indicate that the main barrier is simple awareness. Prior to recruitment none of the respondents had heard of the Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve, yet all respondents had heard of the London Wildlife Trust (LWT) gained mainly from the media and principally from TV and radio advertising. The awareness barrier can be overcome by a variety of engaging, straightforward and cost-sensitive initiatives. For example, it may seem basic but an overtly welcoming, very obvious sign facilitating the visitor’s entrance is essential. From past research we know such signs can rarely be too simple or too friendly, particularly for people who are possibly less acculturated into the local society.

The respondents had a range of positive and practical suggestions to help promote the Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve. Their advice included recommending the need for a large sign outside the main entrance advertising the opening hours and that visiting was free . Respondents also recommended having pictures or images illustrating what is available to see and do within the reserve, to be located at the entrance. There needs to be simple ‘triggers’ to enter, which is usually best conveyed by an engaging picture.

RECOMMENDATION 14: Improve signage and entrance interpretation that makes clear what can be expected inside the reserve and that visiting is free

Other constructive suggestions for promoting the reserve included a ‘well advertised open day’ and placing posters at the local stations, in local supermarkets and also by going into schools ‘to offer the personal touch’.

RECOMMENDATION 15: Conduct regular and broadly-advertised community open days at the reserve, targeting under-represented communities

As all respondents had visited a variety of nature reserves or parks previously, albeit as a typically infrequent occurrence, there is not inherent rejection of nature reserves. It would appear these respondents would enjoy visiting the Gunnersbury Triangle for the same reason other visitors do. Any advertising and marketing on the ‘triggers’ discussed would therefore also likely appeal to the current visiting population.

More structured ‘triggers’ to visit the reserve were, for example, a mini museum, a café kiosk, a leisure or play area for children and a picnic area. It would be attractive if the reserve offered visitors a ‘day out’. Food, children and family activities were the key reasons for driving visits once the respondents understood the reserve was available. It

- 51 -

is no coincidence therefore that Sundays would be the preferred day to visit the reserve as this was considered the main ‘family day’.

RECOMMENDATION 16: Consider, and carefully cost, offering complementary leisure opportunities at the Visitor Centre such as a museum, kiosk/café, play area and picnic area in order to attract new visitors

As the majority of respondents suggested, organised and pre-advertised ‘structured events’ such as themed led walks would entice visitors to the reserve as walking around the reserve may in itself not be sufficient to warrant a visit. This confirms the recommendation made above regarding offering a series of well-advertised events.

The only other potentially significant barrier was some respondents, especially females, expressed a concern that the reserve should be ‘manned’ in order to engender feelings of safety whilst walking around the reserve. It is likely that this barrier is considerably more significant than its expression suggested. ‘Overt’ staffing, if possible, is the best way of addressing this genuine concern. This confirms the recommendation made above regarding safety provisions at the reserve.

In conclusion, there appears that there is a great deal that can be achieved to attract people from ethnic minorities to the reserve. Promoting simple awareness is the first key step, then providing good triggers to use on two levels. First, engaging signage and second, food and child and family activity triggers to visiting

Social Exclusion At this stage it is important to address a potential problem identified during the course of this consultation: the risk that current users involuntarily exclude some new users from active involvement. At its simplest, this has taken the form of some current volunteers expressing concerns that the reserve be over-used:

“We need to look at the capacity of the reserve and how many visitors it can manage”

“I don’t really want many more people coming to the triangle”

Evidence taken from consultation with experienced park managers suggest these fears are unfounded, and confirm that human carrying capacity of the reserve need not be a limit to engagement.

Social Exclusion has also taken expression in more extreme and controversial opinions. While these have been rare, the following comment illustrates serious prejudice, if not racism, as a barrier to inclusion:

“Perhaps ethnic minorities do not come here because they feel intimidated by us white intelligent people”

- 52 -

The cultural, class and racial issues in society are clearly too large to solve in this report; however it is very important to note their existence and recognise the need to address and manage them in any future developments.

RECOMMENDATION 17: A pro-active approach be taken be all members of staff at the reserve to ensure social inclusion and a friendly welcome to all members of society

Partnership Working Working in partnership with other environmental charities and organisations will be integral to the development of the reserve. This consultation process identified several local charities and ‘friends of’ groups to discuss the potential for working together. All respondents were in principle in favour, though there was some variation of the nature and detail of a partnership.

A majority of members of ‘friends of’ groups has visited Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve, and enjoyed it, but were not inclined to become regular visitors or volunteers. Reasons stated included time limits, geographical location and a focus of the park for which they were already engaged in a ‘friends of’ group. However, these groups did support the goals of the triangle, and were enthusiastic about opportunities for supporting one another through advertising, displaying one another’s leaflets, joint publications of events, and occasional joint walks or talks.

RECOMMENDATION 18: Engage with local ‘friends of’ groups by supporting one another, but without a targeted effort to recruit regular volunteers from other ‘friends of’ groups

Other potential partners approached included Groundwork Thames Valley and the Crane Partnership. Groundwork Thames Valley has already supported Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve through small grants. The organisation has also confirmed in principle a willingness to work together, in particular through joint work days and recruitment of volunteers.

The Crane Valley Partnership is another very important local actor. The Partnership is made up of Local Authorities within a 30 mile stretch of the River Crane (from Harrow in the North to Richmond in the South) as well as charities including London Wildlife Trust and significant bodies such as the BAA, Environmental Agency and Thames Water. London Wildlife Trust is currently in the process of submitting a significant funding application to the HLF, on behalf of the Crane Valley Partnership, for a major conservation, access and engagement project along the river. As lead of this funding application, and with a very active role in the partnership, LWT is in a good position to involve Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve in the partnership and the opportunities it presents.

The main facilitator of the Crane Valley Partnership, Fiona Sim, is also the Executive Director of Green Corridor, which works to enhance “the quality of life for all those

- 53 -

living, working and travelling through the western approach to London.” London Wildlife Trust has been working closely with Fiona Sim to develop the Crane Valley Partnership funding application to the HLF, and this relationship should also be developed to involve the Green Corridor in Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve.

RECOMMENDATION 19: Develop links with the Crane Valley Partnership and other local charities and engage these actors in developments at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve.

Financial breakdown and funding strategy

The remaining s106 funding from the Chiswick Business Park is approximately £400,000. In addition to this, developers at the adjoining 2 Bollo Lane have promised a £150,000 contribution to the new Visitor Centre. However this will not be released before construction starts, which may take a year or two.

Although £550,000 is a significant and highly valued sum of money with which to develop the reserve, it is of course finite and will not provide indefinite revenue funding. A majority of current volunteers, steering committee members, LWT staff and even Local Authority officers recommended setting aside a significant proportion, approximately £350,000 for the capital costs, essentially for construction and equipment of a new Visitor Centre. The remainder, approximately £200,000, would be used to cover revenue costs, most importantly staffing, for 3-5 years.

RECOMMENDATION 20: Of the total £550,000 available from two s106 funds, s et aside approximately £200,000 for staffing and revenue costs over 3- 5 years, and use the remaining £350,000 for capital costs in particular construction of a Visitor Centre.

However, a long-term funding strategy will need to be put in place in order to secure long-term financial sustainability of the site. The community focus of the developments should open up many avenues for statutory, foundation, landfill trust and lottery funding, where engagement is often highly prioritised. Specifically, LWT has excellent relationships with the Heritage Lottery Fund, the Big Lottery Fund, the London Development Agency, London Councils, and several small environmental charities and landfill trusts. Applying for funding from these sources should be prioritised, starting immediately. In fact, a funding application to Veolia landfill trust has already been submitted in the amount of £70,000 for a 2-year site management and volunteer development programme at the reserve. If successful, this will ‘free up’ some of the revenue costs set aside from the s106 funding, and stretch out the amount of years of revenue funding available.

- 54 -

RECOMMENDATION 21: Actively pursue other sources of income in order to ‘free up’ and stretch out the amount of revenue funding available, as well as for use as match funding.

Local businesses, as this consultation has shown, present a significant opportunity for long-term funding. Many local businesses, from Chiswick Business Park and beyond, are willing not only to come and volunteer but also to pay for their volunteering experience as part of a team-building activity – up to £50 per head. The opportunities for building relationships with local businesses must of course be maximised, and leading corporate work days should be a key part of any staff member’s job description. A well-developed corporate volunteering programme with local businesses could potentially involve 2 workdays per month, with up to 20 people, ensuring an income of £24,000 per year – a significant and sustainable contribution to revenue costs. Furthermore, many local businesses may become corporate members, adding another £1,000 per year per business. Local businesses are also often willing to donate all tools and materials, adding further value to the relationship.

RECOMMENDATION 22: Build relationships with local businesses in order to develop a corporate volunteering and membership programme potentially worth over £24,000 per year.

Another significant source of potential revenue is through social enterprise and alternative income. Several respondents stated a preference for a seating area and refreshment provision at the reserve. Ina relatively affluent area, this service along with the nature reserve further attracting visitors, has the potential to provide a significant source of income. However, as warned by Doug Napier from CIP, there are serious risks involved in such as undertaking and thorough market research will have to be conducted. Gift shops were also recommended, and may provide a safer and higher yield source of income. Finally, it is clear from the consultation that most stakeholders are willing to pay to attend certain events; this includes respondents from socio- economically less advantaged backgrounds.

RECOMMENDATION 23: Explore alternative sources of sustainable income from the reserve, specifically: selling of coffees and teas, a gift shop, and charging for certain events such as school visits and events.

The potential income sources above will have to be drawn out, researched and analysed more thoroughly in order to get a more detailed income picture. This should be done through a 5-year business plan for the reserve, which would explore in detail the funding, income and financial recommendations above.

RECOMMENDATION 24: LWT to write a Business Plan for Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve, ideally whilst s106 money release and planning permission are being processed.

- 55 -

Timeline

So, how to proceed from here?

Short-Term (April – September 2007) The first, short-term priorities over the next 6 months, between April and October, will be for London Wildlife Trust to: • Negotiate and secure a lease from LB Hounslow for the Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve and future buildings on the site • Liaise with LB Hounslow for the release of the remaining s106 funding due to the trust and necessary in order to take the process forward • Write a Business Plan for Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve; this should be lead by LWT’s Business Development Manager • Commence dialogue with architects regarding design of a new Visitor Centre according to specifications above

Medium Term (October 2007 – December 2008) As soon as the s106 funding is release, LWT can go ahead and push for the construction of a new Visitor Centre. The entire process of building a new centre is likely to take a minimum of 1 – 1.5 years. This process is likely to be overseen by a part-time employee, or through temporary employment on a consultancy basis: • Commission architects to draw up detailed designs of the new Visitor Centre according to specifications above • Apply for planning permission for the construction of a Visitor Centre • Oversee construction of new building • Ensure the proper equipping of new Visitor Centre according to all specifications above • Conduct a campaign to raise local awareness of developments at the reserve and the new Visitor Centre, and secure the adjoining scrap yard

Long Term (January 2009 +) Actual activity at the new visitors centre, as specified in the recommendations above, is not likely to commence before January 2009. At this stage, a full time project manager, and potential additional staff, will be employed and based at the new Visitor Centre. A major press and PR programme will have to be implemented, and temporary staff may be employed to recruit schools, raise awareness, and plan a launch event for the reserve.

- 56 -

CONCLUSION

Conducting this community consultation proved a very informative and useful process for London Wildlife Trust. The s106 funding and planned developments at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve present a significant opportunity for London Wildlife Trust to expand our profile in the area, develop our work in West London, and most importantly engage new local audiences in conservation.

The consultation confirmed several ideas already developed at London Wildlife Trust, such as the importance of a new ecological Visitor Centre, the need for increased publicity and events, and the significance of school activity. More interestingly, though, the 267 respondents contributed a plethora of new suggestions and perspectives not previously considered. These ideas and recommendations add significant value to the planning process, and are sure to contribute to the success of developments at Gunnersbury Triangle Local Nature Reserve.

The 12-month community consultation has created a solid platform from which to take developments forward. Over the next six months, it will be up to London Wildlife Trust and LB Hounslow to ensure that the process does not lose momentum, and is taken forward. If this can be ensured, residents of Hounslow, Ealing and Hammersmith and Fulham will in 2009 be enjoying a fantastic new resource for improved lifestyles, health and engagement, at a beautiful open green space and Local Nature Reserve.

- 57 -

APPENDIX A: Sample Consultation Questionnaire

The sample questionnaire below was adapted for different audiences; in addition other forms for semi-structured interviews, meetings, etc. where prepared. This questionnaire serves as an indicative sample of the type of questions asked.

1. Have you heard of London Wildlife Trust? YES / NO

2. Have you heard of LWT’s nature reserve at Gunnersbury Triangle? YES / NO

3. Have you ever visited Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve? YES / NO

4. If “YES” to Question 3: a. About how many times have you visited? 1 1-5 6-10 11-15 15+

b. When was the last time you visited? JULY ’06 2006 2005 BEFORE ‘05

c. What did you enjoy about the reserve?

d. What did you not like about the reserve?

e. What did you do when you last visited?

f. Would you visit the reserve again? YES / NO

5. If “NO” to Question 3: a. Have you visited other local nature reserves? YES / NO

b. What has stopped you from visiting Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve?

6. What activities do you enjoy undertaking when visiting nature reserves or parks?

7. Would you be more inclined to use a reserve ( Please circle 2 ):

Alone, e.g. for a walk or picnic

With other adults for organised events, e.g. led walks

With members of a community group you belong to

For family activities

For children’s activities

For organised practical conservation work

Other

- 58 -

8. Which of the following organised activities would you pick ( Please circle 3) ?

Practical Conservation Workday Woodland crafts for families

Butterfly Walk for adults Treasure hunt for children

Butterfly Walk for adults, Fungal Foray guided walk for families with children’s activities Night bat walk for adults, with Summer Open Day with many children’s activities activities for parents and children Other?

9. Would you be willing to pay for your child/children to participate in informal education activities at the reserve? YES / NO

10. If YES to question 9, what is maximum you would be willing to pay for a 1.5 hr activity?

£1 £2 £3 £4 £5 £6 £7

11. Would you be willing to pay for your child/children to participate in week- long non-residential summer camps at the reserve? YES / NO

12. If YES to question 11, what is maximum you would be willing to pay for 5 full days?

£30 £40 £50 £60 £80 £100 £150

13. What day of the week are you most likely to visit a nature reserve?

Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun

14. What time of day are you most likely to visit a nature reserve?

9-11 11-14 14-17 17-20 20+

15. Would you be interested in volunteering opportunities at Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve? YES / NO 16. What facilities would you like to see at a nature reserve?

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PARTICIPATING IN THIS SURVEY; YOUR ANSWERS ARE VERY VALUABLE AND WILL INFORM DECISIONS ON FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS AT GUNNERSBURY TRIANGLE NATURE RESERVE

Please return this form to the person who gave it to you or, if you prefer, post it to: Nina Arwitz, London Wildlife Trust, Skyline House, 200 Union Street, London SE1 0LW

- 59 -

APPENDIX B: Map of Gunnersbury Triangle

- 60 -

APPENDIX C: Primary Schools in Catchment Area

School Name Contact Number Address Area Postcode Previous visit to Gunnersbury Triangle? London Borough of Ealing (eastern) Berrymede Junior School (020) 8993 9063 Osborne Road Acton W3 8SJ Yes Derwentwater Primary School (020) 8992 5710 Shakespeare Road Acton W3 6SA Yes East Acton Primary School (020) 8762 0540 East Acton Lane Acton W3 7HA No John Perryn Primary School (020) 8743 5648 Long Drive Acton W3 8EW No St Vincent Catholic Primary School (020) 8992 6625 Pierrepoint Road Acton W3 9JR No West Acton Primary School (020) 8992 3144 Noel Road Acton W3 0JL Yes Southfield Primary School (020) 8994 6173 Southfield Road Bedford Park W4 1BD Yes Christ Church CE Junior School (020) 8567 6252 New Broadway Ealing W5 2XA No Grange Primary School (020) 8567 1432 Church Gardens Ealing W5 4HN Yes Little Ealing Primary School (020) 8567 2135 Weymouth Avenue Ealing W5 4EA Yes Montpelier Primary School (020) 8997 5855 Montpelier Road Ealing W5 2QT No Mount Carmel RC Primary School (020) 8567 4646 Little Ealing Lane Ealing W5 4EA No North Ealing Primary School (020) 8997 2653 Pitshanger Lane Ealing W5 1RP No St Gregory Catholic Primary School (020) 8997 7550 Woodfield Road Ealing W5 1SL No St Saviour’s CE Infant School (020) 8825 8790 The Grove Ealing W5 5DX No Brentside Primary School (020) 8813 2580 Kennedy Road Hanwell W7 1LJ No Hobbayne Primary School (020) 8567 6271 Greenford Avenue Hanwell W7 1HA No Mayfield Primary School (020) 8575 9885 High Lane Hanwell W7 3RT No Oaklands Primary School (020) 8567 5243 Oaklands Road Hanwell W7 2DP Yes St Joseph Catholic Primary School (020) 8567 6293 York Avenue Hanwell W7 3HU No St Mark’s Primary School (020) 8567 6292 Lower Boston Road Hanwell W7 2NR Yes Drayton Green Primary School (020) 8997 2307 Drayton Grove Ealing W13 0LA No Fielding Primary School (020) 8567 9524 Wyndham Road Ealing W13 9TE No Hathaway Primary School (020) 8998 2479 Hathaway Gardens Ealing W13 0DH No St John’s Primary School (020) 8567 6251 Felix Road Ealing W13 0NY Yes West Twyford Primary School (020) 8965 6858 Twyford Abbey Road Park Royal NW10 7DN No London Borough of Hounslow (eastern) Belmont Primary School (020) 8994 7677 Belmont Road Chiswick W4 5UL Yes Cavendish Primary School (020) 8994 6835 Edensor Road Chiswick W4 2RG Yes

- 61 -

Grove Park Primary School (020) 8994 7405 Nightingale Close Chiswick W4 3JN No St Mary’s RC Primary School (020) 8994 5606 Duke Road Chiswick W4 2DF Yes Stand-on-the-Green Junior School (020) 8994 7847 Thames Road Chiswick W4 3NX Yes The William Hogarth Primary School (020) 8994 4782 Duke Road Chiswick W4 2JR Yes Alexandra Junior School (020) 8570 6826 Denbigh Road Hounslow TW3 4DU No Chatsworth Junior School (020) 8560 6019 Heath Road Hounslow TW3 2NW No Grove Road Primary School (020) 8570 6132 Cromwell Road Hounslow TW3 3QQ No Hounslow Town Primary School (020) 8570 1747 Pears Road Hounslow TW3 1SR No Wellington Primary School (020) 8570 6130 Sutton Lane Hounslow TW3 4LB No Beavers Community Primary School (020) 8570 9347 Arundel Road Hounslow TW4 6HR No Hounslow Heath Junior School (020) 8570 1332 Selwyn Close, Cambridge Hounslow TW4 7BD No Road The Orchard Junior School (020) 8570 6247 Orchard Road Hounslow TW4 5JW No St Michael & St Martin RC Primary School (020) 8572 9658 Belgrave Road Hounslow TW4 7AG No The Blue School CE Primary School (020) 8560 6721 North Street Isleworth TW7 6RQ No Isleworth Town Primary School (020) 8560 5701 Twickenham Road Isleworth TW7 6AB No Ivybridge Primary School (020) 8891 2727 Summerwood Road Isleworth TW7 7QB No Marlborough Primary School (020) 8560 3978 London Road Isleworth TW7 5XA No St Mary’s RC Primary School (020) 8560 7166 South Street Isleworth TW7 7EE No The Smallberry Green Primary School (020) 8580 2070 Turnpike Way Isleworth TW7 5BF No Spring Grove Primary School (020) 8560 0965 Star Road Isleworth TW7 4HB No Worple Primary School (020) 8321 8100 Queens Terrace Isleworth TW7 7DB No Green Dragon Primary School (020) 8568 3971 North Road Brentford TW8 0BJ Yes Lionel Primary School (020) 8560 5323 Lionel Road North Brentford TW8 9QT No Our Lady & St John’s RC Primary School (020) 8560 7477 Boston Park Road Brentford TW8 9JF No St Paul’s C of E Primary School (020) 8560 3297 St Paul’s Road Brentford TW8 0PN Yes London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham Brackenbury Primary School (020) 8743 3074 Dalling Road Hammersmith W6 0BA Yes Flora Gardens Primary School (020) 8748 2566 Dalling Road Hammersmith W6 0UD Yes John Betts Primary School (020) 8748 2465 Paddenswick Road Hammersmith W6 0UA Yes Larmenier & Sacred Heart Primary School (020) 8748 9444 Great Church Lane Hammersmith W6 8DH Yes Lena Gardens Primary School (020) 7603 4043 Lena Gardens Hammersmith W6 7PZ No Melcombe Primary School (020) 8748 7411 Fulham Palace Road Hammersmith W6 9ER No St Augustine’s Primary School (020) 7385 4333 Disbrowe Road Hammersmith W6 8QE No St Paul’s Primary School (020) 8748 4951 Worlidge Street Hammersmith W6 9BP No

- 62 -

St Peter’s Primary School (020) 8748 7756 33 St Peter’s Road Hammersmith W6 9BA No The Good Shepherd RC Primary School (020) 8743 5060 Gayford Road East Acton W12 9BY Yes Wendell Park Primary School (020) 8743 1372 Cobbold Road East Acton W12 9LB No Wormholt Park Primary School (020) 8743 5073 Bryony Road East Acton W12 0SR No Bentworth Primary School (020) 8743 2527 Bentworth Road North Kensington W12 7AJ No Old Oak Primary School (020) 8743 7629 Mellitus Street Old Oak Common W12 0AS Yes Canberra Primary School (020) 8743 2514 Australia Road Shepherds Bush W12 7PT No Greenside Primary School (020) 8743 6421 Westville Road Shepherds Bush W12 7PT No Miles Coverdale Primary School (020) 8743 5847 Coverdale Road Shepherds Bush W12 8JJ No Pope John Primary School (020) 8743 9428 Commonwealth Ave Shepherds Bush W12 7QR No St Stephen’s CE Primary School (020) 8743 4483 Uxbridge Road Shepherds Bush W12 8LH No Addison Primary School (020) 7603 5333 Addison Gardens Shepherds Bush W14 0DT No Avonmore Primary School (020) 7603 9750 Avonmore Road Earls Court W14 8SH No Normand Croft Community School for (020) 7385 6847 Bramber Road Earls Court W14 9PA No Early Years & Primary Education St Mary’s Primary School (020) 7603 7717 Masbro Road Kensington W14 0LT No Sir John Lillie Primary School (020) 7385 2107 Lillie Road Earls Court SW6 7LN No All Saints Primary School (020) 7736 2803 Bishops Avenue Fulham SW6 6ED No Fulham Primary School (020) 7385 0535 Halford Road Fulham SW6 1JU No Holy Cross Primary School (020) 7736 1447 Basuto Road Fulham SW6 3QJ No New Kings Primary School (020) 7736 2318 New King’s Road Fulham SW6 4LY Yes Peterborough Primary School (020) 7736 5863 Clancarty Road Fulham SW6 3AA No Queens Manor Primary School (020) 7385 4343 Lysia Street Fulham SW6 6ND Yes St John’s CE Walham Green Primary (020) 7731 5454 Filmer Road Fulham SW6 6AS No School Sulivan Primary School (020) 7736 5869 Peterborough Road Fulham SW6 3BN No St Thomas of Canterbury Primary School (020) 7385 8165 Estcourt Road Parsons Green SW6 7HB Yes Langford Primary School (020) 7736 4045 Gilstead Road Sands End SW6 2LG No Kenmont Primary School (020) 8969 4497 Valliere Road Harlesdon NW10 6AL No

- 63 -

APPENDIX D: Secondary Schools in Catchment Area

School Name Contact Number Address Area Postcode Previous visit to Gunnersbury Triangle? London Borough of Ealing (eastern) Acton High School (020) 8354 3200 Gunnersbury Lane Acton W3 8EY Yes The Ellen Wilkinson School for Girls (020) 8752 1525 Queen’s Drive Acton W3 0HW No Twyford Church of England High School (020) 8752 0141 Twyford Crescent Acton W3 9PP No Brentside High School (020) 8575 9162 Greenford Avenue Hanwell W7 1JJ No Drayton Manor High School (020) 8357 1900 Drayton Bridge Road Hanwell W7 1EU No Elthorne Park High School (020) 8566 1166 Westlea Road Hanwell W7 2AD No London Borough of Hounslow (eastern) Arts Educational School (020) 8987 6600 14 Bath Road Chiswick W4 1LY Yes Chiswick Community School (020) 8747 0031 Burlington Lane Chiswick W4 3UN No Hounslow Manor School (020) 8572 4461 Prince Regent Road Hounslow TW3 1NE No Lampton School (020) 8572 1936 Lampton Avenue Hounslow TW3 4EP No St Mark’s Catholic School (020) 8577 3600 106 Bath Road Hounslow TW3 3EJ No The Heathland School (020) 8572 4411 Wellington Road South Hounslow TW4 5HU No The Green School for Girls (CofE) (020) 8321 8080 Busch Corner Isleworth TW7 5BB No Gumley House RC Convent School (020) 8568 8692 St John’s Road Isleworth TW7 6PN No Isleworth & Syon School for Boys (020) 8568 5791 Ridgeway Road Isleworth TW7 5LJ No Brentford School for Girls (020) 8847 4281 5 Boston Manor Road Brentford TW8 0PG No Gunnersbury Catholic School (020) 8568 7281 The Ride, Boston Manor Brentford TW8 9LB No Road London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham Sacred Heart High School (020) 8748 7600 212 Hammersmith Road Hammersmith W6 7DG No William Morris Sixth Form (020) 8748 6969 St Dunstans Road Hammersmith W6 8RB No Burlington Danes Academy (020) 8735 4950 Burlington Building, East Acton W12 0HL No Wood Lane Phoenix High School (020) 8749 1141 The Curve East Acton W12 0RQ No Fulham Cross School (020) 7381 0861 Munster Road Fulham SW6 6BP No Henry Compton School (020) 7381 3606 Kingwood Road Fulham SW6 6SN No

- 64 -

Hurlingham & Chelsea School (020) 7731 2581 Peterborough Road Parsons Green SW6 3ED No Lady Margaret School (020) 7736 7138 Parson’s Green Parsons Green SW6 4UN No The London Oratory School (020) 7385 0102 Seagrave Road West Brompton SW6 1RX No

- 65 -

APPENDIX E: Private Schools and Colleges in Catchment Area

School Name Contact Number Address Area Postcode Previous visit to Gunnersbury Triangle? London Borough of Ealing (eastern) Barbara Speake Stage School (020) 8743 1306 East Acton Lane Acton W3 7EG No International School of London (020) 8992 5823 139 Gunnersbury Avenue Acton W3 8LG No The Japanese School (020) 8993 7145 87 Creffield Road Acton W3 9PU No The King Fahad Academy: Main Campus (020) 8743 0131 Bromyard Avenue Acton W3 7HD No The King Fahad Academy: Girls Upper (020) 8832 9040 123-127 Little Ealing Lane Ealing W5 4EJ No School Aston House School: Nursery and Junior (020) 8566 7300 1 Aston Road Ealing W5 2RL No School Aston House School: Senior School (020) 8997 3209 10 Montpelier Road Ealing W5 2QP No Clifton Lodge (020) 8579 3662 8 Mattock Lane Ealing W5 5BG No Durston House School (020) 8991 6530 12 Castlebar Road Ealing W5 2DR Yes Falcons School for Girls (020) 8992 5189 15 Gunnersbury Ave Ealing W5 3XD No Harvington School (020) 8997 1583 20 Castlebar Road Ealing W5 2DS Yes St Augustine’s Priory (020) 8997 2022 Hillcrest Road Ealing W5 2JL No St Benedict’s School: Junior School (020) 8862 2050 5 Montpelier Ave Ealing W5 2XP Yes St Benedict’s School: Senior School (020) 8862 2000 54 Eaton Rise Ealing W5 2ES No Kensington Temple Institute of Education (020) 8799 6168 100 Hanger Lane Ealing W5 1EZ No EXCEL school of performing arts (020) 8799 6168 100 Hanger Lane Ealing W5 1EZ No Avenue House School (020) 8998 9981 70 The Avenue Ealing W13 8LS No Ealing College Upper School (020) 8248 2312 83 The Avenue Ealing W13 8JS No Notting Hill and Ealing High School (020) 8799 8400 2 Cleveland Road Ealing W13 8AX No London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham Latymer Upper School (020) 8741 1851 King Street Hammersmith W6 9LR Yes Ealing, Hammersmith and West London 0800 980 2175 Gliddon Road Barons Court W14 9BL No College (EHWLC) Kensington and Chelsea College (020) 7573 3600 Hortensia Road West Brompton SW10 0QS Yes

- 66 -

APPENDIX F: Special Needs Schools in Catchment Area

School Name Contact Number Address Area Postcode Previous visit to Gunnersbury Triangle? London Borough of Ealing (eastern) St Ann’s School (020) 8567 6291 Springfield Road Hanwell W7 3JP No Castlebar School (020) 8998 3135 Hathaway Gardens Ealing W13 0DH No Springhallow School (020) 8998 2700 Compton Close Ealing W13 0JG Yes London Borough of Hounslow (eastern) Oaklands School (020) 8560 3569 Woodlands Road Isleworth TW7 6HD No Syon Park School (020) 8560 4300 Twickenham Road Isleworth TW7 6AU No London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham Cambridge School (020) 8748 7585 Cambridge Grove Hammersmith W6 0LB No Jack Tizard School (020) 8735 3590 South Africa Road East Acton W12 7PA No Woodlane High School (020) 8743 5668 Du Cane Road North Kensington W12 0TN No Gibbs Green School (020) 7385 3908 Mund Street Earls Court W14 9LY No The Bridge Academy (020) 7610 8340 Finlay Street Fulham SW6 6HB No Queensmill School (020) 7384 2330 Clancarty Road Parsons Green SW6 3AA No

- 67 -

APPENDIX G: Community Groups (total groups: 265)

Acton Asian Association Acton Muslim Welfare Association Acton Vale Community Centre Afghan Academy Afghan Association of London African Caribbean Initiative Afican Women's Forum Age Concern Asian Club Al-farazdaq Arabic School and Club Al-Hudah Association Angolan Civic Communities Alliance Annapurna Music Circle An-Nisa Society Apna Centre Arab Club of Britain Arab Women Group Arya Samaj London Ashra Asian Carers Project Asian Family Counselling Service Asian Music and Arts Academy Cancer Black Care Centre for Armenian Information and Advice Dance Carib Descendants Ealing Racial Equality Council Ealing Somali Welfare and Cultural Association Edgware and Harrow Jewish Day Centre Eritrean Community in Hammersmith and Fulham Ethiopian Refugee Association in Brent Federation of Patidar Association Federation of Spanish Associations Friends of African-Caribbean Carers and Sufferers of Dementia Fusion Community Carnival Arts Greater London Somali Community Hammersmith Bengali Association Havelock Family Centre Heritage Ceramics HIV/AIDS Association of Zambia India Welfare Society Indian Workers' Association Iranian Association Iraqi Community Association Iraqi Welfare Association Irish Advice Service Jinah School of Urdu Kenyan Society of London Khalsa National Council Mahila Sabha

- 68 -

Middle Eastern Christian Minorities Advice Centre Middlesex Tamil Sports and Social Club Migrant Advisory and Advocacy Service Nav-Jeevan Asian Society Naz Project Oaktree Community Project Pandit Ram Sahai Sangit Vidyalaya Polish Catholic Community Centre Punjabi Theatre Academy Refugee Art and Cultural Enterprise (RACE) Russian Refugees Aid Society Sickle Cell Society Sikh Missionary Society UK Society of Afghan Resident in UK Somali Community Regeneration Project Somali Refugee Youth Development Project Southall Black Sisters Southall Day Centre - Milap Branch Southall Day Centre - Western Road Branch Stardust Steel Band and Costume Band Swahili Support Network Tamil Refugee Action Group The Monitoring Group United Anglo Caribbean Society United Anglo Caribbean Society Elderly Lunchclub Valam Brahmin Association UK West Indian Senior Citizens Organisation West London Asian Society Zywiec Polish Folk Song and Dance Group A.P.P.L.E. A + A Team (Children's Division) Adult Education and Training Service Adult Education and Training Services at Feltham Community College African Policy Research Network (APORN) Afro-Euro Cultural Link Age Concern (Chiswick) Age Concern (Feltham, Hanworth and Bedfont) Age Concern (Hounslow) Age Concern (Hounslow) - Ethnic Minority Project Age Concern (Hounslow) - Lunch Club Age Link Ahmadiyya Muslim Association Ahmadiyya Muslim Women's Association Ahmadiyya Muslim Youth Group Air Training Corps HQ Middlesex Wing Alf King Under-5s Playcentre All Afghan Association All Saints' Church Pram Club Alphabet Pre School Alzheimer's Society - Hounslow Branch

- 69 -

Andrew Ewing Primary School Parent and Toddler Group Angolan Civic Communities Alliance (ACCA) Anjuman - E - Khwateen Anti-Race / Hate Crime Co-Ordination The Arab Group in Hounslow and the suburbs Armenian Community Pre-School Group Asian Family Counselling Service The Asian Health Agency (TAHA) Asian Women's Centre Contact The Asian Women's Counselling Service (TAWCS) ASRA Greater London Housing Association (at)liberty Awaaz Youth Project Bangladesh Welfare Association Barnado's Spectrum Project Beavers Community School Parent and Toddler Group Beavers Extended Day Care Scheme Bedfont Community Centre Parent and Toddler Group Bedfont Darby and Joan Club Bedfont Lane Community Association Bedford Park Society Beech Avenue Carer and Toddler Group BME Community Help and Development Centre Boys Brigade (1st Richmondupon-Thames Company) Brahma Kumaris Brahmaishi Mission Brent Lea Residents Association Brentford Artists Community Co-Operative Brentford Chamber of Commerce Brentford Child Contact Centre Brentford Community Council Brentford Community Resource Centre Brentford Evening Townswomen's Guild Brentford Fountain Leisure Centre Brentford Free Church (Baptist and URC) Brentford Recycling Action Group (BRAG) Brentford School for Girls (Adult Education and Training) Brentford Senior Citizens Club Brentford Toy Library Brentford, Chiswick & Isleworth Care Community Bridge Church Brentford British Afghan Women's Society Broadvale Association BT Age and Disability Team Burlington Close Sheltered Unit Bushy Park Education Centre Buttercup Nursery (Isleworth) Buttercups Day Nursery (Chiswick) Butts Society, The Carers UK (Hounslow Branch)

- 70 -

CATHJA Project Centre for Armenian Information and Advice (CAIA) The Centre for Nepalese & Gurkhas Chiswick Adult Education Chiswick and Brentford Disability, Action and Support Group Chiswick Community Day Nursery Chiswick Community School Community Association Chiswick Horticultural Society - Allotments & Garden Club Chiswick House Friends Chiswick Protection Group Chiswick Recycling Action Group (CRAG) Chiswick Toddlers' World Chiswick, Brentford & Isleworth Carer's Group CIP - Westmacott Area Community Development Civil Service Retirement Fellowship - Hounslow Group Community Drug & Alcohol Team Community Initiative Partnerships (CIP) - Arts Team Community Initiative Partnerships (CIP) - Development & Regeneration Directorate Community Initiative Partnerships (CIP) - Community Sports Development Team Convent Way Community Centre Convent Way Education and Islamic Teaching Centre Cranford Community School (Adult Education and Training) Cranford Countryside Park Cranford Women's Group Dark Horse Venture Depression Alliance Detached and Outreach Youthwork Team Disability Network Hounslow Disability Network Hounslow - Direct Payments Support Service Dituria Drugs Advice Intervention & Skills (DAIS) The Duke of Edinburgh's Award - Open Award Centre Duke's Meadow Community Association Eagle Eyes Association for African Disabled Youth Ealing Gay Group (EGG) East African Asian Senior Citizens East African Youth Group EKTA The Elders Access Project Elders Network in Hounslow Ethnic Alcohol Counselling in Hounslow (EACH) Ethnic Health and Education Development (EHAED) Evening Shades F.W.A. Newpin Family Support Project (Hounslow Children's Fund) Federation of Poles in Great Britain Fee Hi (UK) Feltham Accord (Feltham Mental Aftercare Service) Feltham and Staines Area Evening Social Club for the Blind Feltham Arts Association

- 71 -

Feltham Asian Women's Group Feltham Child and Family Centre Feltham College Pre-School Feltham Community Association Feltham Community College Association Feltham Diabetic Club Feltham Forum The Feltham Open Door Project Feltham Young Offenders Institute (Voluntary Sector Coordinator) Focus Youth Centre Friends of Duke's Meadows Friends of Gainsborough Green The Friends of Grosvenor Park Friends of Gunnersbury Park Museum Friends of Harvard Hill Park Friends of Kempton Nature Reserve Friends of Osterley Park GALOP Girls' Venture Corps (1348 Feltham Unit) Air Cadets Goldy Goldy Asian Women's Group Hanworth 50+ Social Club Hanworth Youth Centre Heston and District Community Association Hounslow Afro-Caribbean Association (HACA) Hounslow Asian and African Youth Association (HAAYA) Hounslow Chinese Community Centre Hounslow Community Team for People with Learning Disabilities Hounslow Heritage Walks Hounslow Jamia Masjid and Islamic Centre Hounslow Urban Farm Volunteer Centre Hounslow Indian Gymkhana Club Iraqi Community Association Isleworth Explorers Club The Kenyan Society of London (KESOL) Kew Bridge Steam Museum Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement Little Angels Parents & Toddlers Group London Buddhist Vihara Los Andes Mind in Ealing & Hounslow Millan Asian Women's Group The Mulberry Centre NSPCC Jigsaw Project Old Town Playgroup Overseas Chinese Education Centre (Hounslow School) Pakistan Welfare Association Parents in Touch Ramgarhia Sabha The Rotary Club of Hounslow

- 72 -

Sahil Multicultural Women's Association Sathi Project - Asian Children with Special Needs Society of Afghan Residents in the UK Somali Education Advice and Counselling Service Spelthorne Farm Project St. Mary's Parent and Toddler Group Sure Start Hounslow TAHA Access and Information Mental Health Project Thames Community Foundation Vedic Cultural Society Vietnamese Community Association in South West London West Chiswick & Gunnersbury Society West London Refugee Employment and Training Initiative (RETI) Western Kurdistan Association Women's Institute - Chiswick Woodcraft Folk (Hammersmith) Zimbabwe Women's Network - UK

- 73 -

APPENDIX H: Focus Group Recruitment Questionnaire

Screening

Good morning/afternoon/evening. My name is ...... and I am from Accent. We are an independent market research company carrying out research for the London Wildlife Trust. The research is looking at the Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve.

This is a bona fide market research exercise. It is being conducted under the Market Research Society Code of Conduct which means that any answers you give will be treated in confidence. Can you spare a couple of minutes to run through a few questions to check that you are eligible to take part in this research?

Q1. Do you or any of your close family work or have worked in the recent past in any of the following professions: marketing, advertising, public relations, journalism, market research or environmental?

1 yes THANK & CLOSE 2 no

Q2. Have you ever participated in a market research group discussion? IF YES, PROBE WHEN

1 yes, in last six months THANK & CLOSE 3 over 2 years ago GO TO 0 2 yes, between 6 months and 2 years ago 4 no GO TO 0

TWO THIRDS OF RECRUITS MUST HAVE NEVER BEEN TO A GROUP DISCUSSION BEFORE Q3. How many groups have you been to in that period?

1 one 3 more than 3 THANK & CLOSE 2 2-3

Q4. What was the subject matter of the groups you attended? PROBE AND WRITE DOWN ...... IF ENVIRONMENTAL THANK & CLOSE

- 74 -

Q5. ASK ALL : How would you describe your ethnic origin?

WHITE BLACK OR BLACK BRITISH 1. White British THANK & CLOSE 11. Caribbean THANK & CLOSE 2. Any other white background THANK & CLOSE 12. African CONTINUE 13. Any other Black background THANK & CLOSE

MIXED CHINESE 3. White and Black Caribbean THANK & CLOSE 14. Chinese THANK & CLOSE 4. White and Black African THANK & CLOSE 5. White and Asian THANK & CLOSE ANY OTHER ETHNIC GROUP 6. Any other Mixed background THANK & CLOSE 15. Any other ethnic group THANK & CLOSE

ASIAN OR ASIAN BRITISH 7. Indian CONTINUE 8. Pakistani CONTINUE 9. Bangladeshi CONTINUE 10. Any other Asian Background CONTINUE

CHECK QUOTAS Q6. Do you have any school-age children? CODE ALL THAT APPLY

1. yes, child/children attend primary school CONTINUE 2. yes, child/children attend secondary school (YEAR 1) CONTINUE 3. no, have older children only CONTINUE 4. no, have no children CONTINUE 5. no, have pre-school children only THANK AND CLOSE

CHECK QUOTAS Q7. Have you ever or would you ever consider visiting a nature reserve or conservation area in the UK for recreational or educational purposes?

1. Yes, have visited a nature reserve/conservation area RECORD WHICH ONES 2. Have not visited but would consider visiting a nature reserve/conservation area 3. No, have not and would not consider visiting a nature reserve/conservation area THANK AND CLOSE

Q8. Which of the following age groups do you fall into?

1 18-25 4 55+ 2 26-45 5 Refused 3 46-54

CHECK QUOTAS. RECRUIT FOR GROUP. GO TO INVITATION

Invitation: Group discussion Thank you for answering those questions. Would you be willing to attend a focus group we are holding? There will be about eight other people just like yourself. The group will be held in accordance with the Code of Conduct of the Market Research Society and any views you express during the discussion will be treated with complete confidence and will not be attributed to you personally. Would you be willing to take part?

- 75 -

1 yes 2 no THANK AND CLOSE

IF YES, CONTINUE WITH DETAILS

Thank you. As I mentioned, we are carrying out research for The London Wildlife Trust about Gunnersbury Nature Reserve. The group will last around 2 hours. You will be given £40 to thank you for your time and light refreshments will be provided. PLEASE NOTE, CHILDREN WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND THIS FOCUS GROUP .

The group will be audio taped to ensure accuracy. It will be held at the Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve to allow representatives of the LWT to attend if they wish and will remain confidential to Accent. The group will take place on Friday 2 February at 10am until noon.

Date Time Place 2.02.07 10am-12 noon The Gunnersbury Triangle Reserve

Would you be able to attend? REASSURE & PERSUADE

IF RESPONDENT AGREES, CONFIRM DATE, TIME & LOCATION.

TAKE RESPONDENT’S FULL DETAILS AND SEND THEM WRITTEN CONFIRMATION; THEN CALL 24 HOURS PRIOR TO THE GROUP TO CHECK THEY ARE STILL ABLE TO ATTEND. IF NOT, MAKE ALL EFFORTS TO REPLACE THEM. RESPONDENT NAME TELEPHONE NUMBER

ADDRESS (for sending confirmation details):

EMAIL ADDRESS (if business)

READ OUT: If for any reason you find you unable to attend, please could you let me know as soon as possible so that we can invite someone else to take your place? My telephone number is [If BTU: use this number]0117 921 1616 [If ETU: use this number]0131 220 2550. THANK YOU .

Confirmation Confirmation sent via ...... on ……../………/……..

I confirm that this interview was conducted under the terms of the MRS Code of Conduct and is completely confidential Interviewer’s signature: ...... THANK RESPONDENT FOR THEIR HELP IN THIS RESEARCH

- 76 -

APPENDIX I: Focus Group Topic Guide

Moderator: ......

Group: ......

Date: ......

Time : ......

Venue: ......

Good morning... My name is … and I work for an independent market research company called Accent. We are conducting research for the London Wildlife Trust. Thank you very much for agreeing to help us with this research and for being here today.

The research is being conducted in accordance with the Code of Conduct of the Market Research Society (MRS) and also with the Data Protection Act, with whom Accent is registered. This means that everything you say here this evening is confidential and will not be attributed to you personally.

(If client present). This is the client, Nina Arwitz, who is here today to listen to what you have to say. Nina will not actually participate in the group discussion.

The discussion is being tape-recorded. This is standard market research procedure and is to ensure accuracy – so I do not have to try to remember what you have said – and for analysis purposes only. The recordings will not be passed to any third party not associated with the research project, and I assure you that none of your comments will be attributed to you by name.

The discussion will last around 90 minutes.

Can I stress that we are looking for your views. There are no right or wrong answers. I hope you will all contribute to the discussion.

Participants introduce themselves 10 mins

• Name and age of respondent • Where they live • Backgrounds: family details eg number of adults and children in household, ages of children, occupation • Types of things respondents like to do in their spare time eg activities?

London Wildlife Trust 10 mins

- 77 -

• (Before today) Had you ever visited any nature reserve in the UK eg Barnes Wetlands?

If required: Nature Reserve Definition : A nature reserve is an area of importance for wildlife, flora, fauna or features of geological or other special interest, which is reserved and managed for conservation and to provide special opportunities for study or research. Nature reserves may be designated by government institutions or by private landowners, such as charities and research institutions.

• (Before recruitment) Had you heard of the London Wildlife Trust (LWT)? o Where had you heard of it? • (Before recruitment) Had you heard of the LWT’s nature reserve at Gunnersbury Triangle? o If yes:
how did you hear of it eg word of mouth, school children visited it?
had you visited it before today? How often? With whom?

If respondents walked around Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve 20 mins

• Walking around the Gunnersbury nature reserve today, what are your first impressions of it? Include: o Finding your way to the reserve? o The signage in front of reserve? o Walking around the reserve? Signage? Seating? Views? Presentation? Things to do? • Based on what you have just seen, would you visit this reserve again? Would you encourage others to visit it? o If yes, why? What is appealing about it?
For what reasons would you be inclined to use the reserve eg picnics, led walks, family trips etc? o If not, why not? What is not appealing or off-putting about it? • Who do you think the Gunnersbury Nature reserve would appeal to? • Who do you think the Gunnersbury Reserve would not appeal to? • Do you think it would appeal to members of ethnic minority groups? o If yes, why o If not, why not?

If respondents did not walk around reserve: show photos/map 20 mins

• Arriving at the Gunnersbury nature reserve today, what were your first impressions of it? Include: o Finding your way to the reserve? o The signage in front of reserve? • Here is a map of the reserve depicting the site. What are your impressions of it? Consider:

- 78 -

o Seating? Views? Things to do? • Based on what you have just seen, would you visit this reserve again? Would you encourage others to visit it? o If yes, why? What is appealing about it?
For what reasons would you be inclined to use the reserve eg picnics, led walks, family trips etc? o If not, why not? What is not appealing or off-putting about it? • Who do you think the Gunnersbury Nature reserve would appeal to? • Who do you think the Gunnersbury Reserve would not appeal to? • Do you think it would appeal to members of ethnic minority groups? o If yes, why o If not, why not?

Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve 10 mins At this time very few people from Asian backgrounds are visiting this reserve. • Are there any barriers to visiting this reserve? • What would encourage you/your family to visit the reserve? • What type of activities or events would you like to undertake at the reserve? • The Gunnersbury Triangle Reserve organise a number of events that the public can participate in. Would you or your family be interested in taking part in any of these: o Practical Conservation Workdays o Butterfly Walks for adults o Butterfly Walks for adults with children activities o Summer Open Days with many activities for parents and children o Woodland crafts for families o Treasure hunts for children o Fungal Foray guided walks for families o Night bat walk for adults, with children’s activities

Marketing Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve 10 mins

• What is the best way to bring the Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve to the attention of other people just like you? o Where should the LWT advertise? o What is the best medium to use eg telling community leaders, posting leaflets to community groups? o What information should the advertising include about the reserve? o If you were trying to encourage your friends to visit this reserve what would you say were the particular strengths of this reserve? o Are there any weakness of the reserve?

Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve Opening Times 15 mins • Ideally which days would you like to see the Gunnersbury Nature Reserve open? • If the reserve could only be staffed on 5 days which days should these be?

- 79 -

• If the reserve could only be staffed on a Saturday or Sunday which weekend day would you prefer? • What times of day should it be open - in Winter? In Summer? Different times at weekends?

Gunnersbury Triangle Nature Reserve Possible Visitor’s Facilities 20 mins

• In order to encourage you and your families to visit the nature reserve would it help if visitor facilities were available? • If yes, what visitor facilities would you like to see here? o If Café? What would it be like eg branded café eg Starbucks, Café Nero? Sofas? Newspapers? o If Disabled facilities? Describe eg toilets, appropriate paths, car parking? o If Shop – what would it sell eg ice creams, confectionary, newspapers etc o Toilet facilities/baby changing facilities o Play area for small children o Picnic tables o Additional seating o Better signage around the reserve o Car parking • Any other facilities required?

Wrap and Close 5 mins (90)

• Is there anything else you would like to say about the Gunnersbury Nature Reserve?

Thank you very much for your time.

- 80 -